Search

Jung Rae Cho, Fabiana Rollini, Francesco Franchi, Elisabetta Ferrante, Dominick J Angiolillo University of Florida College of Medicine – Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL, USA Abstract: Platelet activation with subsequent aggregation is a complex process leading to thrombus formation, which remains a key component for atherothrombotic manifestations, in particular myocardial infarction. Therefore, antiplatelet therapies are pivotal for the treatment of these patients. Current oral antiplatelet therapies used for secondary prevention of ischemic recurrences include aspirin and adenosine diphosphate P2Y12 platelet-receptor antagonists. However, despite these therapies, patients who have experienced a myocardial infarction remain at risk for ischemic recurrences. Therefore, more aggressive secondary prevention measures have been an area of research, including identifying additional targets modulating platelet-activation and -aggregation processes. Among these, thrombin-mediated platelet activation via protease-activated receptors (PARs) has been subject to extensive clinical investigation. Several PAR-1 receptor antagonists have been developed. However, vorapaxar is the only one that has completed large-scale clinical investigation. The present manuscript will provide an overview on the role of thrombin-mediated signaling, the impact of PAR-1 blockade with vorapaxar on ischemic and bleeding outcomes, and the potential role for vorapaxar in clinical practice. Keywords: platelet aggregation, antiplatelet agent, protease-activated receptor 1, vorapaxar

Current evidence indicates that dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin plus a P2Y 12 inhibitor is essential for the prevention of thrombotic events after percutaneous coronary interventions. However, dual antiplatelet therapy is associated with increased bleeding which may outweigh the benefits. This has set the foundations for customizing antiplatelet treatments to the individual patient. However, bleeding and ischemic risks are often present in the same patient, making it difficult to achieve this balance. The fact that oral P2Y 12 inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor) have diverse pharmacodynamic profiles that affect clinical outcomes supports the rationale for using platelet function and genetic testing to individualize antiplatelet treatment regimens. Indeed, up to one-third of patients treated with clopidogrel, but a minority of those treated with prasugrel or ticagrelor, exhibit high residual platelet reactivity resulting in an increased thrombotic risk. On the other hand, prasugrel and ticagrelor are frequently associated with low platelet reactivity and increased bleeding risk compared with clopidogrel without providing any additional reduction in ischemic events compared with patients who adequately respond to clopidogrel. The use of platelet function and genetic testing may allow for a guided selection of oral P2Y 12 inhibitors. However, the nonuniform results of randomized controlled trials have led guidelines to provide limited recommendations on the implementation of these tests in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. In light of recent advancements in the field, this consensus document by a panel of international experts fills in the guideline gap by providing updates on the latest evidence in the field as well as recommendations for clinical practice., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Angiolillo has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Faraday, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, and Sanofi; and his institution has received research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Faraday, Gilead, Idorsia, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co., Merck, Novartis, and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. Dr Alexopoulos has received advisory board fees or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Chiesi, and Pfizer; and institutional research grants from CSL Behring. Dr Aradi has received lecture fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Biotronik, Boehringer, Egis, Krka, Medtronic, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Richter Gedeon, and Vascular Venture. Dr Bhatt has served on the advisory board for Angiowave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, and Stasys; has served on the Board of Directors for American Heart Association New York City, Angiowave (stock options), Bristol Myers Squibb (stock), DRS.LINQ (stock options), High Enroll (stock); has served as a consultant for Broadview Ventures, GlaxoSmithKline, Hims, SFJ, and Youngene; has served on Data Monitoring Committees for Acesion Pharma, Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris, the Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St. Jude Medical, now Abbott), Cleveland Clinic, the Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for the ENVISAGE trial, funded by Daiichi-Sankyo; for the ABILITY-DM trial, funded by Concept Medical; for ALLAY-HF, funded by Alleviant Medical), Novartis, the Population Health Research Institute, Rutgers University (for the National Institutes of Health–funded MINT trial); has served as a Data Monitoring Committee chair for Boston Scientific (PEITHO trial) and Contego Medical (PERFORMANCE 2); has received honoraria from American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org; Chair, ACC Accreditation Oversight Committee), Arnold and Porter law firm (work related to Sanofi/Bristol Myers Squibb clopidogrel litigation), the Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; AEGIS-II executive committee funded by CSL Behring), Belvoir Publications (Editor in Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), the Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group (clinical trial steering committees), CSL Behring (American Heart Association lecture), Cowen and Company, the Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees, including for the PRONOUNCE trial, funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (Editor in Chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), JACC (Guest Editor; Associate Editor), K2P (Co-Chair, interdisciplinary curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (continuing medical education steering committees), MJH Life Sciences, Oakstone CME (Course Director, Comprehensive Review of Interventional Cardiology), Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and U.S. national co-leader, funded by Bayer), WebMD (continuing medical education steering committees), and Wiley (steering committee); has served as the Deputy Editor for Clinical Cardiology; owns a patent for Sotagliflozin (named on a patent for sotagliflozin assigned to Brigham and Women's Hospital who assigned to Lexicon; neither Dr Bhatt nor Brigham and Women's Hospital receives any income from this patent); has received research funding from Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Alnylam, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, Cleerly, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Otsuka, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, and 89Bio; has received royalties from Elsevier (Editor, Braunwald’s Heart Disease); has served as a Site Co-Investigator for Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St. Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, SpectraWAVE, Svelte, and Vascular Solutions; has been a trustee of the American College of Cardiology; and has conducted unfunded research for FlowCo. Dr Bonello’s his institution received payment from INARI, Boston Scientific, Abbott, Biotronik, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Capodanno has received payment as an individual for consulting fees or honoraria from Sanofi. Dr Cavallari has received research support from Werfen. Dr Cuisset has received consulting and lecture fees from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Europa Organisation, Medtronic, Terumo, and Sanofi. Dr Ferreiro has received lecture honoraria from Eli Lilly, Daiichi-Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Abbott, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Rovi, Terumo and Ferrer; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Ferrer, Boston Scientific, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Biotronik; and research grants from AstraZeneca. Dr Franchi has received payment as an individual for consulting fees or honoraria from AstraZeneca; and institutional payments for grants from PLx Pharma and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. Dr Geisler has received lecture honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Ferrer/Chiesi, Novartis, and Pfizer; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ferrer, Edwards Lifesciences, Haemonetics, and Pfizer; and research grants from Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Ferrer/Chiesi, Medtronic, and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Gibson has received grants from SCAD Alliance, Johnson & Johnson, Janssen, and CSL Behring; has received personal fees from Bayer, AstraZeneca (during the conduct of the study), Angel Medical Corporation, CSL Behring, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, the Boston Clinical Research Institute, the Cardiovascular Research Foundation, Gilead Sciences, WebMD, UpToDate in Cardiovascular Medicine, Somahlution, Boston Scientific, the Duke Clinical Research Institute, Medtelligence, Microport, PERT Consortium, Caladrius Biosciences, CeleCor Therapeutics, Eidos Therapeutics, Microdrop, MD Magazine, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Revance Therapeutics, Pfizer, Dyad Medical, CytoSorbents, AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Amarin, PhaseBio, Bioclinica, Inari, MedImmune, PLx Pharma, Merck, Paratek, Anthos Therapeutics, PHRI, SmartMedics, EXCITE International ($0 received), Novo Nordisk, MedTrace, and the Cardiovascular Clinical Science Foundation; has received nonfinancial support from the Baim Institute; and owns equity in nference, Absolutys, and Dyad Medical. Dr Gorog has received institutional research grants from Bayer, AstraZeneca, Medtronic, and Werfen; and personal fees from Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Chiesi. Dr Gurbel has received consulting fees and/or honoraria from Bayer, Vectura/Otitopic, Janssen, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Wolters Kluwer Pharma, Web MD Medscape, Baron and Budd, Premier Health Care Resource, Baim Institute, and Medforce; has received institutional research grants from Accriva Diagnostics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cronos, Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc., Haemonetics, Hikari Dx, Idorisa, Labcorp Drug Development, Novartis, Prolocor, Recor Medical, Vectura Limited, and Zoll Medical Corporation; owns 2 patents (Detection of restenosis risk in patients issued and Assessment of cardiac health and thrombotic risk in a patient); has served as an expert witness in a lawsuit associated with Plavix. Dr Jeong has received honoraria for lectures from Daiichi-Sankyo, Sanofi, Han-mi Pharmaceuticals, and Daewoong Pharmaceuticals; and research grants or support from Samjin Pharmaceuticals, Hanmi Pharmaceuticals, Yuhan Pharmaceuticals, Biotronik Korea, and U and I Corporation. Dr Marcucci has received consulting fees