CLINICAL RESEARCH: ANTIPLATELET THERAPY
Comparison of Omeprazole and Pantoprazole Influence on a High 150-mg Clopidogrel Maintenance DoseThe PACA (Proton Pump Inhibitors And Clopidogrel Association) Prospective Randomized Study
Thomas Cuisset, MD*, , ,*,
Corinne Frere, MD,,
Jacques Quilici, MD*,
Raphael Poyet, MD*,
Bénédicte Gaborit, MD,,
Laurent Bali, MD*,
Olivier Brissy, MD*,
Pierre-Emmanuel Morange, MD, PhD,,
Marie-Christine Alessi, MD, PhD, and
Jean-Louis Bonnet, MD*
* Département de Cardiologie, CHU Timone, Marseille, France
Laboratoire d'Hématologie, CHU Timone, Marseille, France
INSERM, UMR 626, Faculté de Médecine, Marseille, France
Manuscript received March 3, 2009;
revised manuscript received April 28, 2009,
accepted May 4, 2009.
* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Thomas Cuisset, CHU Timone, Cardiology, 264 rue Saint Pierre, Marseille, France 13385 (Email: thomascuisset{at}voila.fr).
 |
Abstract
|
|---|
Objectives: This study sought to compare the effect of 2 proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on platelet response to clopidogrel after coronary stenting for non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE ACS).
Background: Use of omeprazole has been reported to significantly decrease the clopidogrel antiplatelet effect because of cytochrome P450 interaction. Because all PPIs are metabolized by CYP2C19, but to a varying degree, we hypothesized that the reported negative omeprazole–clopidogrel drug interaction may not be caused by a class effect.
Methods: A total of 104 patients undergoing coronary stenting for NSTE ACS were prospectively included and randomized to omeprazole or pantoprazole 20 mg. They received at discharge 75-mg aspirin and 150-mg clopidogrel. Platelet reactivity index (PRI) vasoactive stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) was used to assess clopidogrel response and adenosine diphosphate (ADP)–induced aggregation for platelet reactivity (ADP-Ag).
Results: After 1 month, patients receiving pantoprazole had a significantly better platelet response to clopidogrel as assessed with the PRI VASP: 36 ± 20% versus 48 ± 17% (p = 0.007). We identified more clopidogrel nonresponders in the omeprazole group than in the pantoprazole group: 44% versus 23% (p = 0.04), odds ratio: 2.6 (95% confidence interval: 1.2 to 6.2). Conversely, we did not observe any significant difference in platelet reactivity with ADP-Ag between the omeprazole and pantoprazole groups: 52 ± 15% and 50 ± 18%, respectively (p = 0.29).
Conclusions: The present findings suggest the preferential use of pantoprazole compared with omeprazole in patients receiving clopidogrel to avoid any potential negative interaction with CYP2C19.
Key Words: proton pump inhibitors • clopidogrel response • VASP assay • cytochrome P450 • coronary stenting
|
Abbreviations and Acronyms
| | ADP = adenosine diphosphate | | ADP-Ag = adenosine diphosphate-induced aggregation for platelet reactivity | | MFI = median fluorescence intensity | | NSTE ACS = non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome | | PPI = proton pump inhibitor | | PRI = platelet reactivity index | | VASP = vasoactive stimulated phosphoprotein |
|
Several studies have shown a broad variability of biological response to clopidogrel and its clinical relevance (1–4). Mechanisms underlying this variability of response remain controversial and multiple factors are involved, including metabolic factors and genetic factors (4). Clopidogrel is a prodrug, which must be metabolized in the liver to generate an active metabolite and acquire its antiplatelet properties (5). Accordingly, clopidogrel response has been related to the level of activation of the CYP450 (6). Moreover, the loss-of-function allele of CYP2C19 has been associated with a poor response to clopidogrel in both healthy volunteers and patients (7–9), and with worse clinical outcomes in clopidogrel-treated patients (10–12). In addition, medications metabolized by CYP450, such as omeprazole or atorvastatin, have been shown to influence clopidogrel effect (13,14). Omeprazole has been associated with a lower efficacy of clopidogrel as assessed by the platelet reactivity index vasoactive stimulated phosphoprotein (PRI VASP) (13). Conversely, new proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) such as pantoprazole or esomeprazole have shown no effect on biological response to clopidogrel (15). Because many PPIs are metabolized by CYP2C19, but to a varying degree, the reported negative omeprazole–clopidogrel drug interaction may not be caused by a class effect. We therefore designed a prospective, randomized study to compare the influence of omeprazole and pantoprazole on the antiplatelet effect of a high 150-mg maintenance dose of clopidogrel in patients undergoing coronary stenting for non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE ACS).
|
Methods
|
|---|
Study protocol.
