Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy

, Volume 17, Issue 3, pp 123–137 | Cite as

Monitoring Aspirin and Clopidogrel Response: Testing Controversies and Recommendations

  • Athanasios Karathanos
  • Tobias Geisler
Current Opinion


Antiplatelet therapy is the cornerstone of the treatment for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Dual therapy with clopidogrel and aspirin is currently the standard treatment after percutaneous coronary interventions. However, despite the use of clopidogrel, a considerable number of patients continue to suffer major adverse cardiac events. There is a growing degree of evidence supporting high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) as a predictive factor for recurrent ischemic complications. Numerous studies have shown an interindividual variability of responsiveness to clopidogrel and aspirin, which is one of the reasons for HPR. There is yet to be established an assay for antiplatelet drug response as the gold standard. This paper provides a background to the current controversies surrounding the issue of testing for the effectiveness of antiplatelet therapy and reviews the various genetic and phenotype-based laboratory tests to measure aspirin and clopidogrel response and their correlation with clinical outcomes. On the basis of the current evidence and trying to be cost-effective, testing should be considered on a case-by-case basis, especially in patients who present with an acute coronary syndrome or stent thrombosis. In the case of stable CAD, we think that testing might be helpful in particular risk groups of patients to avoid ischemic or bleeding complications.


Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Clopidogrel Platelet Function Stent Thrombosis Prasugrel 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



There was no funding provided for the preparation of this paper and the authors have no relevant conflict of interest to reveal.


  1. 1.
    CAPRIE Steering Committee. A randomised, blinded, trial of clopidogrel versus aspirin in patients at risk of ischaemic events (CAPRIE). Lancet. 1996;348:1329–39.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Duke WW. The relation of blood platelets to hemorrhagic disease: description of a method for determining the bleeding time and coagulation time and report of three cases of hemorrhagic disease relieved by transfusion. JAMA. 1910;55:1185–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rodgers RP, Levin J. A critical reappraisal of the bleeding time. Semin Thromb Hemost. 1990;16:1–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    The British Society for Haematology BCSH Haemostasis and Thrombosis Task Force. Guidelines on platelet function testing. J Clin Pathol. 1988;41(12):1322–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cattaneo M, Hayward CP, Moffat KA, et al. Results of a worldwide survey on the assessment of platelet function by light transmission aggregometry: a report from the platelet physiology subcommittee of the SSC of the ISTH. J Thromb Haemost. 2009;7(6):1029.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gurbel PA, Bliden KP, Guyer K, et al. Platelet reactivity in patients and recurrent events post stenting. Results of the PREPARE POST-STENTING Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:1820–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hochholzer W, Trenk D, Bestehorn HP, et al. Impact of the degree of peri-interventional platelet inhibition after loading with clopidogrel on early clinical outcome of elective coronary stent placement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:1742–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cardinal DC, Flower RJ. The electronic aggregometer: a novel device for assessing platelet behavior in blood. J Pharmacol Methods. 1980;3:135–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tóth O, Calatzis A, Penz S, et al. Multiple electrode aggregometry: a new device to measure platelet aggregation in whole blood. Thromb Haemost. 2006;96(6):781–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sibbing D, Braun S, Jawansky S, et al. Assessment of ADP-induced platelet aggregation with light transmission aggregometry and multiple electrode platelet aggregometry before and after clopidogrel treatment. Thromb Haemost. 2008;99:121–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sibbing D, Braun S, Morath T, et al. Platelet reactivity after clopidogrel treatment assessed with point-of-care analysis and early drug-eluting stent thrombosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:849–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Siller-Matula JM, Christ G, Lang M, et al. Multiple electrode aggregometry predicts stent thrombosis better than the vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation assay. J Thromb Haemost. 2010;8:351–9.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Smith JW, Steinhubl SR, Lincoff AM, et al. Rapid platelet-function assay: an automated and quantitative cartridge-based method. Circulation. 1999;99:620–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jakubowsky JA, Payne CD, Li YG, et al. The use of the VerifyNow P2Y12 point-of-care device to monitor platelet function across a range of P2Y12 inhibition levels following prasugrel and clopidogrel administration. Thromb Haemost. 