Search

CYP2C19 genotype has been shown to impact response to clopidogrel 75-mg but not prasugrel 10-mg. Here, we assessed effects of CYP2C19 metaboliser status on pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) responses to prasugrel 5-mg and 10-mg and clopidogrel 75-mg using data from two PK/PD studies in stable coronary artery disease (CAD) patients (GENERATIONS and FEATHER). Active metabolite concentrations (area under the curve, AUC[0-tlast]), maximum platelet aggregation (MPA) measured by light transmission aggregometry, vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein platelet reactivity index, and VerifyNow P2Y12-platelet reaction units (VN-PRU) were analysed by CYP2C19-predicted phenotype (extensive metaboliser [EM; N=154], *2-*8 non-carriers, vs reduced metaboliser [RM; N=41],*2-*8 carriers/*17 non-carriers). AUC(0-tlast) was unaffected by metaboliser status for prasugrel 5-mg and 10-mg (geometric mean EM/RM ratios 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.86,1.17, p>0.99; and 0.97, 95% CI:0.85,1.12, p=0.71, respectively), but was lower among RMs receiving clopidogrel 75-mg (1.37, 95% CI:1.14,1.65, p<0.001). Platelet reactivity was not significantly affected by CYP2C19 metaboliser status for prasugrel 5-mg, or for prasugrel 10-mg by MPA and VN-PRU, but for clopidogrel 75-mg was significantly higher in reduced metabolisers (all measures p<0.01). Prasugrel 10-mg showed greater antiplatelet effects vs clopidogrel 75-mg (all comparisons p<0.001). Prasugrel 5-mg showed greater antiplatelet effects vs clopidogrel 75-mg in RMs (all p<0.001), and comparable effects in EMs (all p≥0.37). In contrast to clopidogrel, prasugrel active metabolite PK was not influenced by CYP2C19 genotype. Antiplatelet effect for prasugrel 10-mg was greater irrespective of metaboliser status and for prasugrel 5-mg was greater for RMs and comparable for EMs as compared to clopidogrel 75-mg.

High on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) has been identified as an independent risk factor for ischaemic events. The randomised, double-blind, TRIPLET trial included a pre-defined comparison of HPR in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) following a placebo/600-mg clopidogrel loading dose (LD) immediately before a subsequent prasugrel 60-mg or 30-mg LD. Platelet reactivity was assessed using the VerifyNow® P2Y12 assay (P2Y12 Reaction Units, PRU) within 24 hours (h) following the placebo/clopidogrel LD (immediately prior to prasugrel LD), and at 2, 6, 24, 72 h following prasugrel LDs. The impact of CYP2C19 predicted metaboliser phenotype (extensive metabolisers [EM] and reduced metabolisers [RM]) on HPR status was also assessed. HPR (PRU ≥240) following the clopidogrel LD (prior to the prasugrel LD) was 58.5% in the combined clopidogrel LD groups. No significant difference was noted when stratified by time between the clopidogrel and prasugrel LDs (≤6 hs vs>6 h). At 6 h following the 2nd loading dose in the combined prasugrel LD groups, HPR was 7.1%, with 0% HPR by 72 h. There was no significant effect of CYP2C19 genotype on pharmacodynamic (PD) response following either prasugrel LD treatments at any time point, regardless of whether it was preceded by a clopidogrel 600-mg LD. In conclusion, in this study, patients with ACS intended for PCI showed a high prevalence of HPR after clopidogrel 600-mg LD regardless of metaboliser status. When prasugrel LD was added, HPR decreased substantially by 6 h, and was not seen by 72 h.