Consecutive patients admitted for NSTE ACS in our institution were eligible for this prospective study if they had undergone successful coronary stenting. We defined NSTE ACS as clinical symptoms compatible with acute myocardial ischemia within 12 h before admission and at least 1 of the following: a new finding of ST-segment changes in at least 2 leads, elevated levels of cardiac markers, or coronary artery disease as documented by a history of revascularization or myocardial infarction.
The exclusion criteria were a history of bleeding diathesis, persistent ST-segment elevation ACS, New York Heart Association functional class IV, percutaneous intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting <3 months, contraindications to antiplatelet therapy, platelet count <100 g/l, creatinine clearance <25 ml/min, use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonist before the procedure, and prior use of PPI or clopidogrel. The design of the study is described in Figure 1. Patients received oral loading doses of 250-mg aspirin and 600-mg clopidogrel at least 12 h before stenting. Initial platelet parameters were assessed between 12 and 24 h after the loading dose (T0). Anticoagulation was obtained with low-weight molecular heparin (enoxaparin) when possible, or unfractionated heparin in patients older than 75 years of age, or with renal failure. Use of a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonist was allowed at the operator's discretion during the procedure. Afterward, patients were discharged with the following dual antiplatelet therapy: 75-mg aspirin and 150-mg clopidogrel daily. Patients were randomized 1:1 to omeprazole 20-mg or pantoprazole 20-mg with randomization by sealed envelopes. Platelet tests were performed 1 month after hospital discharge at clinical follow-up (T1). The study protocol was approved by the ethics committee of our institution, and patients gave written informed consent for participation.
Blood samples and platelet parameters.
Blood samples for testing platelet reactivity were drawn at least 12 h after the loading dose of aspirin and clopidogrel, and before administration of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonist if needed. The blood–citrate mixture was centrifuged at 120 g for 5 min. The resulting platelet-rich plasma was kept at room temperature for use within 1 h. The platelet count was determined in the platelet-rich plasma sample and adjusted to 2.5 x 108 ml–1 with homologous platelet-poor plasma. Platelets were stimulated with adenosine diphosphate (ADP) (10 µmol/l), and aggregation was assessed with a PAP4 Aggregometer (Biodata Corporation, Wellcome, Paris, France). Aggregation was expressed as the percentage change in light transmittance from baseline with platelet-poor plasma as a reference. Here we report data on maximal intensity of ADP-induced platelet aggregation (ADP-Ag). The coefficient of variation of maximal intensity of platelet aggregation with ADP was measured at 6.5%. An ADP-Ag >70% was defined as high post-treatment platelet reactivity as previously described (3,4,8).
To determine the VASP phosphorylation state of whole blood, we used a standardized flow cytometric assay (Platelet VASP, Diagnostica Stago [Biocytex], Asnières, France), which is an adaptation of the method of Schwarz et al. (16). Briefly, a citrated blood sample was incubated with PGE1 or with PGE1 and ADP 10 µmol/l for 10 min and fixed with paraformaldehyde, after which the platelets were permeabilized with nonionic detergent. Analyses were performed on an EPICS XL-MCL flow cytometer (Beckman Coultronics, Margency, France), the platelet population was identified from its forward and side scatter distribution, and 10,000 platelets were gated. A PRI VASP was calculated from the median fluorescence intensity (MFI) of samples incubated with PGE1 or PGE1 and ADP according to the formula: PRI VASP = [(MFI(PGE1) – MFI(PGE1+ADP))/MFIPGE1] x 100. Clopidogrel nonresponse was defined as PRI VASP >50%.
End points.
The primary end point of the study was clopidogrel response 1 month after hospital discharge assessed with the specific method, PRI VASP. The secondary end point was post-treatment platelet reactivity assessed with ADP-Ag.
Statistical analysis.