2008;99:409–15.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Van Werkum JW, van der Stelt CA, Seesing TH, et al. A head-to-head comparison between the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay and light transmittance aggregometry for monitoring the individual platelet response to clopidogrel in patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention. J Thromb Haemost. 2006;4:2516–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lev E, Patel R, Maresh K, et al. Aspirin and clopidogrel drug response in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The role of dual drug resistance. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:27–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Breet NJ, van Werkum JW, Bouman HJ, et al. Comparison of platelet function tests in predicting clinical outcome in patients undergoing coronary stent implantation. JAMA. 2010;303:754–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chen WH, Lee PY, Ng W, et al. Aspirin resistance is associated with a high incidence of myonecrosis after non-urgent percutaneous coronary intervention despite clopidogrel pre-treatment. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43:1122–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Price MJ, Endemann S, Gollapudi RR, et al. Prognostic significance of post-clopidogrel platelet reactivity assessed by a point-of-care assay on thrombotic events after drug-eluting stent implantation. Eur Heart J. 2008;29:992–1000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Marcucci R, Gori AM, Paniccia R, et al. Cardiovascular death and nonfatal myocardial infarction in acute coronary syndrome patients receiving coronary stenting are predicted by residual platelet reactivity to ADP detected by a point-of-care assay: a 12 months follow up. Circulation. 2009;119:237–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Double Randomization of a Monitoring Adjusted Antiplatelet Treatment Versus a Common Antiplatelet Treatment for DES Implantation, and Interruption Versus Continuation of Double Antiplatelet Therapy (ARCTIC). Accessed Sept 2012.
  22. 22.
    Favaloro EJ. Clinical utility of the PFA-100. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2008;34(8):709–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jilma B. Platelet function analyzer (PFA-100): a tool to quantify congenitalor acquired platelet dysfunction. J Lab Clin Med. 2001;138:152–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Andersen K, Hurlen M, Arnesen H, et al. Aspirin non responsiveness as measured by PFA-100 in patients with coronary artery disease. Thromb Res. 2002;108:37–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reny JL, De Moerloose P, Dauzat M, et al. Use of the PFA-100 closure time to predict cardiovascular events in aspirin-treated cardiovascular patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thromb Haemost. 2008;6(3):444–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Linnemann B, Schwonberg J, Rechner AR, et al. Assessment of clopidogrel non-response by the PFA-100 system using the new test cartridge INNOVANCE PFA P2Y. Ann Hematol. 2010;89(6):597–605.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jang J, Lim J, Chang K, et al. A comparison of INNOVANCE® PFA P2Y and VerifyNow P2Y12 assay for the assessment of clopidogrel resistance in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. J Clin Lab Anal. 2012;26(4):262–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tsantes A, Ikonomidis I, Papadakis I. Evaluation of the role of the new INNOVANCE PFA P2Y test cartridge in detection of clopidogrel resistance. Platelets. 2012;23(6):481–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hobson AR, Agarwala RA, Swallow RA, et al. Thrombelastography: current clinical applications and its potential role in interventional cardiology. Platelets. 2006;17:509–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gurbel PA, Bliden KP, Navickas IA, et al. Adenosine diphosphate-induced platelet-fibrin clot strength: a new thrombelastographic indicator of long-term poststenting ischaemic events. Am Heart J. 2010;160:346–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chen A, Teruya J. Global hemostasis testing thromboelastography: old technology, new applications. Clin Lab Med. 2009;29(2):391–407.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hobson AR, Petley GW, Dawkins KD, et al. A novel 15 minute test for assessment of individual time-dependent clotting responses to aspirin and clopidogrel using modified thrombelastography. Platelets. 2007;18:497–505.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Swallow RA, Agarwala RA, Dawkins KD, et al. Thrombelastography: a potential bedside tool to assess the effects of antiplatelet therapy? Platelets. 2006;17:385–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Samama CM. Thromboelastography: the next step. Anesth Analg. 2001;92(3):563–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mahla E, Lang T, Vicenzi MN, et al. Thromboelastography for monitoring prolonged hypercoagulability after major abdominal surgery. Anesth Analg. 