or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Daiichi-Sankyo, Novartis, Sanofi, Viatris, and Werfen. Dr Siller-Matula has received speaker or consulting fees from AOP, Chiesi, Biosensors, Boston Scientific, P&F, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Daiichi-Sankyo not related to the submitted work. Dr Mehran has received institutional research payments from Abbott, Abiomed, Alleviant Medical, AM-Pharma, Amgen, Arena, AstraZeneca, Atricure, Bayer, Biosensors, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CardiaWave, CeloNova, Chiesi, Concept Medical, CSL Behring, Cytosorbents, Daiichi-Sankyo, Element Science, Faraday, Humacyte, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Medtronic, Novartis, OrbusNeich, PhaseBio, Philips, Pi-Cardia, RenalPro, Shockwave, Vivasure, and Zoll; has received personal fees from Cine-Med Research and WebMD; owns equity (<1%) in Applied Therapeutics, Elixir Medical, Stel, and ControlRad (via her spouse); has served on the Scientific Advisory Board for the American Medical Association, the American College of Cardiology (Board of Trustees Member), the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (Women in Innovations Committee Member), and JAMA (Associate Editor); and has served as faculty for the Cardiovascular Research Foundation (no fee). Dr Neumann has received consulting honoraria from Novartis and Meril; speaker honoraria from Boston Scientific, Amgen, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Meril; speaker honoraria paid to his institution from Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Daiichi-Sankyo, Boston Scientific, Siemens, and Amgen; and research grants paid to his institution from Boston Scientific and Abbott. Dr So has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott Vascular, AstraZeneca, Bayer, HLS Therapeutics, JAMP Pharma Corp, Medtronic, and DYFS; and received research grants from Aggredyne, Diapharma, Eli Lilly, Fujimori Kogyo, Roche Diagnostics, and Spartan Biosciences. Dr Stone has received speaker honoraria from Medtronic, Pulnovo, Infraredx, Abiomed, Amgen, and Boehringer Ingelheim; served as a consultant for Abbott, Daiichi-Sankyo, Ablative Solutions, CorFlow, Cardiomech, Robocath, Miracor, Vectorious, Abiomed, Valfix, Apollo Therapeutics, Elucid Bio, Cardiac Success, TherOx, HeartFlow, Neovasc, Ancora, Occlutech, Impulse Dynamics, Adona Medical, Millennia Biopharma, Oxitope, HighLife, Elixir, Remote Cardiac Enablement, and Aria; he owns equity/options in Cardiac Success, Ancora, Cagent, Applied Therapeutics, and Biostar family of funds, SpectraWave, Orchestra Biomed, Aria, Valfix, and Xenter; and his employer (Mount Sinai Hospital) has received research grants from Shockwave, Abbott, Abiomed, Bioventrix, Cardiovascular Systems Inc, Phillips, Biosense Webster, Vascular Dynamics, Pulnovo, and V-wave. Dr Storey has received institutional research grants/support from AstraZeneca and Cytosorbents; and personal fees from Alfasigma, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, Chiesi, Cytosorbents, Daiichi-Sankyo, Idorsia, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, PhaseBio, and Tabuk. Dr Tantry has received honoraria from Wolters Kluwer Pharma. Dr ten Berg has received institutional research grants from ZonMw (Dutch Government) and Daiichi-Sankyo; has served on the advisory board CeleCor; and has received lecture and advisory board fees paid to his institution from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Pfizer. Dr Trenk has received honoraria for lectures from AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Novartis; and consulting fees from Atriva, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Eleva. Dr Valgimigli has received personal fees from AstraZeneca, Terumo, Alvimedica/CID, Abbott Vascular, Daiichi-Sankyo, Bayer, CoreFLOW, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Universität Basel | Dept. Klinische Forschung, Bristol Myers Squibb SA/Janssen, Medscape, Biotronik, Novartis, and Vesalio, outside the submitted work; and grants from Terumo, outside the submitted work. Dr Waksman has served on advisory boards for Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, J Valve, Medtronic Inc, Philips IGT, and Pi-Cardia Ltd.; has served as a consultant for Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CardioMed LLC, Cordis, Medtronic Inc, Philips IGT, Pi-Cardia Ltd., Swiss Interventional Systems/SIS Medical AG, Transmural Systems Inc., and Venous MedTech; has received institutional grant support from Amgen, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Chiesi, Medtronic Inc, and Philips IGT; and is an investor in MedAlliance, Pi-Cardia Ltd., and Transmural Systems. Dr Sibbing has received speaker fees and fees for advisory board activities from Bayer, Sanofi, and Daiichi-Sankyo. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Cangrelor, the only intravenous platelet P2Y 12 receptor inhibitor, is characterized by a prompt and potent platelet inhibition, with a rapid offset of action. Large-scale clinical trials have shown that cangrelor reduce peri-procedural thrombotic events among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions and not pre-treated with an oral P2Y 12 receptor inhibitor. However, high P2Y 12 receptor occupancy provided by cangrelor raises concerns for drug-drug interactions (DDIs) when transitioning to oral P2Y 12 inhibitors., Areas Covered: An understanding of the pharmacology of cangrelor and oral P2Y 12 inhibitors is essential to define the optimal approach to transition to oral P2Y 12 inhibitors without incurring the risk of DDIs. This review, based on a thorough literature search in major scientific databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science), synthesizes the pharmacology of cangrelor and the oral P2Y 12 receptor inhibitors, providing the rationale for the occurrence of DDIs and strategies to avoid such risk., Expert Opinion: The timing of transition from cangrelor to oral P2Y 12 inhibitors plays a crucial role in the occurrence of DDIs, especially with clopidogrel and prasugrel. Currently, no evidence suggests a DDI when transitioning to ticagrelor. Adhering to product labels and guideline recommendations is crucial for optimizing safety and efficacy of cangrelor.

Circulating lipoproteins may interact with platelets, increasing platelet sensitivity to aggregating agonists and their tendency towards activation and thrombus formation. In particular, patients with hypercholesterolemia exhibit a higher degree of platelet reactivity compared to normolipidemic. Moreover, accruing evidence report that lipid-lowering therapies can reduce thrombus formation, particularly in the absence of concomitant antiplatelet therapy. However, the underlying biological mechanism(s) explaining these clinical observations are not completely understood. Baseline platelet reactivity and high on-treatment platelet reactivity while on antiplatelet therapy (e.g., aspirin and clopidogrel) are associated with poor clinical outcomes. Therefore, strategies to reduce baseline platelet reactivity or improve the pharmacodynamic profile of antiplatelet therapies are an unmet clinical need. The potential use of lipid-lowering therapies for optimizing platelet reactivity provides several advantages as there is strong evidence that reducing circulating lipoproteins can improve clinical outcomes, and they may avoid the need for potent antiplatelet therapies that, although more effective, are associated with increased bleeding risk. This review will provide a systematic overview of the effects of lipid-lowering therapy on platelet reactivity in patients treated with and without antiplatelet therapy. We will focus on the potential biological mechanism(s) of action and the effect of statins, ezetimibe, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 inhibitors, omega-3 fatty acids, and recombinant high-density lipoprotein on platelet reactivity. Ultimately, we will assess the current gaps in the literature and future perspective in the field.

Significant advancements have shaped the landscape of anticoagulant therapy in the past two decades, including the introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), characterized by favorable safety and efficacy profiles and reduced drug-to-drug or food interaction resulting in excellent patient compliance. However, residual concerns still exist with standard-of-care anticoagulant therapy, including the inability to use DOACs in several clinical settings and the need to further reduce the risk of bleeding. Recent improvements in the understanding of the mechanisms behind thrombus formation have led to the awareness that the intrinsic pathway of the coagulation cascade may play an important role in pathological thrombosis, but not in hemostasis. This has represented the rationale for targeting this pathway with factor XI (FXI) inhibitors, with the aim of uncoupling hemostasis and thrombosis. Clinical evidence from patients with FXI deficiency further supports this concept. A number of compounds with different mechanisms of action have been developed to target FXI (i.e., asundexian, abelacimab, Ionis-FXIRx, milvexian, osocimab, and Xisomab 3G). To date, the majority of available trials have not gone beyond completion of phase 2 and results are conflictive making it difficult to appraise the clinical benefit of these compounds in the different clinical settings where they have been tested (i.e., atrial fibrillation, acute ischemic stroke, acute myocardial infarction, end-stage renal disease, total knee arthroplasty). Moreover, the largest phase 3 randomized trial designed to test the efficacy of asundexian over apixaban in patients with atrial fibrillation, the OCEANIC-AF, has been prematurely stopped as a result of the inferior efficacy of asundexian. In this review we discuss the pharmacological properties and available evidence generated thus far for factor XI inhibitors, providing a perspective on the current state of these drugs., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Background: Among patients treated with a novel oral anticoagulant (NOAC) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), combination therapy with clopidogrel (ie, known as dual antithrombotic therapy [DAT]) is the treatment of choice. However, there are concerns for individuals with impaired response to clopidogrel., Objectives: The authors sought to assess the pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of clopidogrel vs low-dose ticagrelor in patients with impaired clopidogrel response assessed by the ABCD-GENE score., Methods: This was a prospective, randomized PD study of NOAC-treated patients undergoing PCI. Patients with an ABCD-GENE score ≥10 (n = 39), defined as having impaired clopidogrel response, were randomized to low-dose ticagrelor (n = 20; 60 mg twice a day) or clopidogrel (n = 19; 75 mg once a day). Patients with an ABCD-GENE score <10 (n = 42) were treated with clopidogrel (75 mg once a day; control cohort). PD assessments at baseline and 30 days post-randomization (trough and peak) were performed to assess P2Y 12 signaling (VerifyNow P2Y 12 reaction units [PRU], light transmittance aggregometry, and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein); makers of thrombosis not specific to P2Y 12 signaling were also assessed. The primary endpoint was PRU (trough levels) at 30 days., Results: At 30 days, PRU levels were reduced