Phenotyping vs. genotyping for prediction of clopidogrel efficacy and safety: the PEGASUS-PCI study

dc.contributor.authorSiller-Matula, Jolanta Maria
dc.contributor.authorDelle-Karth, G.
dc.contributor.authorLang, I.M.
dc.contributor.authorNeunteufl, T.
dc.contributor.authorKoziński, Marek
dc.contributor.authorKubica, Jacek
dc.contributor.authorMaurer, G.
dc.contributor.authorLinkowska, Katarzyna
dc.contributor.authorGrzybowski, Tomasz
dc.contributor.authorHuber, K.
dc.contributor.authorJilma, B.
dc.date.accessioned2013-02-21T13:29:40Z
dc.date.available2013-02-21T13:29:40Z
dc.date.issued2013-02-21
dc.description.abstractBackground: Prognostic values of genotyping and phenotyping for assessment of clopidogrel responsiveness have been shown in independent studies. Objectives: To compare different assays for prediction of events during long-term follow-up. Methods: In this prospective cohort study polymorphisms of CYP2C19*2 and CYP2C19*17 alleles, vasodilator- stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation (VASP) assay, multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA), cone and platelet analyser (CPA) and platelet function analyser (PFA- 100) were performed in 416 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The rates of events were recorded during a 12-month follow-up. Results: Platelet aggregation by MEA predicted stent thrombosis (2.4%) better (c-index = 0.90; P < 0.001; sensitivity = 90%; specificity = 83%) than the VASP assay, CPA or PFA-100 (c-index < 0.70; P > 0.05; sensitivity < 70%; specificity < 70% for all) or even the CYP2C19*2 polymorphism (c-index < 0.56; P > 0.05; sensitivity = 30%; specificity = 71%). Survival analysis indicated that patients classified as poor responders by MEA had a substantially higher risk of developing stent thrombosis or MACE than clopidogrel responders (12.5% vs. 0.3%, P < 0.001, and 18.5% vs. 11.3%, P = 0.022, respectively), whereas poor metabolizers (CYP2C19*1/*2 or *2/*2 carriers) were not at increased risks (stent thrombosis, 2.7% vs. 2.5%, P > 0.05; MACE, 13.5% vs. 12.1%, P = 0.556). The incidence of major bleedings (2.6%) was numerically higher in patients with an enhanced vs. poor response to clopidogrel assessed by MEA (4% vs. 0%) or in ultra-metabolizers vs. regular metabolizers (CYP2C19*17/*17 vs. CYP2C19*1/*1; 9.5% vs. 2%). The classification tree analysis demonstrated that acute coronary syndrome at hospitalization and diabetes mellitus were the best discriminators for clopidogrel responder status. Conclusions: Phenotyping of platelet response to clopidogrel was a better predictor of stent thrombosis than genotyping.pl
dc.identifier.issn1538-7836
dc.identifier.urihttp://repozytorium.umk.pl/handle/item/377
dc.language.isoengpl
dc.relation.ispartofseriesJournal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2012 , 10 : 529–542;;
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen
dc.subjectclopidogrelpl
dc.subjectCYP2C19pl
dc.subjectmajor bleedingpl
dc.subjectMEApl
dc.subjectplateletspl
dc.subjectpolymorphismpl
dc.subjectsensitivitypl
dc.subjectspecificitypl
dc.subjectstent thrombosispl
dc.titlePhenotyping vs. genotyping for prediction of clopidogrel efficacy and safety: the PEGASUS-PCI studypl
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlepl

Files

Original bundle

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Phenotyping versus Genotyping for Prediction of Clopidogrel Efficacy and Safety the PEGASUS-PCI study.pdf
Size:
207.41 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

License bundle

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.34 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:

Collections