2001;92(3):572–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bochsen L, Wiinberg B, Kjelgaard-Hansen M, et al. Evaluation of the TEG platelet mapping assay in blood donors. Thromb J. 2007;20(5):3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mahla E, Suarez TA, Bliden KP, et al. Platelet function measurement-based strategy to reduce bleeding and waiting time in clopidogrel-treated patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: the timing based on platelet function strategy to reduce clopidogrel-associated bleeding related to CABG (TARGET-CABG) study. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:261–9.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Preisman et al. Modified thromboelastography evaluation of platelet dysfunction in patients undergoing coronary artery surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2010;37(6):1367–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gurbel P, Bliden K, Saucedo J, et al. Bivalirudin and clopidogrel with and without eptifibatide for elective stenting: effects on platelet function, thrombelastographic indexes, and their relation to periprocedural infarction results of the CLEAR PLATELETS-2 (Clopidogrel with Eptifibatide to Arrest the Reactivity of Platelets) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:648–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Schwarz UR, Geiger J, Walter U, et al. Flow cytometry analysis of intracellular VASP phosphorylation for the assessment of activating and inhibitory signal transduction pathways in human platelets—definition and detection of ticlopidine/clopidogrel effects. Thromb Haemost. 1999;82:1145–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bonello L, Camoin-Jau L, Arques S, et al. Adjusted clopidogrel loading doses according to vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation index decrease rate of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with clopidogrel resistance: a multicenter randomized prospective study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51(14):1404–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Campbell J, Ridgway H, Carville D. Plateletworks®: a novel point-of-care platelet function screen. Mol Diagn Ther. 2008;12:253–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Cattaneo M. Aspirin and clopidogrel: efficacy, safety and the issue of drug resistance. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2004;24:1980–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Eikelboom JW, Hankey GJ, Thom J. Incomplete inhibition of thromboxane biosynthesis by acetylsalicylic acid: determinants and effect on cardiovascular risk. Circulation. 2008;118(17):1705–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Frelinger AL 3rd, Furman MI, Linden MD, et al. Residual arachidonic acid-induced platelet activation via an adenosine diphosphate-dependent but cyclooxygenase-1- and cyclooxygenase-2-independent pathway: a 700-patient study of aspirin resistance. Circulation. 2006;113(25):2888–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Rocca B, Secchiero P, Ciabattoni G, et al. Cyclooxygenase-2 expression is induced during human megakaryopoiesis and characterizes newly formed platelets. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002;99:7634–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Weber AA, Zimmermann KC, Meyer-Kirchrath J, et al. Cyclooxygenase-2 in human platelets as a possible factor in aspirin resistance. Lancet. 1999;353:900.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Cattaneo M. Resistance to antiplatelet drugs: molecular mechanisms and laboratory detection. J Thromb Haemost. 2007;5(Suppl 1):230–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Campbell CL, Steinhubl SR. Variability in response to aspirin: do we understand the clinical relevance? J Thromb Haemost. 2005;3:665–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ohmori T, Yatomi Y, Nonaka T, et al. Aspirin resistance detected with aggregometry cannot be explained by cyclooxygenase activity: involvement of other signaling pathway(s) in cardiovascular events of aspirin-treated patients. J Thromb Haemost. 2006;4(6):1271–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Snoep JD, Hovens MC, Eikenboom JJ, et al. Association of laboratory-defined aspirin resistance with a higher risk of recurrent cardiovascular events: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(15):1593–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Antithrombotic Trialists’ Collaboration. Collaborative meta-analysis of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy for prevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in high risk patients. BMJ. 2002;324:71–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Krasopoulos G, Brister SJ, Beattie SW, et al. Aspirin “resistance” and risk of cardiovascular morbidity: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2008;336:195.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Pettersen AA, Seljeflot I, Abdelnoor M, et al. High on-aspirin platelet reactivity and clinical outcome in patients with stable coronary artery disease: results from ASCET (Aspirin Nonresponsiveness and Clopidogrel Endpoint Trial). J Am Heart Assoc. 