Objective-In addition to P2Y 12 receptor antagonism, ticagrelor inhibits adenosine cell uptake. Prior data show that 7-day pretreatment with ticagrelor limits infarct size. We explored the acute effects of ticagrelor and clopidogrel on infarct size and potential long-term effects on heart function. Approach and Results-Rats underwent 30-minute ischemia per 24-hour reperfusion. (1) Ticagrelor (10 or 30 mg/kg) or clopidogrel (12.5 mg/kg) was given via intraperitoneal injection 5 minutes before reperfusion. (2) Rats received ticagrelor acute (intraperitoneal; 30 mg/kg), chronic (oral; 300 mg/kg per day) for 4 weeks starting 1 day after reperfusion or the combination (acute+chronic). Another group received clopidogrel (intraperitoneal [12.5 mg/kg]+oral [62.5 mg/kg per day]) for 4 weeks.(1) Ticagrelor dose-dependently reduced infarct size, 10 mg/kg (31.5%±1.8%; P<0.001) and 30 mg/ kg (21.4%±2.6%; P<0.001) versus control (45.3±1.7%), whereas clopidogrel had no effect (42.4%±2.6%). Ticagrelor, but not clopidogrel, increased myocardial adenosine levels, increased phosphorylation of Akt, endothelial NO synthase, and extracellular-signal-regulated kinase 1/2 4 hours after reperfusion and decreased apoptosis. (2) After 4 weeks, left ventricular ejection fraction was reduced in the vehicle-treated group (44.8%±3.5%) versus sham (77.6%±0.9%).All ticagrelor treatments improved left ventricular ejection fraction, acute (69.5%±1.6%), chronic (69.2%±1.0%), and acute+chronic (76.3%±1.2%), whereas clopidogrel had no effect (37.4%±3.7%). Ticagrelor, but not clopidogrel, attenuated fibrosis and decreased collagen-III mRNA levels 4 weeks after ischemia/reperfusion. Ticagrelor, but not clopidogrel, attenuated the increase in proinflammatory tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-1β, and interleukin-18, and increased anti-inflammatory 15-epi-lipoxin-A 4 levels. Conclusions-Ticagrelor, but not clopidogrel, administered just before reperfusion protects against reperfusion injury. This acute treatment or chronic ticagrelor for 4 weeks or their combination improved heart function, whereas clopidogrel, despite achieving a similar degree of platelet inhibition, had no effect. addition to platelet inhibition, ticagrelor, but not clopidogrel, has protective effects against ischemia-reperfusion that may help explain the differences in clinical benefit in the PLATO trial. 7,8 However, a recent multicenter, randomized, double-blind clinical trial did not show a clear clinical benefit in patients with STEMI receiving ticagrelor en route to the hospital versus in the catheterization laboratory. 16 As the study was not powered for benefit on cardiovascular events, it is inconclusive about the hypothesis that administration of ticagrelor after onset of ischemia (in contrast to pretreatment just before reperfusion) can ameliorate reperfusion injury. In addition, as the median time difference between the prehospital and the in-hospital ticagrelor administration groups was only 31 minutes, 16 it is plausible that ticagrelor absorption was insufficient an...

The clinical, radiologic and microbiologic findings in adolescents with TB have features seen in both younger children and adults; most cases were preventable.

Ticagrelor and rosuvastatin when given in combination have an additive effect on local myocardial adenosine levels in the setting of ischemia reperfusion. This translates into an additive cardioprotective effect mediated by adenosine-induced effects including downregulation of pro- but upregulation of anti-inflammatory mediators.

No abstract

Numerous interventions have been shown to limit myocardial infarct size in animal models; however, most of these interventions have failed to have a significant effect in clinical trials. One potential explanation for the lack of efficacy in the clinical setting is that in bench models, a single intervention is studied without the background of other interventions or modalities. This is in contrast to the clinical setting in which new medications are added to the "standard of care" treatment that by now includes a growing number of medications. Drug-drug interaction may lead to alteration, dampening, augmenting or masking the effects of the intended intervention. We use the well described model of statin-induced myocardial protection to demonstrate potential interactions with agents which are commonly concomitantly used in patients with stable coronary artery disease and/or acute coronary syndromes. These interactions could potentially explain the reduced efficacy of statins in the clinical trials compared to the animal models. In particular, caffeine and aspirin could attenuate the infarct size limiting effects of statins; morphine could delay the onset of protection or mask the protective effect in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction, whereas other anti-platelet agents (dipyridamole, cilostazol and ticagrelor) may augment (or mask) the effect due to their favorable effects on adenosine cell reuptake and intracellular cAMP levels. We recommend that after characterizing the effects of new modalities in single intervention bench research, studies should be repeated in the background of standard-of-care medications to assure that the magnitude of the effect is not altered before proceeding with clinical trials.