Investigating the Mechanisms of Hyporesponse to Antiplatelet Approaches

Hyporesponsiveness, or resistance, to antiplatelet therapy may be a major contributor to poorer outcomes among cardiac patients and may be attributed to an array of mechanisms—both modifiable and unmodifiable. Recent evidence has uncovered clinical, cellular, and genetic factors associated with hyporesponsiveness. Patients with severe acute coronary syndromes (ACS), type 2 diabetes, and increased body mass index appear to be the most at risk for hyporesponsiveness. Addressing modifiable mechanisms may offset hyporesponsiveness, while recognizing unmodifiable mechanisms, such as genetic polymorphisms and diseases that affect response to antiplatelet therapy, may help identify patients who are more likely to be hyporesponsive. Hyporesponsive patients might benefit from different dosing strategies or additional antiplatelet therapies. Trials correlating platelet function test results to clinical outcomes are required. Results from these studies could cause a paradigm shift toward individualized antiplatelet therapy, improving predictability of platelet inhibition, and diminishing the likelihood for hyporesponsiveness. Copyright © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58554/1/20360_ftp.pd

Clopidogrel: A CURE in acute coronary syndromes? (A Key Paper Evaluation)

The standard approach to preventing acute coronary syndromes (ACSs)has been to inhibit platelet aggregation with aspirin and to inhibit blood coagulation with low molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). Even with this combination there is still a substantial short and long-term cardiovascular risk. The Clopidogrel in Unstable angina to prevent Recurrent Events (CURE) trial [1] compared clopidogrel plus aspirin against aspirin alone in patients with ACSs. The clopidogrel regimen was a loading dose of 300 mg p.o. followed by 75 mg/day and the recommended dose of aspirin was 75 - 325 mg/day. The first primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke and this occurred significantly less often in the clopidogrel than the placebo group (9.3 vs. 11.4%). Although there were more clopidogrel patients with life-threatening bleeding (clopidogrel 2.2%, placebo 1.8%), this represented GI haemorrhages and bleeding at sites of arterial puncture rather than fatal bleeding. This trial suggests a role for clopidogrel in the long-term treatment of ACS