Statistical analysis was performed using the Graphpad Prism Software (version 4.00, Graphpad Software, Inc., San Diego, California). We estimated that a study sample size of 100 patients would enable a one-half standard deviation difference (10% difference in PRI VASP between both groups) to be detected, with an 80% statistical power and a 5% alpha risk. Continuous variables are expressed as mean ± SD. Categorical variables are expressed as frequencies and percentages. Comparisons between groups were made with the chi-square or Fisher exact test for categorical variables and nonparametric statistical testing (Mann-Whitney) for continuous variables. Values of p < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
|
Results
|
|---|
A total of 104 consecutive patients were prospectively included and randomized to omeprazole (n = 52) or pantoprazole (n = 52). Baseline characteristics of the patients are summarized in Table 1. Baseline levels of ADP-Ag and PRI VASP (T0) were not significantly different between patients randomized to omeprazole or pantoprazole: 39.5 ± 19% versus 39.8 ± 19% (p = 0.84) and 35 ± 21% versus 30 ± 21% (p = 0.36), respectively.
At 1-month follow-up, in the whole population, mean PRI VASP and ADP-Ag were 41 ± 19% and 51 ± 17%, respectively. The PRI VASP and ADP-Ag significantly correlated (r = 0.55, p < 0.01). The prevalence of clopidogrel nonresponders was 34% (n = 35) with PRI VASP, and the rate of high post-treatment platelet reactivity was 12% (n = 12).
After 1 month of PPI treatment (T1), patients receiving pantoprazole had a significantly better platelet response to clopidogrel as assessed with the PRI VASP: 36 ± 20% versus 48 ± 17% (p = 0.007) (Fig. 2A). The differences of PRI VASP between the 2 measures were significantly different with pantoprazole and omeprazole: 3.6 ± 15% versus 11.2 ± 16%, respectively (p = 0.03). We identified more clopidogrel nonresponders in the omeprazole group than in the pantoprazole group: 44% versus 23%, p = 0.04, odds ratio: 2.6 (95% confidence interval: 1.2 to 6.2) (Fig. 3).
View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
|
Figure 2 Platelet Parameters and According to Proton Pump Inhibitors
Clopidogrel response with platelet reactivity index vasoactive stimulated phosphoprotein (PRI VASP) (A) and platelet reactivity with adenosine diphosphate–induced platelet aggregation (ADP-Ag) (B) according to proton pump inhibitor treatment.
|
|
View larger version (9K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
|
Figure 3 Prevalence of Clopidogrel Nonresponders
Prevalence of clopidogrel nonresponders (platelet reactivity index vasoactive stimulated phosphoprotein >50%) according to proton pump inhibitor treatment.
|
|
We did not observe any significant difference for platelet reactivity with ADP-Ag between the omeprazole and pantoprazole groups: 52 ± 15% and 50 ± 18%, respectively (p = 0.29) (Fig. 2B).
|
Discussion
|
|---|
The present study suggests that the degree of the interaction between clopidogrel and PPI is not homogeneous within the class of PPIs and is less marked with pantoprazole than with omeprazole. It confirms that the use of omeprazole significantly reduced the antiplatelet activity of clopidogrel, even with a high maintenance dose of clopidogrel, and that other PPIs, such as pantoprazole, must be preferred in clopidogrel-treated patients. Interestingly, the PPI had no significant effect on platelet reactivity assessed with ADP-Ag, whereas omeprazole significantly blunted the decrease in PRI VASP with clopidogrel. This finding underlined the divergence between the 2 tests: ADP-Ag, despite the use of ADP stimulation, may reflect other platelet pathways, whereas levels of VASP phosphorylation/dephosphorylation accurately reflect P2Y12 inhibition/activation (16). Biological studies have shown a broad interindividual variability of platelet response to clopidogrel, and more recently, a low response to clopidogrel has been associated with an increased risk of ischemic events (1–4) and is now a growing concern in the medical community. Several mechanisms have been proposed to explain this variability of response, including genetic factors, metabolic parameters, or interaction with other medications (1).