with ticagrelor-based DAT compared with clopidogrel-based DAT at trough (23.0 [Q1-Q3: 3.0-46.0] vs 154.5 [Q1-Q3: 77.5-183.0]; P < 0.001) and peak (6.0 [Q1-Q3: 4.0-14.0] vs 129.0 [Q1-Q3: 66.0-171.0]; P < 0.001). Trough PRU levels in the control arm (104.0 [Q1-Q3: 35.0-167.0]) were higher than ticagrelor-based DAT (P = 0.005) and numerically lower than clopidogrel-based DAT (P = 0.234). Results were consistent by light transmittance aggregometry and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein. Markers measuring other pathways leading to thrombus formation were largely unaffected., Conclusions: In NOAC-treated patients undergoing PCI with an ABCD-GENE score ≥10, ticagrelor-based DAT using a 60-mg, twice-a-day regimen reduced platelet P2Y 12 reactivity compared with clopidogrel-based DAT. (Tailoring P2Y12 Inhibiting Therapy in Patients Requiring Oral Anticoagulation After PCI [SWAP-AC-2]; NCT04483583)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The study was funded by institutional grants from the University of Florida. Dr Franchi has received consulting fees or honoraria from AstraZeneca; and institutional grants from PLx Pharma and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. Dr Galli has received consulting fees or honoraria from Terumo, outside the present work. Dr Ajjan has received institutional research grants and honoraria/educational support/consultancy from Abbott Diabetes Care, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Menarini Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk, and Roche. Dr Angiolillo has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Faraday, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, and Sanofi; and has received institutional research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Faraday, Gilead, Idorsia, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co., Merck, Novartis, and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

This prospective ex vivo and in vitro pharmacodynamic (PD)/pharmacokinetic investigation was conducted in patients with diabetes mellitus with (n = 31) and without chronic kidney disease (n = 30). PD assessments included platelet reactivity index, maximum platelet aggregation, and P2Y 12 reaction units. Ex vivo pharmacokinetic assessments included plasma levels of clopidogrel and its active metabolite. In vitro PD assessments were conducted on baseline samples incubated with escalating concentrations of clopidogrel and its active metabolite. Among patients with diabetes mellitus treated with clopidogrel, impaired renal function was associated with increased maximum platelet aggregation. This finding could be attributed partially to upregulation of the P2Y 12 activity without differences in drug absorption or metabolism. (Impact of Chronic Kidney Disease on Clopidogrel Effects in Diabetes Mellitus; NCT03774394)., Competing Interests: This study was funded by an investigator-initiated grant from the University of Florida and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. The Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation had no role in the study design conception, conduct of the study, or decision to publish these results. Work by Drs Cavallari, Angiolillo, and Franchi is supported by the National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (1R01HL149752). Dr Franchi has received payment as an individual for consulting fee or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer and Sanofi; and institutional payments for grants from PLx Pharma and The Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. Dr Galli has received consulting fees or honoraria from Terumo, outside the present work. Dr Cavallari has received research support from Accriva Diagnostics. Dr Angiolillo has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Faraday, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Vectura; h and his institution has received research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Faraday, Gilead, Idorsia, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co. Merck, Novartis, and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. Dr Jakubowski was an employee of Eli Lilly and Company at the time of the studies. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Background:  To date, there are no data on switching to dual pathway inhibition (DPI) patients who have completed a guideline-recommended dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) regimen., Objectives:  To assess the feasibility of switching from DAPT to DPI and to compare the pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles of these treatments., Methods:  This was a prospective, randomized, PD study conducted in 90 patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) on DAPT with aspirin (81 mg/qd) plus a P2Y 12 inhibitor (clopidogrel [75 mg/qd; n  = 30], ticagrelor [90 mg/bid; n  = 30], or prasugrel [10 mg/qd; n  = 30]). Patients in each cohort were randomized to maintain DAPT or switch to DPI (aspirin 81 mg/qd plus rivaroxaban 2.5 mg/bid). PD assessments included: VerifyNow P2Y 12 reaction units; light transmittance aggregometry following stimuli with adenosine diphosphate (ADP), tissue factor (TF), and a combination of collagen, ADP, and TF (maximum platelet aggregation %); thrombin generation (TG). Assays were performed at baseline and 30 days postrandomization., Results:  Switching from DAPT to DPI occurred without major side effects. DAPT was associated with enhanced P2Y 12 inhibition, while DPI with reduced TG. Platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity (primary endpoint) showed no differences between DAPT and DPI in the ticagrelor (14.5% [0.0-63.0] vs. 20.0% [0.0-70.0]; p  = 0.477) and prasugrel (20.0% [0.0-66.0] vs. 4.0% [0.0-70.0]; p  = 0.482), but not clopidogrel (27.0% [0.0-68.0] vs. 53.0% [0.0-81.0]; p  = 0.011), cohorts., Conclusion:  In patients with CCS, switching from different DAPT regimens to DPI was feasible, showing enhanced P2Y 12 inhibition with DAPT and reduced TG with DPI, with no differences in platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity between DPI and ticagrelor- and prasugrel-, but not clopidogrel-, based DAPT., Clinical Trial Registration:  http://www., Clinicaltrials: gov Unique Identifier: NCT04006288., Competing Interests: F.F. declares that he has received payment as an individual for consulting fee or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Sanofi; and institutional payments for grants from PLx Pharma and The Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. D.J.A. declares that he has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi and Vectura; D.J.A. also declares that his institution has received research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Idorsia, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co., Merck, Novartis, and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. Other authors have nothing to declare., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background: A drug-drug interaction (DDI) may occur when transitioning from intravenous P2Y 12 inhibition with cangrelor to oral P2Y 12 inhibition with prasugrel. However, this has never been tested in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Objectives: This study sought to rule out a DDI when cangrelor and prasugrel are concomitantly administered in PCI patients., Methods: SWAP-6 (Switching Antiplatelet-6) was a prospective, randomized, 3-arm, open-label pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) study. Patients (N = 77) were randomized to 1) prasugrel only at the start of PCI, 2) cangrelor plus prasugrel concomitantly at the start of PCI, or 3) cangrelor at the start of PCI plus prasugrel at the end of infusion. Cangrelor infusion was maintained for 2 hours. PK/PD assessments were performed at baseline and 6 time points postrandomization. The primary endpoint was noninferiority in VerifyNow (Werfen) P2Y 12 reaction units measured at 4 hours after randomization between cangrelor plus prasugrel concomitantly administered vs prasugrel only. PK assessments included plasma levels of the active metabolite of prasugrel., Results: Compared with prasugrel, cangrelor further enhances P2Y 12 inhibitory effects. At 4 hours postrandomization, P2Y 12 reaction unit levels were significantly lower with prasugrel only compared to cangrelor and prasugrel concomitantly administered (least squares means difference = 130; 95% CI: 85-176), failing to meet the prespecified noninferiority margin. Findings were corroborated by multiple PD assays. The active metabolite of prasugrel levels were not affected by concomitant administration of cangrelor and were low at the end of cangrelor infusion., Conclusions: In patients undergoing PCI, concomitant administration of prasugrel with cangrelor leads to a marked increase in platelet reactivity after stopping cangrelor infusion, supporting the presence of a DDI. (Switching Antiplatelet Therapy-6 [SWAP-6]; NCT04668144)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was funded by an investigator-initiated grant from the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. The Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation had no role in the study design conception, conduct of the study, or decision to publish these results. Dr Franchi has received payment as an individual for consulting fees or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Sanofi; and has received institutional payments for grants from PLx Pharma and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. Dr Angiolillo has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Vectura; and his institution has received research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Celo-Nova, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Idorsia, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co, Merck, Novartis, and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Antiplatelet therapy is the mainstay of pharmacologic treatment to prevent thrombotic or ischemic events in patients with coronary artery disease treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and those treated medically for an acute coronary syndrome. The use of antiplatelet therapy comes at the expense of an increased risk of bleeding complications. Defining the optimal intensity of platelet inhibition according to the clinical presentation of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and individual patient factors is a clinical challenge. Modulation of antiplatelet therapy is a medical action that is frequently performed to balance the risk of thrombotic or ischemic events and the risk of bleeding. This aim may be achieved by reducing (ie, de-escalation) or increasing (ie, escalation) the intensity of platelet inhibition by changing the type, dose, or number of antiplatelet drugs. Because de-escalation or escalation can be achieved in different ways, with a number of emerging approaches, confusion arises with terminologies that are often used interchangeably. To address this issue, this Academic Research Consortium collaboration provides an overview and definitions of different strategies of antiplatelet therapy modulation for patients with coronary artery disease, including but not limited to those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, and consensus statements on standardized definitions., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Capodanno