We compared results obtained with the Nanosphere Verigene® System, a novel point-of-care (POC) genetic test capable of analysing 11 CYP2C19 variants within 3 hours, to an established, validated genotyping method (Affymetrix™ DMET+; reference assay) for identifying extensive and reduced metabolisers of clopidogrel. Based on genotyping, patients (N=82) with stable coronary artery disease on clopidogrel 75 mg daily were defined as extensive metabolisers (*1/*1, *1/*17, *17/*17), reduced metabolisers (*1/*2, *1/*8, *2/*2, *2/*3), or of indeterminate metaboliser status (*2/*17). Pharmacokinetic exposure to clopidogrel's active metabolite and pharmacodynamic measures with P2Y12 reaction units (PRU) (VerifyNow®P2Y12 assay) and VASP PRI (PRI) were also assessed. There was a 99.9% overall concordance of marker-level data between the Nanosphere Verigene and DMET+ systems in identifying the CYP2C19 variants and 100% agreement in classifying the patients as extensive (n=59) or reduced metabolisers (n=15). Extensive metabolisers had significantly higher active metabolite exposure than reduced metabolisers (LS means 12.6 ng*h/ml vs 7.7 ng*h/ml; p<0.001). Extensive metabolisers also had lower PRU (LS means 158 vs 212; p=0.003) and VASP PRI (LS means 48% vs 63%, p=0.01) compared to reduced metabolisers. Rates of high on-treatment platelet reactivity were higher in reduced metabolisers compared to extensive metabolisers (VASP PRI ≥ 50%: 79% vs 47%; PRU >235: 33% vs 16%). The Nanosphere Verigene CBS system identified 11 CYP2C19 alleles in less than 3 hours with a high degree of accuracy when compared to a conventional method, and was further validated against pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic phenotypes.

Clopidogrel response varies according to the presence of genetic polymorphisms. The CYP2C19*2 allele has been associated with impaired response; conflicting results have been reported for CYP2C19*17, ABCB1, and PON1 genotypes. We assessed the impact of CYP2C19, PON1, and ABCB1 polymorphisms on clopidogrel and prasugrel pharmacodynamic (PD) and pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters. Aspirin-treated patients (N=194) with coronary artery disease from two independent, prospective, randomised, multi-centre studies comparing clopidogrel (75 mg) and prasugrel (10 mg) were genotyped and classified by predicted CYP2C19 metaboliser phenotype (ultra metabolisers [UM] = *17 carriers; extensive metabolisers [EM] = *1/1 homozygotes; reduced metabolisers [RM] = *2 carriers). ABCB1 T/T and C/T polymorphisms and PON1 A/A, A/G and G/G polymorphisms were also genotyped. PD parameters were assessed using VerifyNow® P2Y12 and vasodilator stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) expressed as platelet reactivity index (PRI) after 14 days of maintenance dosing. Clopidogrel and prasugrel active metabolite (AM) exposure was calculated in a cohort of 96 patients. For clopidogrel, genetic variants in CYP2C19, but not ABCB1 or PON1, affected PK and PD. For prasugrel, none of the measured genetic variants affected PK or PD. Compared with clopidogrel, platelet inhibition with prasugrel was greater even in the CYP2C19 UM phenotype. Prasugrel generated more AM and achieved greater platelet inhibition than clopidogrel irrespective of CYP2C19, ABCB1, and PON1 polymorphisms. The lack of effect from genetic variants on prasugrel AM generation or antiplatelet activity is consistent with previous studies in healthy volunteers and is consistent with improved efficacy in acute coronary syndrome patients managed with percutaneous coronary intervention.

The prevalence of high platelet reactivity (HPR) in patients who have switched from clopidogrel to prasugrel during maintenance phase after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) event is unknown. Therefore, the effect of switching from clopidogrel to prasugrel on the prevalence of HPR was evaluated. This analysis from the previously reported SWAP (SWitching Anti Platelet) study assessed HPR at baseline, 2 and 24 hours, and seven days after switching from clopidogrel to prasugrel maintenance dose (MD), with or without a prasugrel loading dose (LD) using four definitions: maximum platelet aggregation (MPA) >65% (primary endpoint), MPA >50%, P2Y12 reaction units (PRU) >235, and platelet reactivity index (PRI) ≥ 50%. A total of 95 patients were available for analysis; 56 patients provided DNA for genetic assessments of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C19. There were 26 (27.4%) patients with HPR at the end of the clopidogrel run-in (defined as MPA >65%). The HPR prevalence varied by each definition and ranged from 19% (PRU >235) to 68% (PRI ≥ 50 %). A significantly higher HPR prevalence was observed during clopidogrel versus the combined prasugrel therapy groups at seven days as measured by MPA >65% (21.2% vs. 4.5%, p<0.05), PRU >235 (18.8% vs. 0%, p=0.001), and PRI ≥ 50 % (66.7% vs. 7.9%, p<0.0001). There was a significantly higher percentage of subjects carrying at least one reduced function allele with HPR measured by MPA >65% (p=0.02) or PRU >235 (p=0.05) than non-carriers with HPR. Switching ACS patients during maintenance clopidogrel therapy to prasugrel with or without an LD is associated with a reduced HPR prevalence and may provide an alternative strategy to treat patients with HPR, independent of CYP2C19 genotype.