Performance comparison of the PFA-200 and Anysis-200: Assessment of bleeding risk screening in cardiology patients.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of platelet function is important in the management of patients who are subject to operation as well as at potential risk of hemorrhagic complications. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate a new platelet assays (Anysis-Epinephrine, Anysis-ADP) and to compare them with PFA-200 in cardiology visiting patients and inpatients. METHODS: Citrated blood samples were collected from 184 patients for ADP test and 163 patients for EPI test, who visited Korea University Guro Hospital with written consent. The PFA-200 assay gives a test result the closure time (CT) until the blood flow rate decreases to 10% of the initial value, whereas Anysis-200 assay does a blood flow migration distance (MD) until blood flow completely stops. According to the results of PFA closure time (CT), the tested samples were classified as either negative control or positive group. The measurements were simultaneously conducted with two devices and compared. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of Anysis-200 C/EPI kit in comparison to PFA-200 C/EPI kit was 87.5% and 85.7%, respectively. Regarding C/ADP kit, the sensitivity and specificity of Anysis-200 was 96.9% and 87.5%, respectively. In addition, the sums of sensitivity and specificity are greater than 150% for both of EPI and ADP. Also, it was found that likelihood ratio and odd ratio for each assay provide useful additional information. Since the Cohen's kappa coefficients value between the two devices was relatively high, the equivalence between the two devices was confirmed. CONCLUSIONS: Anysis-200, a novel platelet function analyzer has showed excellent agreements with PFA-200 with high agreement rates and precision. Anysis-200 assay would be useful in assessing bleeding risk management as well as abnormal platelet reactivity at point of care.

Inflammation increases the development of depression behaviors in male rats after spinal cord injury.

Following spinal cord injury, 18-26% of patients are diagnosed with depressive disorders, compared to 8-12% in the general population. As increased inflammation strongly correlates with depression in both animal and human studies, we hypothesized that the immune activation inherent to SCI could increase depression-like behavior. Thus, we proposed that reducing immune activation with minocycline, a microglial inhibitor, would decrease depression-like behavior following injury. Male Sprague-Dawley rats were given minocycline in their drinking water for 14 days following a moderate, mid-thoracic (T12) spinal contusion. An array of depression-like behaviors (social activity, sucrose preference, forced swim, open field activity) were examined prior to injury as well as on days 9-10, 19-20, and 29-30 post-injury. Peripheral cytokine levels were analyzed in serum collected prior to injury and 10 days post-injury. Hierarchical cluster analysis divided subjects into two groups based on behavior: depressed and not-depressed. Depressed subjects displayed lower levels of open field activity and social interaction relative to their not-depressed counterparts. Depressed subjects also showed significantly greater expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines both before and after injury and displayed lower levels of hippocampal neurogenesis than not-depressed subjects. Intriguingly, subjects who later showed depressive behaviors had higher baseline levels of the pro-inflammatory cytokine IL-6, which persisted throughout the duration of the experiment. Minocycline, however, did not affect serum cytokine levels and did not block the development of depression; equal numbers of minocycline versus vehicle-treated subjects appeared in both phenotypic groups. Despite this, these data overall suggest that molecular correlates of inflammation prior to injury could predict the development of depression after a physical stressor.

Performance comparison of aspirin assay between Anysis and VerifyNow: Assessment of therapeutic platelet inhibition in patients with cardiac diseases.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of platelet inhibition for aspirin therapy is important to manage patients who are at potential risk of developing thrombotic and hemorrhagic complications. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate a new platelet assay (Anysis-aspirin), compare it with VerifyNow-aspirin in patients with cardiac diseases, and analyze the aspirin resistance rates between the two devices. METHODS: Citrated blood samples were collected from patients with cardiac diseases referred for the aspirin response test. In the Anysis assay, a test result was provided with a blood flow migration distance (MD) until blood flow stoppage, which was comparable to aspirin reaction units (ARUs) obtained using VerifyNow. The measurements were simultaneously conducted using the two devices and compared. RESULTS: The MD without and with aspirin use was 160±33 and 254±23 mm, respectively (p < 0.0001). Compared with VerifyNow (reference), the sensitivity and specificity of Anysis-200 were 96.3 and 90.3%, respectively (area under the curve, 0.968). Furthermore, the aspirin resistance rate in aspirin-administered patients was 20.9%using VerifyNow and 16.5%for Anysis-200. The Cohen's kappa coefficient between the two devices was 0.81, indicating an almost perfect agreement between the two devices. CONCLUSIONS: Anysis-aspirin, a novel aspirin assay for assessing platelet inhibition, showed excellent agreement with VerifyNow-aspirin with high accuracy and precision. The Anysis-aspirin assay would be used as a point-of-care test to assess aspirin non-responsiveness and abnormal platelet reactivity.

Assessment of therapeutic platelet inhibition in cardiac patients: Comparative study between VerifyNow-P2Y12 and Anysis-P2Y12 assay.

BACKGROUND: Analyzing responsiveness to P2Y12 therapy is vital to preventing thrombotic and hemorrhagic complications in patients with cardiovascular diseases. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates a new Anysis-P2Y12 assay system against VerifyNow-P2Y12 in cardiac patients and analyzes the P2Y12 low-response rates of the two devices with various cutoff values. METHODS: In total, 125 citrated blood samples were collected from cardiac patients referred for a P2Y12 antiplatelet response test. In the Anysis assay, the test result was the migration distance (MD) until the blood flow stops, which is comparable to both P2Y12 reaction units and percent inhibition obtained using VerifyNow. RESULTS: The MDs without and with P2Y12 were 182±30 and 264±12 mm, respectively (p < 0.0001). Compared to VerifyNow-P2Y12, the sensitivity and specificity of Anysis-200 were 96.8% and 88.7%, respectively. Cohen's kappa coefficient between the two devices was 0.761, indicating a high agreement. However, there was an apparent difference in the low-response rate to P2Y12, which was 36.5% for VerifyNow and 5.9% for Anysis. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of the newly developed platelet function assay, Anysis-P2Y12 was equivalent to that of VerifyNow-P2Y12 in terms of sensitivity and specificity. The Anysis-P2Y12 assay may help screen patients with abnormal P2Y12 non-responsiveness.