Poor agreement between light transmission aggregometry, Verify Now P2Y12 and vasodilatator-stimulated phosphoprotein for clopidogrel low-response assessment: a potential explanation of negative results of recent randomized trials.

Clopidogrel low response as assessed by several different biological tests correlates with poor prognosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, recent randomized clinical trials (RCT) testing the strategy of individual antiplatelet therapy tailoring based on one sole test have all shown negative results. Poor correlation between the different tests may explain the difficulties of patient selection and identification of "true poor responders" to clopidogrel. In this prospective study, clopidogrel response was assessed in 100 consecutive patients between 18 and 24 hours after a 600 mg clopidogrel loading dose using three different tests: light transmission aggregometry with 10 µmol ADP (LTA, results expressed as platelet aggregation percentage: PAP), Verify Now P2Y12 (VN, results expressed as P2Y12 reaction unit: PRU) and vasodilatator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP, results expressed as platelet reactivity index: PRI). Patients under chronic clopidogrel therapy were excluded. The mean PAP, PRU and PRI values were 38.6%, 176.1 PRU and 52.4%, respectively. When clopidogrel response was analyzed as continuous variable, there was a good correlation between the different tests: LTA/VN (R(2 )= 0.642, p < 0.001), LTA/VASP (R(2 )= 0.409, p < 0.001) and VN/VASP (R(2 )= 0.616, p < 0.001). However, when clopidogrel response was analyzed as pre-specified cut-off points to define patients as "poor or good responders" (according to the literature: 50% PAP for LTA, 235 PRU for VN and 50% PRI for VASP), only 47% of the patients were defined as "good" or "poor responders" by the three tests. Altogether, 33% of the patients were defined as "poor responders" by only one test, 20% by two tests and only 16% by the three tests. The correlation between the different tests is good when clopidogrel response is analyzed as continuous variable. Each individual is however rarely (less than 50%) defined as "poor or good responder" by all the three tests when pre-specified cut-off values are used. A sole test might not be sufficient to manage antiplatelet therapy in an individual patient and these results may explain the results of recent RCT showing the lack of benefit of systematic antiplatelet therapy monitoring strategy.

Impact of initial clinical presentation on clopidogrel low response.

BACKGROUND: Large interindividual variability exists in clopidogrel response. Clopidogrel low response correlates with poor prognosis after percutaneous coronary intervention. Some authors also suggest intraindividual variability over time. AIM: To assess the impact of initial clinical presentation on clopidogrel low response. METHODS: In this prospective study, clopidogrel response was assessed in 100 patients. Fifty patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes (ACS group) were compared with 50 patients with stable coronary artery disease matched 1:1 for age, sex, body mass index and diabetes (stable group). All patients were tested 18-24h after a 600 mg loading dose of clopidogrel using the VerifyNow-P2Y12 test (results expressed as platelet reaction units [PRUs]). Patients under chronic clopidogrel therapy or treated with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, bivalirudin or thrombolytics were excluded. RESULTS: Mean age was 61 ± 12 years in each group; 28% of patients in each group were diabetic; mean body mass index was 27.6 ± 5.6 kg/m(2) in the ACS group and 27.9 ± 5.9 kg/m(2) in the stable group (p=0.80). Mean PRU values were 197 ± 81 in the ACS group and 159 ± 94 in the stable group (p=0.03). By multivariable analysis, the ACS group was significantly associated with a higher PRU value (p=0.02). There were significantly more clopidogrel low responders (PRU value>230) in the ACS group (38% vs. 18%; p=0.04). CONCLUSION: Our study confirms that initial clinical presentation, especially ACS, is a strong predictor of clopidogrel low response; this suggests that the evolution of coronary artery disease for one patient influences the clopidogrel response over time. These results are in accordance with recent trials showing a benefit for more aggressive antiplatelet therapy in ACS patients.