The active metabolite of clopidogrel, which irreversibly blocks platelet ADP P2Y12 receptors, arises from complex biochemical reactions involving several CYP450 isoforms (5). Lau et al. (6) reported that CYP3A4 metabolic activity correlated with between-subject variability in clopidogrel response. The CYP450 isoform 2C19 plays a major role in this metabolism, and its activity dramatically influences the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel. This effect has been highlighted recently with the loss-of-function CYP2C19*2 allele, associated with a low response to clopidogrel and worse clinical outcome (7–12). Several medications are also metabolized by CYP450, suggesting potential drugs–clopidogrel interactions. Accordingly, interaction between atorvastatin or omeprazole and clopidogrel has been suggested in biological studies (13,14). Gilard et al. (13) showed a significant interaction between omeprazole and clopidogrel with a decreased platelet response to clopidogrel assessed with PRI VASP after omeprazole administration. Indeed, omeprazole is both a substrate and an inhibitor of CYP2C19. In contrast, in a recent study, Siller-Matula et al. (15) found no interaction between new PPIs (esomeprazole or pantoprazole) and clopidogrel response in patients with coronary artery disease. These findings suggested the preferential use of new PPIs such as pantoprazole, which are less potent CYP2C19 inhibitors than omeprazole.
The biological interaction found between atorvastatin and clopidogrel did not show any clinical effect while the interaction was tested in large randomized trials (17,18). Two clinical reports have suggested a clinical relevance of PPI and clopidogrel interaction. Indeed, Juurlink et al. (19) suggested that among patients receiving clopidogrel after an acute myocardial infarction, concomitant therapy with a PPI other than pantoprazole was associated with a loss of the beneficial effects of clopidogrel and an increased risk of reinfarction. More recently, in a retrospective cohort study of 8,205 patients with ACS taking clopidogrel, concomitant use of clopidogrel and PPI after hospital discharge for ACS was also associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes than use of clopidogrel without PPI, confirming that use of PPI may be associated with attenuation of the benefits of clopidogrel after ACS (20). These results suggested the clinical relevance of a biological interaction between most PPIs (e.g., omeprazole) and clopidogrel. Our present study confirms the difference between 2 different PPIs in terms of modulation of clopidogrel response. This is of great importance for daily practice because PPIs are now a standard of care for patients receiving dual-antiplatelet therapy to prevent gastrointestinal bleeding. Indeed, PPIs are recommended to prevent the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding in the latest American recommendations (21).
Study limitations.
The main limitations of the present study include its small sample size and biological contents without clinical data. Additional large prospective clinical studies are required to confirm the clinical effect of this biological interaction.
|
Conclusions
|
|---|
The lack of negative effects of concomitant treatment with pantoprazole is an important finding because it may have an impact on clinical practice and suggests the preferential use of pantoprazole as PPI in patients receiving clopidogrel to avoid any potential negative interaction as described for omeprazole (13,19,20).
|
Acknowledgments
|
|---|
The authors thank their nurses, team, and technicians for assistance in executing this study.
|
Footnotes
|
|---|
Supported by grants from the Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Marseille.
|
References
|
|---|
1. Angiolillo DJ, Fernandez-Ortiz A, Bernardo E, et al. Variability in individual responsiveness to clopidogrel clinical implications, management, and future perspectives J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:1505-1516.[Abstract/Free Full Text]2. 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;109:3171-3175.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 3. Cuisset T, Frere C, Quilici J, et al. High post-treatment platelet reactivity identified low-responders to dual antiplatelet therapy at increased risk of recurrent cardiovascular events after stenting for acute coronary syndrome J Thromb Haemost 2006;4:542-549.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 4. Buonamici P, Marcucci R, Migliorini A, et al. Impact of platelet reactivity after clopidogrel administration on drug-eluting stent thrombosis J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:2312-2317.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 5. Richter T, Mürdter TE, Heinkele G, et al. Potent mechanism-based inhibition of human CYP2B6 by clopidogrel and ticlopidine J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2004;308:189-197.