Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor blocker is a key strategy to reduce platelet reactivity and to prevent thrombotic events in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. In an earlier consensus document, we proposed cutoff values for high on-treatment platelet reactivity to adenosine diphosphate (ADP) associated with post-percutaneous coronary intervention ischemic events for various platelet function tests (PFTs). Updated American and European practice guidelines have issued a Class IIb recommendation for PFT to facilitate the choice of P2Y12 receptor inhibitor in selected high-risk patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention, although routine testing is not recommended (Class III). Accumulated data from large studies underscore the importance of high on-treatment platelet reactivity to ADP as a prognostic risk factor. Recent prospective randomized trials of PFT did not demonstrate clinical benefit, thus questioning whether treatment modification based on the results of current PFT platforms can actually influence outcomes. However, there are major limitations associated with these randomized trials. In addition, recent data suggest that low on-treatment platelet reactivity to ADP is associated with a higher risk of bleeding. Therefore, a therapeutic window concept has been proposed for P2Y12 inhibitor therapy. In this updated consensus document, we review the available evidence addressing the relation of platelet reactivity to thrombotic and bleeding events. In addition, we propose cutoff values for high and low on-treatment platelet reactivity to ADP that might be used in future investigations of personalized antiplatelet therapy.
Platelet reactivity assessment during thienopyridine-type P2Y12-inhibitors identifies PCI-treated patients at higher risk for mortality and ST (HPR) or at an elevated risk for bleeding (LPR).
AimsThe currently available data indicate a drug–drug interaction between morphine and oral P2Y12 receptor inhibitors, when administered together. The aim of this trial was to assess the influence of infused morphine on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of ticagrelor and its active metabolite (AR-C124910XX) in patients with acute myocardial infarction.Methods and resultsIn a single-centre, randomized, double-blind trial, patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive intravenously either morphine (5 mg) or placebo, followed by a 180 mg loading dose of ticagrelor. Pharmacokinetics was determined with liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry and ticagrelor antiplatelet effects were measured with up to three different platelet function tests: vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation assay, multiple electrode aggregometry and VerifyNow. The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic assessment was performed in 70 patients (35 in each study group). Morphine lowered the total exposure to ticagrelor and its active metabolite by 36% (AUC(0–12): 6307 vs. 9791 ng h/mL; P = 0.003), and 37% (AUC(0–12): 1503 vs. 2388 ng h/mL; P = 0.008), respectively, with a concomitant delay in maximal plasma concentration of ticagrelor (4 vs. 2 h; P = 0.004). Multiple regression analysis showed that lower AUC(0–12) values for ticagrelor were independently associated with the administration of morphine (P = 0.004) and the presence of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (P = 0.014). All three methods of platelet reactivity assessment showed a stronger antiplatelet effect in the placebo group and a greater prevalence of high platelet reactivity in patients receiving morphine.ConclusionsMorphine delays and attenuates ticagrelor exposure and action in patients with myocardial infarction. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02217878.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.