2012;1(3):e000703.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Schwartz KA, Schwartz DE, Barber K, et al. Non-compliance is the predominant cause of aspirin resistance in chronic coronary arterial disease patients. J Transl Med. 2008;6:46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mehta SR, Yusuf S. Short- and long-term oral antiplatelet therapy in acute coronary syndromes and percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41(Suppl S):79S–88S.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Steinhubl SR, Berger PB, Mann JT III, et al. Early and sustained dual oral antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2002;288:2411–20. Erratum in: JAMA. 2003;289:987.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Chen ZM, Jiang LX, Chen YP, et al. Addition of clopidogrel to aspirin in 45,852 patients with acute myocardial infarction: randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;366:1607–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Barragan P, Bouvier JL, Roquebert PO, et al. Resistance to thienopyridines: clinical detection of coronary stent thrombosis by monitoring of vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2003;59:295–302.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Matetzky S, Shenkman B, Guetta V, et al. Clopidogrel resistance is associated with increased risk of recurrent atherothrombotic events in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2004;109:3171–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Gurbel PA, Bliden KP, Zaman KA, et al. Clopidogrel loading with eptifibatide to arrest the reactivity of platelets: results of the Clopidogrel Loading With Eptifibatide to Arrest the Reactivity of Platelets (CLEAR PLATELETS) study. Circulation. 2005;111:1153–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Bliden KP, DiChiara J, Tantry US, et al. Increased risk in patients with high platelet aggregation receiving chronic clopidogrel therapy undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: is the current antiplatelet therapy adequate? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:657–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Blindt R, Stellbrink K, de Taeye A, et al. The significance of vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein for risk stratification of stent thrombosis. Thromb Haemost. 2007;98:1329–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Cuisset T, Frere C, Quilici J, et al. High post-treatment platelet reactivity is associated with a high incidence of myonecrosis after stenting for non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes. Thromb Haemost. 2007;97:282–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Frere C, Cuisset T, Quilici J, et al. ADP-induced platelet aggregation and platelet reactivity index are good predictive markers for clinical outcomes in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome. Thromb Haemost. 2007;98:838–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Geisler T, Langer H, Wydymus M, et al. Low response to clopidogrel is associated with cardiovascular outcome after coronary stent implantation. Eur Heart J. 2006;27:2420–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Geisler T, Graß D, Bigalke B, et al. The Residual Platelet Aggregation after Deployment of Intracoronary Stent (PREDICT) score. J Thromb Haemost. 2008;6:54–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Gurbel PA, Antonino MJ, Bliden KP, et al. Platelet reactivity to adenosine diphosphate and long-term ischemic event occurrence following percutaneous coronary intervention: a potential antiplatelet therapeutic target. Platelets. 2008;19:595–604.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Gurbel PA, Bliden KP, Samara W, et al. The Clopidogrel Resistance and Stent Thrombosis (CREST) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:1827–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Buonamici P, Marcucci R, Miglironi A, et al. Impact of platelet reactivity after clopidogrel administration on drug-eluting stent thrombosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:2312–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Bonello L, Paganelli F, Arpin-Bornet M, et al. Vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation analysis prior to percutaneous coronary intervention for exclusion of postprocedural major adverse cardiovascular events. J Thromb Haemost. 2007;5:1630–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Cuisset T, Hamilos M, Sarma J, et al. Relation of low response to clopidogrel assessed with point-of-care assay to periprocedural myonecrosis in patients undergoing elective coronary stenting for stable angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 2008;101:1700–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Migliorini A, Valenti R, Marcucci R, et al. High residual platelet reactivity after clopidogrel loading and long-term clinical outcome after drug-eluting stenting for unprotected left main coronary disease. Circulation. 2009;120:2214–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Bonello L, Camoin-Jau L, Armero S, et al. Tailored clopidogrel loading dose according to platelet reactivity monitoring to prevent acute and subacute stent thrombosis. Am J Cardiol. 