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 6. Lau WC, Gurbel PA, Watkins PB, et al. Contribution of hepatic cytochrome P450 3A4 metabolic activity to the phenomenon of clopidogrel resistance Circulation 2004;109:166-171.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 7. 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;108:2244-2247.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 8. Frere C, Cuisset T, Morange PE, et al. Effect of cytochrome p450 polymorphisms on platelet reactivity after treatment with clopidogrel in acute coronary syndrome Am J Cardiol 2008;101:1088-1093.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 9. 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;51:1925-1934.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 10. 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;373:309-317.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 11. Simon T, Verstuyft C, Mary-Krause M, et al. French Registry of Acute ST-Elevation and Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (FAST-MI) Investigators Genetic determinants of response to clopidogrel and cardiovascular events N Engl J Med 2009;360:363-375.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 12. Mega JL, Close SL, Wiviott SD, et al. Cytochrome p-450 polymorphisms and response to clopidogrel N Engl J Med 2009;360:354-362.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 13. Gilard M, Arnaud B, Cornily JC, et al. Influence of omeprazole on the antiplatelet action of clopidogrel associated with aspirin: the randomized, double-blind OCLA (Omeprazole CLopidogrel Aspirin) study J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;51:256-260.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 14. 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;107:32-37.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 15. Siller-Matula JM, Spiel AO, Lang IM, Kreiner G, Christ G, Jilma B. Effects of pantoprazole and esomeprazole on platelet inhibition by clopidogrel Am Heart J 2009;157:148.e1-148.e5.[CrossRef][Medline] 16. Schwarz UR, Geiger J, Walter U, Eigenthaler M. 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;82:1145-1152.[Web of Science][Medline] 17. Saw J, Steinhubl SR, Berger PB, et al. Clopidogrel for the Reduction of Events During Observation Investigators Lack of adverse clopidogrel-atorvastatin clinical interaction from secondary analysis of a randomized, placebo-controlled clopidogrel trial Circulation 2003;108:921-924.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 18. Saw J, Brennan DM, Steinhubl SR, et al. CHARISMA Investigators Lack of evidence of a clopidogrel-statin interaction in the CHARISMA trial J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:291-295.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 19. Juurlink DN, Gomes T, Ko DT, et al. A population-based study of the drug interaction between proton pump inhibitors and clopidogrel CMAJ 2009;180:713-718.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 20. Ho PM, Maddox TM, Wang L, et al. Risk of adverse outcomes associated with concomitant use of clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors following acute coronary syndrome JAMA 2009;301:937-944.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 21. Bhatt DL, Scheiman J, Abraham NS, et al. ACCF/ACG/AHA 2008 expert consensus document on reducing the gastrointestinal risks of antiplatelet therapy and NSAID use: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:1502-1517.[Free Full Text]
Related Article
-
Inside This Issue
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2009 54: A27.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
X. Boulenc, N. Djebli, J. Shi, L. Perrin, W. Brian, R. Van Horn, and F. Hurbin
Effects of Omeprazole and Genetic Polymorphism of CYP2C19 on the Clopidogrel Active Metabolite
Drug Metab. Dispos.,
January 1, 2012;
40(1):
187 - 197.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Silvain, G. Cayla, J.-S. Hulot, J. Finzi, M. Kerneis, S. A. O'Connor, A. Bellemain-Appaix, O. Barthelemy, F. Beygui, J.-P. Collet, et al.
High on-thienopyridine platelet reactivity in elderly coronary patients: the SENIOR-PLATELET study
Eur. Heart J.,
November 7, 2011;
(2011)
ehr407v1.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. M. Siller-Matula and G. Delle-Karth
Addition of omeprazole to dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel plus aspirin lowers the risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding
Evid. Based Med.,
October 1, 2011;
16(5):
144 - 145.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. L. Ferreiro, M. Ueno, S. D. Tomasello, D. Capodanno, B. Desai, K. Dharmashankar, N. Seecheran, M. K. Kodali, A. Darlington, J.-P. Pham, et al.