reports speaker or consulting fees from Amgen, Arena, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi, and Terumo; and institutional fees from Medtronic. Dr Mehran reports institutional research payments from Abbott, Abiomed, Alleviant Medical, Amgen, AM-Pharma, Arena, AstraZeneca, Atricure, Bayer, Biosensors, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CardiaWave, CeloNova, Chiesi, Concept Medical, CSL Behring, Cytosorbents, Daiichi Sankyo, Element Science, Faraday, Filterlex Medical, Humacyte, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Mediasphere, Medtelligence, Medtronic, Novartis, OrbusNeich, Penumbra, PhaseBio, Philips, Pi-Cardia, PLx Pharma, Protembis, RenalPro, RM Global, Shockwave, Vivasure, and Zoll; personal fees from Cine-Med Research, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Vectura, and WebMD; equity <1% in Applied Therapeutics, Elixir Medical, Stel, and ControlRad (spouse); and roles with the American Medical Association (Scientific Advisory Board, JAMA Cardiology Associate editor), American College of Cardiology (board of trustees member, member clinical trials research program), and Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (Women in Innovations committee member; faculty Cardiac Research Foundation; no fee). Dr Baber discloses honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, and Abbott Vascular. Dr Bhatt discloses the following relationships: advisory board: Angiowave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regado Biosciences, and Stasys; board of directors: Angiowave (stock options), Boston VA Research Institute, Bristol Myers Squibb (stock), DRS.LINQ (stock options), High Enroll (stock), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care, and TobeSoft; chair: inaugural chair, American Heart Association Quality Oversight Committee; consultant: Broadview Ventures and Hims; data monitoring committees: Acesion Pharma, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for PORTICO [Portico Re-sheathable Transcatheter Aortic Valve System US IDE Trial], funded by St Jude Medical, now Abbott), Boston Scientific (chair, PEITHO [Pulmonary Embolism Thrombolysis Study]), Cleveland Clinic (including for ExCEED [Centera THV System in Intermediate Risk Patients Who Have Symptomatic, Severe, Calcific, Aortic Stenosis], funded by Edwards), Contego Medical (chair, PERFORMANCE 2 [Protection Against Emboli During Carotid Artery Stenting Using the Neuroguard IEP System]), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for ENVISAGE [Edoxaban Compared to Standard Care After Heart Valve Replacement Using a Catheter in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation], funded by Daiichi Sankyo; for ABILITY-DM [Randomized Comparison of Abluminus DES+ Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Coronary Artery Disease Patients with Diabetes Mellitus], funded by Concept Medical), Novartis, Population Health Research Institute, and Rutgers University (for the National Institutes of Health–funded MINT [Myocardial Ischemia and Transfusion]); honoraria: American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org; chair, American College of Cardiology Accreditation Oversight Committee), Arnold and Porter law firm (work related to Sanofi/Bristol Myers Squibb clopidogrel litigation), Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI [Evaluation of Dual Therapy With Dabigatran vs Triple Therapy With Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation That Undergo a PCI With Stenting] clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; AEGIS-II [Study to Investigate CSL112 in Subjects With Acute Coronary Syndrome] executive committee funded by CSL Behring), Belvoir Publications (Editor-in-Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group (clinical trial steering committees), Cowen and Company, Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees, including for PRONOUNCE [A Trial Comparing Cardiovascular Safety of Degarelix Versus Leuprolide in Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease], funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (editor-in-chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (guest editor; associate editor), K2P (co-chair, interdisciplinary curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (CME steering committees), MJH Life Sciences, Oakstone CME (course director, Comprehensive Review of Interventional Cardiology), Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS [Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies] operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and US national coleader, funded by Bayer), Slack Publications (chief medical editor, Cardiology Today’s Intervention), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care (secretary/treasurer), WebMD (continuing medical education steering committees), and Wiley (steering committee); other: Clinical Cardiology (deputy editor), National Cardiovascular Data Registry–ACTION Registry Steering Committee (chair), and VA CART (Cardiovascular Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking) Research and Publications Committee (chair); patent: sotagliflozin (named on a patent for sotagliflozin assigned to Brigham and Women’s Hospital, assigned to Lexicon; neither the author nor Brigham and Women’s Hospital receives any income from this patent); research funding: Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, Cleerly, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, and 89Bio; royalties: Elsevier (editor, Braunwald’s Heart Disease); site coinvestigator: Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, SpectraWAVE, Svelte, and Vascular Solutions; trustee: American College of Cardiology; and unfunded research: FlowCo and Takeda. Dr Capranzano reports speaker fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Amgen, and Bayer. Dr Collet reports grants for the institution, honoraria, or research fees from BMS Pfizer, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and AstraZeneca. Dr Cuisset reports consulting and lecture fees from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Edwards, Europa Organisation, Medtronic, Terumo, and Sanofi, and shares from CERC, a health care company. Dr L. De Luca has received consulting fees or honoraria from Amgen, Aspen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Pfizer/Bristol Myers Squibb, Sanofi, Servier, and The Medicines Company, outside the present work. Dr Farb has received payment as an individual for consulting fee or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Sanofi and institutional payments for grants from PLx Pharma and The Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. Dr Gibson reports grant support paid to the institution and consulting fees from Johnson & Johnson, Bristol Myers Squibb, CeleCor, Daiichi Sankyo, and Merck. Dr Hahn reports an institutional research grant from the National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency, Ministry of Health & Welfare, Korea, and from Abbott Vascular, Biosensors, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Donga-ST, Hanmi Pharmaceutical, and Medtronic Inc. Dr James repots grants to the institution from Amgen, Novartis, Janssen, and AstraZeneca. Dr Lemos reports institutional research funding, unpaid advisory board membership, unpaid membership of the steering/executive/data safety and monitoring group of trials, and unpaid interventional proctorship by Abbott, Corindus, Scitech, Boston Scientific, and Flouit but has not received personal payments by pharmaceutical companies or device manufacturers; being part of Argonauts, an innovation facilitator; and partial support by a grant from The National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), Brazil (grant 306677/2019-9). Dr Lopes reports research support from Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, and Pfizer and consulting fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Merck, Pfizer, and Portola. Dr Morice reports being chief executive officer and a shareholder of CERC and a minor shareholder of Electroducer. Dr O’Donoghue reports grants through the hospital from Amgen, Novartis, Janssen, Merck, and AstraZeneca, and honoraria from Amgen, Novartis, AstraZeneca, and Janssen. Dr Serruys reports consultancy fees from SMT, Philips, Novartis, Merillife, and Xeltis. Dr Smits reports institutional research grants from Abbott Vascular and SMT and speaker or consulting honoraria from Abbott Vascular, Microport, and Terumo. Dr Steg reports research grants from Amarin, Bayer, Sanofi, and Servier; he is a speaker or consultant for Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Janssen, Kowa, Idorsia, Lexicon, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Servier; he is senior associate editor of Circulation. Dr Storey reports institutional research grants/support and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Cytosorbents, GlyCardial Diagnostics, and Thromboserin and personal fees from Alnylam, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Hengrui, Idorsia, Intas Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, PhaseBio, and Sanofi Aventis. Dr Valgimigli reports grants and personal fees from Terumo and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Alvimedica/CID, Abbott Vascular, Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer, CoreFLOW, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Universität Basel, Dept Klinische Forschung, Vifor, Bristol Myers Squib SA, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medscape, Medtronic, Vesalio, Novartis, Chiesi, ECRI, and PhaseBio. Dr Vranckx received personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer AG, CSL Behring, Novartis, and Pfizer-Bristol Meyers Squibb alliance. Dr Windecker reports research, travel, or educational grants to the institution from Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardinal Health, CardioValve, Corflow Therapeutics, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Guerbet, InfraRedx, Janssen-Cilag, Johnson & Johnson, Medicure, Medtronic, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Miracor Medical, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Organon, OrPha Suisse, Pfizer, Polares, Regeneron, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier, Sinomed, Terumo, Vifor, and V-Wave; serves as an advisory board member or member of the steering/executive group of trials funded by Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Bristol Myers Squibb, Edwards Lifesciences, Janssen, MedAlliance, Medtronic, Novartis, Polares, Recardio, SINOMED, Terumo, V-Wave, and Xeltis, with payments to the institution but no personal payments; and is a member of the steering/executive committee group of several investigator-initiated trials that receive funding by industry without effect on his personal remuneration. Dr Yeh reports research grants or consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic; and consulting fees from Cathworks, Elixir Medical, Shockwave, and Zoll. Dr Angiolillo has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Vectura, outside the present work; and his institution has received research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co, Merck, Novartis, Osprey Medical, Renal Guard Solutions, and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. The other authors have nothing to disclose.

