We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
A pharmacodynamic comparison of a personalized strategy for anti-platelet therapy versus ticagrelor in achieving a therapeutic window.
International Journal of Cardiology 2015 October 16
BACKGROUND: A therapeutic window in antiplatelet treatment has been associated with concurrent lowering of bleeding and ischemic risks. Prasugrel and ticagrelor provide potent platelet inhibition, but may increase bleeding. No study has evaluated a personalized therapy with selective use of novel P2Y12 inhibitory agents compared to empiric ticagrelor use. The objective of this study was to compare a personalized anti-platelet therapy strategy to empiric ticagrelor in achieving a therapeutic window.
METHODS: Using the CAPITAL registry, we performed a retrospective analysis to evaluate a personalized anti-platelet therapy (PAT) strategy, using a pharmacogenetic approach, and compared it to empiric ticagrelor. In the PAT group, carriers of CYP2C19*2 received prasugrel and non-carriers received clopidogrel. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients within a validated therapeutic window, after a steady state treatment (≥48h) of antiplatelet therapy, as measured by a P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) >85 and <208.
RESULTS: Of 199 patients with platelet function measurements, 150 received PAT, while 49 received ticagrelor. Significantly more patients on PAT achieved the primary outcome (50.0% vs. 4.1%, p<0.0001). This was predominantly driven by an increase in low on-treatment reactivity with ticagrelor (95.9% vs. 37.3%, p<0.0001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated PAT to be the strongest predictor of achieving PRU values within the therapeutic window (odds ratio 20.27; 95% CI: 4.33-94.82, p=0.0001).
CONCLUSION: Patients treated with PAT were more likely to achieve a therapeutic window compared to a strategy of ticagrelor. Future prospective evaluation of novel PAT strategies will be required to prove clinical utility.
METHODS: Using the CAPITAL registry, we performed a retrospective analysis to evaluate a personalized anti-platelet therapy (PAT) strategy, using a pharmacogenetic approach, and compared it to empiric ticagrelor. In the PAT group, carriers of CYP2C19*2 received prasugrel and non-carriers received clopidogrel. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients within a validated therapeutic window, after a steady state treatment (≥48h) of antiplatelet therapy, as measured by a P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) >85 and <208.
RESULTS: Of 199 patients with platelet function measurements, 150 received PAT, while 49 received ticagrelor. Significantly more patients on PAT achieved the primary outcome (50.0% vs. 4.1%, p<0.0001). This was predominantly driven by an increase in low on-treatment reactivity with ticagrelor (95.9% vs. 37.3%, p<0.0001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated PAT to be the strongest predictor of achieving PRU values within the therapeutic window (odds ratio 20.27; 95% CI: 4.33-94.82, p=0.0001).
CONCLUSION: Patients treated with PAT were more likely to achieve a therapeutic window compared to a strategy of ticagrelor. Future prospective evaluation of novel PAT strategies will be required to prove clinical utility.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Anti-Arrhythmic Effects of Heart Failure Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy and Their Role in the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death: From Beta-Blockers to Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors and Beyond.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 Februrary 27
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app