Pharmacodynamic Evaluation of Pantoprazole Therapy on Clopidogrel Effects: Results of a Prospective, Randomized, Crossover Study
Circ Cardiovasc Interv,
June 1, 2011;
4(3):
273 - 279.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U. S. Tantry, D. J. Kereiakes, and P. A. Gurbel
Clopidogrel and Proton Pump Inhibitors: Influence of Pharmacological Interactions on Clinical Outcomes and Mechanistic Explanations
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv.,
April 1, 2011;
4(4):
365 - 380.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. J. Harjai, C. Shenoy, P. Orshaw, S. Usmani, J. Boura, and R. H. Mehta
Clinical Outcomes in Patients With the Concomitant Use of Clopidogrel and Proton Pump Inhibitors After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Analysis From the Guthrie Health Off-Label Stent (GHOST) Investigators
Circ Cardiovasc Interv,
April 1, 2011;
4(2):
162 - 170.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. R. Bates, W. C. Lau, and D. J. Angiolillo
Clopidogrel-Drug Interactions
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
March 15, 2011;
57(11):
1251 - 1263.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Simon, P. G. Steg, M. Gilard, D. Blanchard, L. Bonello, M. Hanssen, H. Lardoux, P. Coste, T. Lefevre, E. Drouet, 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,
February 8, 2011;
123(5):
474 - 482.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. N. Juurlink, T. Gomes, M. M. Mamdani, D. J. Gladstone, and M. K. Kapral
The Safety of Proton Pump Inhibitors and Clopidogrel in Patients After Stroke
Stroke,
January 1, 2011;
42(1):
128 - 132.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. P. Giugliano and E. Braunwald
The Year in Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
December 14, 2010;
56(25):
2126 - 2138.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Writing Committee Members, N. S. Abraham, M. A. Hlatky, E. M. Antman, D. L. Bhatt, D. J. Bjorkman, C. B. Clark, C. D. Furberg, D. A. Johnson, C. J. Kahi, 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: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents
Circulation,
December 14, 2010;
122(24):
2619 - 2633.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
American College of Cardiology Foundation Task For, N. S. Abraham, M. A. Hlatky, E. M. Antman, D. L. Bhatt, D. J. Bjorkman, C. B. Clark, C. D. Furberg, D. A. Johnson, C. J. Kahi, 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
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
December 7, 2010;
56(24):
2051 - 2066.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Tran, J. Tafreshi, and R. G. Pai
Review Article: Combination of Clopidogrel and Proton Pump Inhibitors: Implications for Clinicians
Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology and Therapeutics,
December 1, 2010;
15(4):
326 - 337.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. R. Sinnaeve and F. J. Van de Werf
Chapter 42 Fibrinolytic, antithrombotic, and antiplatelet drugs in acute coronary syndrome
The ESC Textbook of Acute and Intensive Cardiac Care,
December 1, 2010;
1(1):
med-9780199584314-chapter - med-9780199584314-chapter.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. L. Ferreiro, M. Ueno, D. Capodanno, B. Desai, K. Dharmashankar, A. Darlington, R. K. Charlton, T. A. Bass, and D. J. Angiolillo
Pharmacodynamic Effects of Concomitant Versus Staggered Clopidogrel and Omeprazole Intake: Results of a Prospective Randomized Crossover Study
Circ Cardiovasc Interv,
October 1, 2010;
3(5):
436 - 441.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J.-S. Hulot, J.-P. Collet, J. Silvain, A. Pena, A. Bellemain-Appaix, O. Barthelemy, G. Cayla, F. Beygui, and G. Montalescot
Cardiovascular Risk in Clopidogrel-Treated Patients According to Cytochrome P450 2C19*2 Loss-of-Function Allele or Proton Pump Inhibitor Coadministration: A Systematic Meta-Analysis
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
July 6, 2010;
56(2):
134 - 143.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. R. Dixon, C. L. Grines, and W. W. O'Neill
The Year in Interventional Cardiology
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
May 18, 2010;
55(20):
2272 - 2286.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Abel, A. R. Desilets, and K. Willett
Dexlansoprazole in the Treatment of Esophagitis and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease
Ann. Pharmacother.,
May 1, 2010;
44(5):
871 - 877.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. P. DEPTA and D. L. BHATT
Omeprazole and clopidogrel: Should clinicians be worried?
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine,
February 1, 2010;
77(2):
113 - 116.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. N. DeMaria, J. J. Bax, O. Ben-Yehuda, G. K. Feld, B. H. Greenberg, J. Hall, M. Hlatky, W. Y.W. Lew, J. A.C. Lima, A. S. Maisel, et al.
Highlights of the Year in JACC 2009
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
January 26, 2010;
55(4):
380 - 407.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. B Norgard and G. C Wall
Authors' Reply
Ann. Pharmacother.,
January 1, 2010;
44(1):
226 - 227.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. N. Juurlink
Proton Pump Inhibitors and Clopidogrel: Putting the Interaction in Perspective
Circulation,
December 8, 2009;
120(23):
2310 - 2312.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
Top
Abstract
Methods