Background:  Phase II randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on factor(F)XI inhibitors have shown promising results but they were burdened by low statistical power for clinical outcomes., Methods:  We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCT comparing FXI inhibitors versus other anticoagulants (enoxaparin or direct oral anticoagulants, DOACs) or versus placebo on top of antiplatelet therapy., Results:  Eight RCTs testing FXI inhibitors (ISIS 416858, osocimab, abelacimab, milvexian, asundexian) and enrolling 9,216 patients were included. Compared with enoxaparin, FXI inhibitors were associated with reduced any-bleeding (risk ratio [RR]: 0.49, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31-0.77), no difference in major bleeding (RR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.41-2.28), and reduced trial-defined efficacy endpoint (RR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.49-0.79), the latter driven by the high-dose regimens. Compared with DOACs, FXI inhibitors were associated with a trend toward reduced any-bleeding (RR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.31-1.38) and no difference in major bleeding (RR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.22-4.78) or in trial-defined efficacy endpoint (RR: 1.23, 95% CI: 0.88-1.70). Compared with placebo, FXI inhibitors were associated with increased any-bleeding (RR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.08-1.43) and a trend toward increased major bleeding (RR: 1.21, 95% CI: 0.75-1.93), both driven by high-dose regimens, with no difference in trial-defined efficacy endpoint (RR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.92-1.13)., Conclusion:  Results of this meta-analysis on FXI inhibitors suggest increased safety and efficacy compared with enoxaparin and modest increased safety compared with DOACs. The use of FXI inhibitors in adjunct to antiplatelet therapy versus placebo appears to be associated with a dose-dependent increase in bleeding without any difference in efficacy., Study Registration:  This study is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022367706)., Competing Interests: M.G. declares that he has received consulting fees or honoraria from Terumo, outside the present work. F.F. declares that he has received payment as an individual for consulting fee or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Sanofi, and institutional payments for grants from PLx Pharma and The Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. D.C. declares that he has received consulting and speaker's fee from Amgen, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi, and Terumo outside the present work. C.M.G. has received research grant support from Angel Medical Corporation, Bayer Corp, CSL Behring, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson Corporation, and Portola Pharmaceuticals, and has received modest consulting monies from Amarin Pharma, Amgen, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Corporation, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Clinical Research Institute, Cardiovascular Research Foundation, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences, Inc, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson Corporation, The Medicines Company, Merk & Co, Inc., Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharma Mar, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Somahlution, St. Francis Hospital, Verson Corporation, and Web MD. R.M. reports the following outside of the submitted work: institutional research payments from Abbott, Abiomed, Alleviant Medical, AM‐Pharma, Amgen, Arena, AstraZeneca, Atricure, Bayer, Biosensors, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Bristol‐Myers Squibb, CardiaWave, CeloNova, Chiesi, Concept Medical, CSL Behring, Cytosorbents, Daiichi Sankyo, Element Science, Faraday, Humacyte, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Medtronic, Novartis, OrbusNeich, PhaseBio, Philips, Pi‐Cardia, RenalPro, Shockwave, Vivasure, and Zoll; personal fees from Cine‐Med Research and WebMD; equity <1% in Applied Therapeutics, Elixir Medical, Stel, and ControlRad (spouse); Scientific Advisory Board for American Medical Association, American College of Cardiology (Board of Trustees Member), Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (Women in Innovations Committee Member), and JAMA Associate Editor; and Faculty Cardiovascular Research Foundation (no fee). D.J.A. declares that he has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chiesi, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi and Ventura, outside the present work. D.J.A. also declares that his institution has received research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co., Merck, Novartis, Osprey Medical, Renal Guard Solutions and Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. The remaining authors report no disclosures., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Antiplatelet agents are among the most frequently used medications in cardiovascular medicine. Although in patients with atherosclerotic disease manifestations, in particular those treated by percutaneous coronary intervention, antiplatelet agents are beneficial for the prevention of ischemic events, they inevitably increase the risk of bleeding. Furthermore, 5-15% of patients treated by percutaneous coronary intervention may need a surgical procedure within 2 years, creating challenges to safe and effective antiplatelet drug management. Importantly, major spontaneous or procedural-related bleedings are associated with increased hospital admission, length, costs, and poor prognosis. Although the effects of other antithrombotic therapies, such as direct oral anticoagulants, can be reversed by approved specific agents, there are no approved reversal agents for any antiplatelet drugs. The fact that many antiplatelet agents, such as aspirin and thienopyridines (i.e., clopidogrel and prasugrel), bind irreversibly to their targets represents a challenge for the development of a drug-specific reversal agent. In contrast, ticagrelor is a non-thienopyridine with a plasma half-life of 7-9 h that reversely binds the P2Y 12 receptor producing potent signaling blockage. In 2015, bentracimab (also known as PB2452 or MEDI2452), a neutralizing monoclonal antibody fragment that binds free plasma ticagrelor and its major active metabolite, was identified. This systematic overview provides a comprehensive summary of the drug development program of bentracimab, focusing on its pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, and safety profiles., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Ticagrelor has multiple indications, including for some patients with chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) at high risk of ischaemic events. Body mass can potentially affect pharmacodynamics (PD) and pharmacokinetics (PK). We investigated the influence of body mass (range 53-172 kg, 20.8-46.9 kg/m 2 ) on PD/PK in 221 CCS patients receiving ticagrelor 60 mg or 90 mg twice-daily (BD) during two randomised-controlled trials. Correlations between body weight (BW) or body mass index (BMI) and PD/PK measurements obtained during maintenance treatment at trough ('pre-dose') and peak effect ('post-dose') were assessed. BW and BMI correlated with P2Y 12 reactivity units at pre-dose (e.g. BW:R = 0.26, p = 0.008) but not post-dose timepoints. BW affected ticagrelor active metabolite (TAM) levels (e.g. 60 mg BD, post-dose:R = -0.39, p < 0.0001) and there was evidence of an inverse power law relationship between BW and TAM-to-ticagrelor ratio. PK with ticagrelor 60 mg correlated significantly with BMI. BW and BMI did not affect the chance of high platelet reactivity, which remained very low across the whole cohort. There was no difference in PRU between the two doses of ticagrelor within each weight or BMI group. Body mass has modest effects on the PK/PD response to ticagrelor in patients with CCS but currently-used regimens appear adequate across the range of BW/BMI studied., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest W.A.E. Parker reports institutional research grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca. D.J. Angiolillo has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, Aralez, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chiesi, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi, and The Medicines Company; has received payments for participation in review activities from CeloNova and St Jude Medical; and his institution has received research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Idorsia, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co, Merck, Novartis, Osprey Medical, Renal Guard Solutions, and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. F. Rollini declares that he has received honoraria from Chiesi. F. Franchi. declares that he has received consulting fees or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer and Sanofi. He also declares that has received research grants from PLx Pharma and Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. M.P. Bonaca is the Executive Director of CPC, a non-profit academic research organization affiliated with the University of Colorado, that receives research grant/consulting funding from: Abbott, Agios, Alexion Pharma, Alnylam, Amgen, Angionetics, ARCA Biopharma, Array, AstraZeneca, Atentiv, Audentes, Bayer, Better Therapeutics, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cardiol Therapeutics, CellResearch, Cook Medical, Cook, CSL Behring, Eidos Therapeutics, EP Trading Co, Esperion Therapeutics, EverlyWell, Faraday, Fortress Biotech, HDL Therapeutics, Heartflow, Hummingbird Bioscience, Insmed, Janssen, Kowa Research, Lexicon, Merck, Medtronic, Moderna, Novate Medical, NovoNordisk, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PPD Development, Prairie Education and Research, Prothena Ciosciences, Regeneron, Regio Biosciences, Sanifit Therapeutics, Sanofi, Smith and Nephew, Stealth BioTherapeutics, University of Colorado, Worldwide Clinical Trials, Wraser, Yale Cardiovascular Research Group. Dr. Bonaca also reports stock in Medtronic and Pfizer and consulting fees from Audentes. D.L. Bhatt discloses the following relationships - Advisory Board: AngioWave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, Janssen, Level Ex, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regado Biosciences, Stasys; Board of Directors: AngioWave (stock options), Boston VA Research Institute, DRS.LINQ (stock options), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care, TobeSoft; Chair: Inaugural Chair, American Heart Association Quality Oversight Committee; Data Monitoring Committees: Acesion Pharma, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St. Jude Medical, now Abbott), Boston Scientific (Chair, PEITHO trial), Cleveland Clinic (including for the ExCEED trial, funded by Edwards), Contego Medical (Chair, PERFORMANCE 2), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for the ENVISAGE trial, funded by Daiichi Sankyo; for the ABILITY-DM trial, funded by Concept Medical), Novartis, Population Health Research Institute; Rutgers University (for the NIH-funded MINT Trial); Honoraria: American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org; Chair, ACC Accreditation Oversight Committee), Arnold and Porter law firm (work related to Sanofi/Bristol-Myers Squibb clopidogrel litigation), Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; AEGIS-II executive committee funded by CSL Behring), Belvoir Publications (Editor in Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group (clinical trial steering committees), Cowen and Company, Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees, including for the PRONOUNCE trial, funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (Editor in Chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Guest Editor; Associate Editor), K2P (Co-Chair, interdisciplinary curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (CME steering committees), MJH Life Sciences, Oakstone CME (Course Director, Comprehensive Review of Interventional Cardiology), Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and USA national co‑leader, funded by Bayer), Slack Publications (Chief Medical Editor, Cardiology Today's Intervention), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care (Secretary/Treasurer), WebMD (CME steering committees), Wiley (steering committee); Other: Clinical Cardiology (Deputy Editor), NCDR-ACTION Registry Steering Committee (Chair), VA CART Research and Publications Committee (Chair); Research Funding: Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, 89Bio; Royalties: Elsevier (Editor, Braunwald's Heart Disease); Site Co-Investigator: Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St. Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, Svelte, Vascular Solutions; Trustee: American College of Cardiology; Unfunded Research: FlowCo, Takeda. P.G.Steg reports receiving research grants from Bayer, Merck, Sanofi, Servier and receiving consulting fees or honoraria from Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Janssen, Kowa, Idorsia, Lexicon, Merck, Novartis, Novo-Nordisk, PhaseBio, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Servier. M. R. Thomas reports institutional research grants from Novartis, Sanofi, Rigel and Acticor Pharmaceuticals and consultancy fees from Cytosorbents. M. S. Sabatine reports research grant support through Brigham and Women's Hospital from: Abbott; Amgen; Anthos Therapeutics; AstraZeneca; Bayer; Daiichi-Sankyo; Eisai; Intarcia; Ionis; Medicines Company; MedImmune; Merck; Novartis; Pfizer; Quark Pharmaceuticals. Consulting for: Althera; Amgen; Anthos Therapeutics; AstraZeneca; Beren Therapeutics; Bristol-Myers Squibb; DalCor; Dr. Reddy's Laboratories; Fibrogen; Intarcia; Merck; Moderna; Novo Nordisk; and Silence Therapeutics. R.F. Storey reports institutional research grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Cytosorbents, GlyCardial Diagnostics and Thromboserin; and personal fees from Alnylam, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Hengrui, Idorsia, Novartis, PhaseBio, Portola, and Sanofi Aventis. The other authors have no relevant disclosures., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) represents the standard of care for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Increasing evidence indicates that a "one-size-fits-all" approach with the use of a standard DAPT regimen for all patients undergoing PCI could lead to either suboptimal efficacy or prohibitively high bleeding in specific cohorts of patients. Moreover, the broad interindividual variability in response to P2Y 12 inhibitors can impact outcomes and resource utilization. Among the strategies proposed to provide a more balanced trade-off between bleeding and ischemic events at a single patient level, a guided selection of P2Y 12 inhibitors, by using platelet function or genetic testing, has shown promising results. In this review, we provide a focused summary of the rationale and evidence on the use of platelet function and genetic testing-guided antiplatelet therapy, and we explore the implications for their use in the modern setting of patients undergoing PCI., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The impact of intense low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction using a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor on profiles of platelet reactivity has yet to be explored., Aims: Our aim was to investigate the effects of the PCSK9 inhibitor, evolocumab, on platelet reactivity in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) on clopidogrel treatment., Methods: This was a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled pharmacodynamic study in patients with ASCVD on clopidogrel treatment and with LDL-C levels ≥70 mg/dL despite a maximally tolerated statin dose. Patients were stratified according to levels of platelet reactivity using VerifyNow P2Y 12 reactivity units (PRU) into high platelet reactivity (HPR; PRU >208) or normal platelet reactivity (NPR; PRU >85 and ≤208). Each cohort was randomised to receive evolocumab 420 mg or placebo. The primary endpoint was the difference in PRU at 30 days., Results: A total of 84 patients (HPR, n=37 [19 evolocumab vs 18 placebo]; NPR, n=47 [22 evolocumab vs 25 placebo]) were included. Evolocumab significantly reduced LDL-C compared to placebo at 14 (p<0.001) and 30 (p=0.001) days. At 14 days, PRU levels were significantly lower with evolocumab compared to placebo in the HPR (218.2±29.7 vs 246.6±35.2; p=0.017), but not in the NPR cohort (141.2±42.8 vs 148.2±41.7; p=0.578). At 30 days, there were no significant differences in PRU in the HPR (219.3±38.3 vs 240.9±51.8; p=0.161) or NPR (141.5±54.3 vs 158.6±40.8; p=0.229) cohorts., Conclusions: Compared to placebo, evolocumab in adjunct to statin therapy did not significantly reduce platelet reactivity at 30 days in ASCVD patients on clopidogrel treatment despite intense LDL-C reduction. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03096288.

Background: There are no studies specifically designed to rule out a drug-drug interaction (DDI) when cangrelor is used among patients who have been pretreated with ticagrelor., Objectives: This study sought to rule out a DDI among cangrelor-treated patients who have been pretreated with ticagrelor., Methods: In this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover, pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) study, patients with coronary artery disease (N = 20) were pretreated with a 180-mg ticagrelor loading dose and after 1 hour randomized to placebo or cangrelor (bolus and infusion for 2 hours). Patients crossed over after 1 to 4 weeks of washout. PK analysis included ticagrelor plasma levels and its active metabolite. PD assessments included VerifyNow P2Y 12 reaction units (PRU), light transmittance aggregometry, vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein, and Total Thrombus-Formation Analysis System. PK/PD assessments were performed at 7 time points., Results: Compared with placebo, adding cangrelor to patients pretreated with ticagrelor resulted in a significant reduction in PRU at 30 minutes and 1 hour after starting infusion. At 2 hours after stopping cangrelor/placebo infusion, PRU were low and similar in both groups (16.9 vs 12.6; mean difference: 4.3; 95% CI: -28.6 to 37.3), meeting the noninferiority primary endpoint (predefined noninferiority margin 45 PRU). Consistent findings were shown with all PD assays. PK tracked PD findings with no differences between groups in plasma levels of ticagrelor and its metabolite., Conclusions: Compared with placebo, the use of cangrelor in patients pretreated with ticagrelor results in enhanced platelet inhibition with no differences in PK/PD profiles after discontinuation of drug infusion indicating the absence of a DDI. (PD and PK Profiles of Switching Between Cangrelor and Ticagrelor Following Ticagrelor Pre-treatment [SWAP-5]; NCT04634162)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The present study was funded by an investigator-initiated grant from The Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. The Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation had no role in the study design conception, conduct of the study, or decision to publish these results. Dr Franchi has received consulting fees or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Sanofi; and has received institutional payments for grants from PLx Pharma and The Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. Dr Angiolillo has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chiesi, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, and Sanofi; and has received research grants to the institution from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Idorsia, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co, Merck, Novartis, and The Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The persistence of elevated rates of ischemic recurrences despite the use of antiplatelet therapy among patients with atherosclerotic disease together with the understanding of the pivotal role of coagulation in the thrombo-inflammatory processes involved in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis and its complications has fostered the development of treatments targeting both platelets and coagulation, a strategy known as dual-pathway inhibition (DPI)., Areas Covered: In this review we discuss the recent advancements in the understanding of the interplay between coagulation, platelets and inflammation involved in the pathophysiology of atherosclerosis and atherothrombosis, as the rationale for the implementation of a DPI strategy. We also discuss the available pharmacodynamic (PD) evidence and clinical implications with the use of DPI in patients with atherosclerotic disease., Expert Opinion: The implementation of a DPI by adding the so-called 'vascular dose of rivaroxaban' (i.e. 2.5 mg bis in die), on top of antiplatelet therapy has consistently been associated with reduced levels of thrombin generation in PD studies and with reduced ischemic event rates at the cost of increased bleeding compared to antiplatelet therapy alone. Further research is warranted to best define patients in whom a DPI regimen has the best safety and efficacy profile.

For 20 years, dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), consisting of the combination of aspirin and a platelet P2Y 12 receptor inhibitor, has been the gold standard of antithrombotic pharmacology after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In the past 5 years, several investigations have challenged this paradigm by testing the efficacy and safety of P2Y 12 inhibitor monotherapy (that is, without aspirin) following a short course of DAPT. Collectively, these studies suggested a reduction in the risk of major bleeding and no significant increase in thrombotic or ischaemic events compared with guideline-recommended DAPT. Current recommendations are evolving to inform clinical practice on the ideal candidates for P2Y 12 inhibitor monotherapy after PCI. Generalizing the results of studies of P2Y 12 inhibitor monotherapy requires a thorough understanding of their design, populations, interventions, comparators and results. In this Review, we provide an up-to-date overview on the use of P2Y 12 inhibitor monotherapy after PCI, including supporting pharmacodynamic and clinical evidence, practical recommendations and future directions., (© 2022. Springer Nature Limited.)