2009;103:5–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Valgimigli M, Campo G, de Cesare N, et al. Intensifying platelet inhibition with tirofiban in poor responders to aspirin, clopidogrel undergoing elective coronary intervention. Circulation. 2009;119:3215–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Patti G, Nusca A, Mangiacapra F, et al. Point-of-care measurement of clopidogrel responsiveness predicts clinical outcome in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: results of the ARMYDA-PRO (Antiplatelet therapy for Reduction of MYocardial Damage during Angioplasty-Platelet Reactivity Predicts Outcome) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52(14):1128–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Eshtehardi P, Windecker S, Cook S, et al. Dual low response to acetylsalicylic acid and clopidogrel is associated with myonecrosis and stent thrombosis after coronary stent implantation. Am Heart J. 2010;159(5):891–8.e1.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Cuisset T, Frere C, Quilici J, et al. Predictive values of post-treatment adenosine diphosphate-induced aggregation and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein index for stent thrombosis after acute coronary syndrome in clopidogrel-treated patients. Am J Cardiol. 2009;104:1078–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Reny JL, Berdagué P, Poncet A, Barazer I, et al. Antiplatelet drug response status does not predict recurrent ischemic events in stable cardiovascular patients: results of the Antiplatelet Drug Resistances and Ischemic Events study. Circulation. 2012;125(25):3201–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Trenk D, Stone GW, Gawaz M, et al. A randomized trial of prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with high platelet reactivity on clopidogrel after elective percutaneous coronary intervention with implantation of drug-eluting stents: results of the TRIGGER-PCI (Testing Platelet Reactivity in Patients Undergoing Elective Stent Placement on Clopidogrel to Guide Alternative Therapy With Prasugrel) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59(24):2159–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Price MJ, Angiolillo DJ, Teierstein PS, et al. Platelet reactivity and cardiovascular outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention: a time-dependent analysis of the gauging responsiveness with a VerifyNow P2Y12 assay: impact on thrombosis and safety (GRAVITAS) trial. Circulation. 2011;124:1132–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Collet JP, Cuisset T, Range G, et al. Bedside monitoring to adjust antiplatelet therapy for coronary stenting. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:2100–9.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Fontana P, Berdagué P, Castelli C, et al. Clinical predictors of dual aspirin and clopidogrel poor responsiveness in stable cardiovascular patients from the ADRIE study. J Thromb Haemost. 2010;8(12):2614–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Jneid H, Anderson JL, Wright R, et al. 2012 ACCF/AHA focused update of the guideline for the management of patients with unstable angina/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (updating the 2007 guideline and replacing the 2011 focused update): a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60(7):645–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Aradi D, Komócsi A, Vorobcsuk A, et al. Prognostic significance of high on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity after percutaneous coronary intervention: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am Heart J. 2010;160(3):543–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Price MJ, Berger PB, Teirstein PS, et al. Standard- vs high-dose clopidogrel based on platelet function testing after percutaneous coronary intervention: the GRAVITAS randomized trial. JAMA. 2011;305(11):1097–105.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Thrombocyte Activity Reassessment and GEnoTyping for PCI(TARGET-PCI). Accessed April 2012.
  88. 88.
    Mehta SR, Tanguay JF, Eikelboom JW, et al. Double-dose versus standard-dose clopidogrel and high-dose versus low-dose aspirin in individuals undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndromes (CURRENT-OASIS 7): a randomised factorial trial. Lancet. 2010;376(9748):1233–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Cardiovascular Research Foundation. Low responsiveness to clopidogrel predicts stent thrombosis, heart attack; but is not directly linked to death (press release). 2012. Accessed 23 Feb 2013.
  90. 90.
    Stone GW. ADAPT-DES one year: a large-scale, multicenter, prospective, observational study of the impact of clopidogrel and aspirin hyporesponsiveness on patient outcomes, Miami, FL. TCT. 2012.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Siller-Matula JM, Francesconi M, Dechant C, Jilma B, Maurer G, Delle-Karth G, Gouya G, Ruzicka K, Podczeck-Schweighofer A, Christ G. Personalized antiplatelet treatment after percutaneous coronary intervention: the MADONNA study. Int J Cardiol. 2012. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.05.040.
  92. 92.