Switching P2Y 12 inhibitors is common in clinical practice. However, data on the pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of switching in clinical settings characterized by high platelet reactivity, such as diabetes mellitus (DM), are limited. This is a post-hoc analysis from a prospective, randomized, open-label study conducted in coronary artery disease patients comparing the PD effects of loading dose (LD) and maintenance dose regimens of prasugrel vs ticagrelor according to DM status. A total of 110 patients were enrolled: 42 (38%) with DM and 68 (62%) without DM. All patients were on maintenance dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel. PD assessments were performed using whole blood vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP), with results quantified by the platelet reactivity index (PRI), VerifyNow P2Y12 (VN-P2Y12) with results reported as P2Y12 reaction units (PRU), and light transmittance aggregometry (LTA) following 20 and 5 µM adenosine diphosphate stimuli with results reported as maximum platelet aggregation (MPA). PD assessments were performed at baseline (while on clopidogrel), 30 min after LD, 2 h after LD, and 1 week after LD. Overall, platelet reactivity was higher in DM than in non-DM patients while on clopidogrel therapy. After switching to either prasugrel or ticagrelor, platelet reactivity dropped but remained significantly higher among patients with DM at 30 min with all tests (VN-PRU p < 0.01, MPA 20 µM p < 0.01, VASP-PRI p = 0.02) and at 2 h with VN-PRU (p < 0.01) and LTA-MPA 20 µM (p < 0.01) but not with VASP-PRI (p = 0.19). There were no significant differences between prasugrel and ticagrelor both among patients with or without DM, except for lower LTA-MPA 20 at 30 min (p < 0.01) among non-DM patients treated with prasugrel. Patients with DM treated with clopidogrel have higher platelet reactivity compared to patients without DM. Although platelet reactivity markedly reduces to a similar extent after switching to prasugrel or ticagrelor, patients with DM persist with increased platelet reactivity compared to patients without DM.Study registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01852175., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Low dose enteric-coated aspirin (EC-ASA) is routinely used for secondary cardiovascular event prevention. However, absorption of EC tablets is poor, which can result in subtherapeutic antiplatelet effects. Phospholipid-aspirin liquid filled capsules (PL-ASA) are a novel FDA-approved immediate-release formulation designed to reduce gastrointestinal (GI) injury by limiting direct contact with the stomach lining. We compared the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles of PL-ASA versus EC-ASA at a low dose. This randomized, open-label, crossover study assessed PK and PD following a single 81-mg dose of PL-ASA versus EC-ASA under fasting conditions in 36 volunteers without cardiovascular disease between 18 and 75 years of age. Volunteers were randomly assigned 1:1 to either PL-ASA then EC-ASA or vice versa with a minimum 14-day washout. Assessments included PK parameters for acetylsalicylic acid and salicylic acid, platelet aggregation in response to arachidonic acid (AA), and serum thromboxane B2 (TxB 2 ) assessments over 24 h. PL-ASA was rapidly absorbed. PL-ASA reached T max 3 h earlier (1.01 vs. 4.00 h, p < 0.0001), with almost double the C max (720 vs. 368 ng/mL, p < 0.0001) and overall 44% higher exposure of acetylsalicylic acid (AUC 0-t : 601 vs. 416 h*ng/mL, p = 0.0013) compared with EC-ASA. Within 1 h of dosing, PL-ASA achieved significantly lower residual platelet aggregation, which persisted for the full 24 h (median AA-LTA was 47% with PL-ASA vs. 80.5% with EC-ASA; p = 0.0022 at hour-24). Treatment with PL-ASA also resulted in significantly lower serum TxB 2 concentrations at each time point compared with EC-ASA (all p-values < 0.05). PL-ASA resulted in faster and more complete aspirin absorption paralleled by more prompt and potent platelet inhibition compared with EC-ASA after a single 81 mg dose. PL-ASA represents an attractive novel aspirin formulation for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events.Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04811625., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: The clinical impact of different prophylactic anticoagulation regimens among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unclear. We pooled evidence from available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to provide insights on this topic., Methods and Results: We searched for RCTs comparing treatment with an escalated-dose (intermediate-dose or therapeutic-dose) vs. a standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation regimen in critically and non-critically ill COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalization and without a formal indication for anticoagulation. The primary efficacy endpoint was all-cause death, and the primary safety endpoint was major bleeding. Seven RCTs were identified, including 5154 patients followed on an average of 33 days. Compared to standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation, escalated-dose prophylactic anticoagulation was not associated with a reduction of all-cause death [17.8% vs. 18.6%; risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-1.18] but was associated with an increase in major bleeding (2.4% vs. 1.4%; RR 1.73, 95%CI 1.15-2.60). Compared to prophylactic anticoagulation used at a standard dose, an escalated dose was associated with lower rates of venous thromboembolism (2.5% vs. 4.7%; RR 0.55, 95%CI 0.41-0.74) without a significant effect on myocardial infarction (RR 0.80, 95%CI 0.47-1.36), stroke (RR 0.94, 95%CI 0.43-2.09), or systemic arterial embolism (RR 1.20, 95%CI 0.29-4.95). There were no significant interactions in the subgroup analysis for critically and non-critically ill patients., Conclusions: Our findings provide comprehensive and high-quality evidence for the use of standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation over an escalated-dose regimen as routine standard of care for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who do not have an indication for therapeutic anticoagulation, irrespective of disease severity., Study Registration: This study is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021257203)., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Dual pathway inhibition (DPI) by adding a vascular dose of rivaroxaban to a single antiplatelet agent has emerged as a promising antithrombotic strategy. However, in most studies the antiplatelet agent of choice used in adjunct to a vascular dose of rivaroxaban was aspirin, and data on a P2Y12 inhibitor and how this DPI regimen compares with standard dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) are limited., Methods and Results: This investigation was a substudy analysis conducted in selected cohorts of patients with stable atherosclerotic disease enrolled from a larger prospective, open-label, parallel-group pharmacodynamic (PD) study. We analysed data from 40 patients treated with either clopidogrel- or ticagrelor-based DAPT first, and clopidogrel- or ticagrelor-based DPI thereafter. PD measures explored key pathways involved in thrombus formation and included markers of (1) P2Y12 reactivity, (2) platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity, (3) cyclooxygenase-1 activity, (4) thrombin receptor-activating peptide (TRAP)-induced platelet aggregation, (5) tissue factor (TF)-induced platelet aggregation, and (6) thrombin generation. Compared with DAPT, on a background of the same P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel or ticagrelor), DPI was associated with reduced thrombin generation, increased markers of cyclooxygenase-1 activity and TRAP-induced platelet aggregation, and no differences in markers of P2Y12 signalling, platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity, and TF-induced platelet aggregation. In an analysis according to P2Y12 inhibitor type, ticagrelor reduced markers of platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity, P2Y12 signalling, and rates of high platelet reactivity compared with clopidogrel., Conclusion: Compared with DAPT with aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor, the use of a P2Y12 inhibitor in adjunct to a vascular dose of rivaroxaban as part of a DPI strategy is associated with similar effects on platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity but reduced thrombin generation. A DPI strategy with ticagrelor is associated with enhanced antithrombotic efficacy, the clinical implications of which warrant larger scale investigations., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03718429., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at increased risk of atherothrombotic events. Ticagrelor reduces ischaemic events compared to clopidogrel, with the greatest risk reduction in patients with both DM and CKD. How CKD status affects the pharmacodynamic (PD) and pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles of different ticagrelor maintenance dose regimens in patients with DM is unknown., Methods and Results: In this randomized, crossover study, patients with DM on treatment with dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin and clopidogrel) were stratified according to CKD status and randomized to ticagrelor 90 or 60 mg bid. PK/PD assessments were performed at baseline, after 7-10 days of ticagrelor (peak and trough), and after 7-10 days of alternative ticagrelor regimen (peak and trough). PK assessments included plasma concentrations of ticagrelor and its major metabolite. PD assessments included vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP)-platelet reactivity index (PRI), VerifyNow P2Y12, and light transmittance aggregometry (LTA). A total of 92 patients with DM (CKD, n = 44; non-CKD, n = 48) were randomized. Levels of platelet reactivity were lower with the 90 mg compared with the 60 mg ticagrelor dose, which was statistically significant in non-CKD but not in CKD patients for most PD measures. There were no significant differences in the primary endpoint (trough levels of VASP-PRI following ticagrelor 90 mg dosing) between cohorts (31 ± 20 vs. 25 ± 14; P = 0.105). VerifyNow and LTA provided similar findings. PK assessments tracked PD profiles showing increased plasma concentrations of ticagrelor and its major metabolite in CKD compared to non-CKD patients., Conclusion: In patients with DM, although ticagrelor maintenance dose regimens (60 and 90 mg) yield potent P2Y12 inhibition, levels of platelet reactivity tended to be higher and subject to broader variability in non-CKD compared with CKD patients., Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier: NCT02539160., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2021. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aim:  Inhibition of thrombin-mediated signaling processes using a vascular dose of rivaroxaban in adjunct to antiplatelet therapy, known as dual-pathway inhibition (DPI), reduces atherothrombotic events in patients with stable atherosclerotic disease. However, there are limited data on the pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of this strategy and how it compares to standard dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT)., Methods and Results:  This investigation was conducted in selected cohorts of patients ( n  = 40) with stable atherosclerotic disease-enrolled within a larger prospective, open-label, parallel-group PD study-who were treated with either aspirin plus clopidogrel (DAPT), aspirin plus rivaroxaban 2.5 mg/bid (DPI), or DAPT plus rivaroxaban 2.5 mg/bid. Multiple PD assays providing a comprehensive assessment of markers of thrombosis were used. PD endpoints included platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity measured by light transmittance aggregometry (LTA) following stimuli with CATF (collagen-related peptide + adenosine diphosphate [ADP] + tissue factor [TF]), markers of P2Y 12 reactivity, markers of platelet aggregation using LTA following several stimuli (arachidonic acid, ADP, collagen, TF, and thrombin receptor-activating peptide [TRAP]), thrombin generation, and thrombus formation. There was no difference in platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity between groups. Rivaroxaban significantly reduced thrombin generation and was associated with a trend toward reduced TF-induced platelet aggregation. Clopidogrel-based treatments reduced markers of P2Y 12 signaling and TRAP-induced platelet aggregation. There were no differences between groups on markers of cyclooxygenase-1-mediated activity., Conclusion:  Compared with DAPT, DPI does not result in any differences in platelet-mediated global thrombogenicity, but reduces thrombin generation. These PD observations suggest that modulating thrombin generation-by means of factor Xa inhibition-in adjunct to antiplatelet therapy provides effective antithrombotic effects, supporting the efficacy and safety findings of a DPI strategy observed in clinical trials., Competing Interests: F.F. declares that he has received consulting fees or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Sanofi. He also declares that has received research grants from PLx Pharma and Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. F.R. declares that he has received honoraria from Chiesi. T.G. declares that he has received research grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Bayer, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Ferrer/Chiesi. T.G. also declares that he has received consulting fees or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Bayer, Ferrer/Chiesi, and Pfizer. D.J.A. declares that he has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chiesi, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi, and The Medicines Company D.J.A. also declares that his institution has received research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co., Merck, Novartis, Osprey Medical, Renal Guard Solutions, and Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. L.K.J. declares that she has received consulting fees or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Sanofi, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Portola, and PhaseBio. L.K.J. also declares that her company has received grants from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Bayer, Janssen, and Portola. The remaining authors report no disclosures., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Precision medicine is a medical model that proposes the customization of medical treatments to the individual patient, as opposed to a one-drug-fits-all model. Such a "personalized medicine" approach has been widely adopted in several medical fields, such as cancer medicine, but the implementation of precision medicine in cardiovascular medicine has not been similarly straightforward. Because pharmacogenomics plays an important role in the safety and efficacy of cardiovascular drug therapy, there has been a great interest in the use of tools aiming at personalizing antiplatelet therapy. Moreover, antiplatelet therapy is essential for the treatment of cardiovascular patients to reduce the risk of thrombotic complications, particularly those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, but it is inevitably associated with increased bleeding risk. In this review, the authors discuss the rationale, summarize the evidence and discuss the current and future directions for the personalization of antiplatelet treatment regimens in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Aims: Guidelines recommend the use of potent P2Y12 inhibitors over clopidogrel for the reduction of ischaemic events in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, this comes at the expense of increased bleeding. A guided selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy has the potential to overcome this limitation. We aimed at evaluating the comparative safety and efficacy of guided vs. routine selection of potent P2Y12 inhibiting therapy in patients with ACS., Methods and Results: We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different oral P2Y12 inhibitors currently recommended for the treatment of patients with ACS (clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor). RCTs including a guided approach (i.e. platelet function or genetic testing) vs. standard selection of P2Y12 inhibitors among patients with ACS were also included. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. P-scores were used to estimate hierarchies of efficacy and safety. The primary efficacy endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and the primary safety endpoint was all bleeding. A total of 61 898 patients from 15 RCTs were included. Clopidogrel was used as reference treatment. A guided approach was the only strategy associated with reduced MACE (IRR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65-0.98) without any significant trade-off in all bleeding (IRR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.96-1.55). A guided approach and prasugrel were associated with reduced myocardial infarction. A guided approach, prasugrel, and ticagrelor were associated with reduced stent thrombosis. Ticagrelor was also associated with reduced total and cardiovascular mortality. Prasugrel was associated with increased major bleeding. Prasugrel and ticagrelor were associated with increased minor bleeding. The incidence of stroke did not differ between treatments., Conclusion: In patients with an ACS, compared with routine selection of potent P2Y12 inhibiting therapy (prasugrel or ticagrelor), a guided selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy is associated with the most favourable balance between safety and efficacy. These findings support a broader adoption of guided approach for the selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy in patients with ACS., Study Registration Number: This study is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021258603)., Key Question: A guided selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy using platelet function or genetic testing improves outcomes among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Nevertheless, the comparative safety and efficacy of a guided versus routine selection of potent P2Y12-inhibiting therapy in acute coronary syndrome has not been explored., Key Finding: In a comprehensive network meta-analysis including the totality of available evidence and using clopidogrel as treatment reference, a guided approach was the only strategy associated with reduced major adverse cardiovascular events without any significant trade-off in bleeding. Prasugrel and ticagrelor increased bleeding and only ticagrelor reduced mortality., Take Home Message: A guided selection of P2Y12-inhibiting therapy represents the strategy associated with the most favourable balance between safety and efficacy. These findings support a broader adoption of guided P2Y12 inhibiting therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2021. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Clopidogrel is the most frequently utilized P2Y 12 inhibitor and is characterized by broad interindividual response variability resulting in impaired platelet inhibition and increased risk of thrombotic complications in a considerable number of patients. The potent P2Y 12 inhibitors, prasugrel and ticagrelor, can overcome this limitation but at the expense of an increased risk of bleeding. Genetic variations of the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2 C19 enzyme, a key determinant in clopidogrel metabolism, have been strongly associated with clopidogrel response profiles prompting investigations of genetic-guided selection of antiplatelet therapy., Areas Covered: The present manuscript focuses on the rationale for the use of genetic testing to guide the selection of platelet P2Y 12 inhibitors among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Moreover, a comprehensive appraisal of the available evidence and practical recommendations is provided., Expert Commentary: Implementation of genetic testing as a strategy to guide the selection of therapy can result in escalation (i.e. switching to prasugrel or ticagrelor) or de-escalation (i.e. switching to clopidogrel) of P2Y 12 inhibiting therapy. Most recent investigations support the clinical benefit of a genetic guided selection of antiplatelet therapy in patients undergo PCI. Integrating the results of genetic testing with clinical and procedural variables represents a promising strategy for a precision medicine approach for the selection of antiplatelet therapy among patients undergoing PCI.

Background: Whether guided selection of antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is effective in improving outcomes compared with standard antiplatelet therapy remains controversial. We assessed the safety and efficacy of guided versus standard selection of antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing PCI., Methods: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, from Aug 20 to Oct 25, 2020, we searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science databases for randomised controlled trials and observational studies published in any language that compared guided antiplatelet therapy, by means of platelet function testing or genetic testing, versus standard antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing PCI. Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility, extracted the data, and assessed risk of bias. Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs were used with random-effects or fixed-effect models according to the estimated heterogeneity among studies assessed by the I 2 index. Coprimary endpoints were trial-defined primary major adverse cardiovascular events and any bleeding. Key secondary endpoints were all-cause death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, definite or probable stent thrombosis, and major and minor bleeding. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021215901)., Findings: 3656 potentially relevant articles were screened. Our analysis included 11 randomised controlled trials and three observational studies with data for 20 743 patients. Compared with standard therapy, guided selection of antiplatelet therapy was associated with a reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events (RR 0·78, 95% CI 0·63-0·95, p=0·015) and reduced bleeding, although not statistically significant (RR 0·88, 0·77-1·01, p=0·069). Cardiovascular death (RR 0·77, 95% CI 0·59-1·00, p=0·049), myocardial infarction (RR 0·76, 0·60-0·96, p=0·021), stent thrombosis (RR 0·64, 0·46-0·89, p=0·011), stroke (RR 0·66, 0·48-0·91, p=0·010), and minor bleeding (RR 0·78, 0·67-0·92, p=0·0030) were reduced with guided therapy compared with standard therapy. Risks of all-cause death and major bleeding did not differ between guided and standard approaches. Outcomes varied according to the strategy used, with an escalation approach associated with a significant reduction in ischaemic events without any trade-off in safety, and a de-escalation approach associated with a significant reduction in bleeding, without any trade-off in efficacy., Interpretation: Guided selection of antiplatelet therapy improved both composite and individual efficacy outcomes with a favourable safety profile, driven by a reduction in minor bleeding, supporting the use of platelet function or genetic testing to optimise the choice of agent in patients undergoing PCI., Funding: None., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests DC declares that he has received consulting and speaker's fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer, and Sanofi, outside the present work. FF declares that he has received consulting fees or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Sanofi. FR declares that he has received honoraria from Chiesi. IP reports consulting and speaker's fees from Abiomed, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biotronik, Daiichi Sankyo, Philips, Sanofi, Stentys, and Terumo, outside the present work. DJA declares that he has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, Aralez, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chiesi, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi, and The Medicines Company, and has received payments for participation in review activities from CeloNova and St Jude Medical, outside the present work. DJA also declares that his institution has received research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Idorsia, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry, Merck, Novartis, Osprey Medical, RenalGuard Solutions, and Scott R MacKenzie Foundation. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Prasugrel and ticagrelor are potent oral platelet P2Y 12 inhibitors and are recommended over clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Oral platelet P2Y 12 inhibitors are characterized by varying degrees of pharmacodynamic response profiles as assessed by a variety of commercially available assays. Because of its ease of use, rapid turnaround times and ability to provide results specific to P2Y 12 inhibitory effects, VerifyNow has emerged as one of the most commonly utilized platelet function assays. However, reference ranges with VerifyNow have been reported mainly for clopidogrel and there has not yet been any study specifically conducted to provide the expected on treatment reference ranges following administration of prasugrel and ticagrelor. This was a prospective single center investigation conducted in 120 patients with ACS who were treated with prasugrel or ticagrelor as per standard of care. Patients who underwent percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) were treated with a loading dose of prasugrel (60 mg) or ticagrelor (180 mg), and patients who were on maintenance therapy were taking prasugrel (10 mg qd or 5 mg qd) or ticagrelor (90 mg bid). Platelet function testing was performed using the VerifyNow™ PRUTest™. The overall range of PRUTest values was lower than that observed in studies of patients treated with clopidogrel. The use of a maintenance dose regimen had a wider range of PRUTest values compared to the use of a loading dose for both prasugrel (1-179 vs. 2-128) and ticagrelor (1-196 vs. 1-177). The average PRUTest values in patients on prasugrel and ticagrelor maintenance dosing were 20% and 9% higher those observed in patients treated with a loading dose. PRUTest results following loading dose administration were very similar between drugs, but were 20% higher with prasugrel compared with ticagrelor during maintenance dosing. This study establishes expected PRUTest ranges for patients taking loading and maintenance doses of prasugrel and ticagrelor.Clinical Trial Registration http://www.clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier: NCT04492423, registered July 2020 retrospectively registered.