    Roe MT, Armstrong PW, Fox KAA, et al. Prasugrel versus clopidogrel for ACS patients managed without revascularization. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1297–309.Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Gurbel PA, Erlinge D, Ohman EM, et al. Platelet function during extended prasugrel and clopidogrel therapy for patients with ACS treated without revascularization. The TRILOGY ACS platelet function substudy. JAMA. 2012;308:1785–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Taubert D, Kastrati A, Harlfinger S, et al. Pharmacokinetics of clopidogrel after administration of a high loading dose. Thromb Haemost. 2004;92:311–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Mega JL, Close SL, Wiviott SD, et al. Cytochrome P-450 polymorphisms and response to clopidogrel. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:354–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Hulot JS, Bura A, Villard E, et al. Cytochrome P450 2C19 loss-of-function polymorphism is a major determinant of clopidogrel responsiveness in healthy subjects. Blood. 2006;108(7):2244–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Collet JP, Hulot JS, Pena A, et al. Cytochrome P450 2C19 polymorphism in young patients treated with clopidogrel after myocardial infarction: a cohort study. Lancet. 2009;373(9660):309–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Simon T, Verstuyft C, Mary-Krause M, French Registry of Acute ST-Elevation and Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (FAST-MI) Investigators, et al. Genetic determinants of response to clopidogrel and cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(4):363–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Trenk D, Hochholzer W, Fromm MF, et al. Cytochrome P450 2C19 681G>A polymorphism and high on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity associated with adverse 1-year clinical outcome of elective percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting or bare-metal stents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51(20):1925–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Luo HR, Poland RE, Lin KM, et al. Genetic polymorphism of cytochrome P450 2C19 in Mexican Americans: a cross-ethnic comparative study. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2006;80(1):33–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Xiao ZS, Goldstein JA, Xie HG, et al. Differences in the incidence of the CYP2C19 polymorphism affecting the S-mephenytoin phenotype in Chinese Han and Bai populations and identification of a new rare CYP2C19 mutant allele. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1997;281(1):604–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Takakubo F, Kuwano A, Kondo I. Evidence that poor metabolizers of (S)-mephenytoin could be identified by haplotypes of CYP2C19 in Japanese. Pharmacogenetics. 1996;6(3):265–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Shuldiner A, O’Connell J, Bliden K, et al. Association of cytochrome P450 2C19 genotype with the antiplatelet effect and clinical efficacy of clopidogrel therapy. JAMA. 2009;302(8):849–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Food and Drug Administration. FDA drug safety communication: reduced effectiveness of Plavix (clopidogrel) in patients who are poor metabolizers of the drug (safety announcement). 2010. Accessed 23 Feb 2013.
  105. 105.
    Roberts JD, Wells GA, Le May MR, et al. Point-of-care genetic testing for personalisation of antiplatelet treatment (RAPID GENE): a prospective, randomised, proof-of-concept trial. Lancet. 2012;379:1705–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Mega JL, Hochholzer W, Frelinger AL, et al. Dosing clopidogrel based on CYP2C19 genotype and the effect on platelet reactivity in patients with stable cardiovascular disease. JAMA. 2011;306(20):2221–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Bouman HJ, Schomig E, van Werkum JW, et al. Paraoxonase-1 is a major determinant of clopidogrel efficacy. Nat Med. 2011;17:110–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Sibbing D, Koch W, Massberg S, et al. No association of paraoxonase-1 Q192R genotypes with platelet response to clopidogrel and risk of stent thrombosis after coronary stenting. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:1605–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Fontana P, James R, Barazer I, et al. Relationship between paraoxonase-1 activity, its Q192R genetic variant and clopidogrel responsiveness in the ADRIE study. J Thromb Haemost. 2011;9:1664–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Trenk D, Hochholzer W, Fromm MF, et al. Paraoxonase-1 Q192R polymorphism and antiplatelet effects of clopidogrel in patients undergoing elective coronary stent placement. Circ Cardiovasc Genet. 2011;4:429–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Rideg O, Komócsi A, Magyarlaki T, et al. Impact of genetic variants on post-clopidogrel platelet reactivity in patients after elective percutaneous coronary intervention. Pharmacogenomics. 2011;12(9):1269–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Hulot JS, Collet JP, Cayla G, et al. CYP2C19 but not PON1 genetic variants influence clopidogrel pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and clinical efficacy in post-myocardial infarction patients. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:422–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Price MJ, Murray SS, Angiolillo DJ, et al. Influence of genetic polymorphisms on the effect of high- and standard-dose clopidogrel after percutaneous coronary intervention: the GIFT (Genotype Information and Functional Testing) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59(22):1928–37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Simon T, Steg PG, Gilard M, et al. Clinical events as a function of proton pump inhibitor use, clopidogrel use, and cytochrome P450 2C19 genotype in a large nationwide cohort of acute myocardial infarction: results from the French Registry of Acute ST-Elevation and Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (FAST-MI) registry. Circulation. 2011;123(5):474–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Abraham NS, Hlatky MA, Antman EM, et al. ACCF/ACG/AHA 2010 expert consensus document on the concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors and thienopyridines: a focused update of the ACCF/ACG/AHA 2008 Expert Consensus Document on Reducing the Gastrointestinal Risks of Antiplatelet Therapy and NSAID Use. Circulation. 2010;122:2619–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Dunn SP, Macaulay TE, Brennan DM, et al. Baseline proton pump inhibitor use is associated with increased cardiovascular events with and without the use of clopidogrel in the CREDO trial. Circulation. 2008;118:S815.Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    O’Donoghue ML, Braunwald E, Antman EM, et al. Pharmacodynamic effect and clinical efficacy of clopidogrel and prasugrel with or without a proton-pump inhibitor: an analysis of two randomised trials. Lancet. 2009;374:989–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Goodman SG, Clare R, Pieper KS, et al. Proton pump inhibitor use is likely a marker for, rather than a cause of, a higher risk of cardiovascular events: insights from PLATO. Circulation. 2010;122:A12092.Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Food and Drug Administration. FDA drug safety communication. Clopidogrel (marketed as Plavix) and omeprazole (marketed as Prilosec)—drug Interaction (safety announcement) 2009. Accessed 23 Feb 2013.
  120. 120.
    O’Donoghue ML. CYP2C19 genotype and proton pump inhibitors in clopidogrel-treated patients: does it take two to tango? Circulation. 2011;123(5):468–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Bhatt DL, Cryer BL, Contant CF, et al. Clopidogrel with or without omeprazole in coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1909–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Lau WC, Waskell LA, Watkins PB, et al. Atorvastatin reduces the ability of clopidogrel to inhibit platelet aggregation: a new drug-drug interaction. Circulation. 2003;107:32–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Siller-Matula JM, Lang I, Christ G, et al. Calcium-channel blockers reduce the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:1557–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Gremmel T, Steiner S, Seidinger D, et al. Calcium-channel blockers decrease clopidogrel-mediated platelet inhibition. Heart. 2010;96:186–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Saw J, Steinhubl SR, Berger PB, et al. Lack of adverse clopidogrel-atorvastatin clinical interaction from secondary analysis of a randomized, placebo-controlled clopidogrel trial. Circulation. 2003;108:921–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Saw J, Brennan DM, Steinhubl SR, et al. Lack of evidence of a clopidogrel-statin interaction in the CHARISMA trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:291–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Bonello L, Tantry US, Marcucci R, et al. Consensus and future directions on the definition of high on-treatment platelet reactivity to adenosine diphosphate. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56(12):919–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Silvain J, Cayla G, Hulot JS, et al. High on-thienopyridine platelet reactivity in elderly coronary patients: the SENIOR-PLATELET study. Eur Heart J. 2012;33(10):1241–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Mangiacapra F, Patti G, Barbato E, et al. A therapeutic window for platelet reactivity for patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention: results of the ARMYDA-PROVE (Antiplatelet therapy for Reduction of MYocardial Damage during Angioplasty-Platelet Reactivity for Outcome Validation Effort) study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5(3):281–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Sibbing D, Steinhubl SR, Schulz S, et al. Platelet aggregation and its association with stent thrombosis and bleeding in clopidogrel-treated patients: initial evidence of a therapeutic window. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56(4):317–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Cardiology and Cardiovascular MedicineUniversity Hospital TübingenTübingenGermany

Personalised recommendations