Tomasz P Stys1, Maheedhar Gedela2, Smitha N Gowda3, Valerie Bares1, Lauren Fanta4, Marian Petrasko1, Catherine Hajek3, Eric Larson3, Adam T Stys1. 1. Sanford Heart Hospital, Sanford Cardiovascular Institute, University of South Dakota Sanford School of Medicine, Sioux Falls, SD, USA. 2. Sanford Heart Hospital, Sanford Cardiovascular Institute, University of South Dakota Sanford School of Medicine, Sioux Falls, SD, USA; Mount Sinai Hospital and Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, NY, New York, USA. Electronic address: maheedhargedela@gmail.com. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, University of South Dakota Sanford School of Medicine, Sioux Falls, SD, USA. 4. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the use of CYP2C19 genotyping to guide P2Y12 inhibitor selection to maximize efficacy, and attenuate risk in appropriate patients who underwent PCI for CAD. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 868 patients with CAD who received CYP2C19 genotyping after PCI and changed P2Y12 inhibitor based on the results. Patients were divided into two groups based on clopidogrel metabolizer status. Group I: Intermediate (IM) and poor metabolizers (PM). Group II: Ultra-rapid (UM), rapid (RM) and normal metabolizers (NM). Each group was then categorized to one of two treatment arms guided by CYP2C19 genotype. Category 1: IM/PM started on clopidogrel, switched to ticagrelor or prasugrel; 2:IM/PM started on ticagrelor/prasugrel, continued these medications; 3: UM/RM/NM started on ticagrelor/prasugrel, switched to clopidogrel; 4: UM/RM/NM started on clopidogrel, continued clopidogrel. Death due to cardiac causes, bleeding events, non-fatal MI, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and MACE in all four categories were considered at 1, 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: We did not observe significant difference between phenotypes for MACE at 1 (p = 0.274), 6 (p = 0.387), and 12 months (p = 0.083). Death due to cardiac causes, MI, and bleeding events were not significant at 1, 6, and 12 months. There was no significant difference in TVR at 6 (p = 0.491), and 12 months (p = 0.423) except at 1 month (p = 0.012). CONCLUSION: CYP2C19 genotype-based intervention can be implemented effectively and reliably to guide selection of P2Y12 inhibitor to optimize patient quality and safety when appropriate in post PCI patients.
OBJECTIVE: To study the use of CYP2C19 genotyping to guide P2Y12 inhibitor selection to maximize efficacy, and attenuate risk in appropriate patients who underwent PCI for CAD. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 868 patients with CAD who received CYP2C19 genotyping after PCI and changed P2Y12 inhibitor based on the results. Patients were divided into two groups based on clopidogrel metabolizer status. Group I: Intermediate (IM) and poor metabolizers (PM). Group II: Ultra-rapid (UM), rapid (RM) and normal metabolizers (NM). Each group was then categorized to one of two treatment arms guided by CYP2C19 genotype. Category 1: IM/PM started on clopidogrel, switched to ticagrelor or prasugrel; 2:IM/PM started on ticagrelor/prasugrel, continued these medications; 3: UM/RM/NM started on ticagrelor/prasugrel, switched to clopidogrel; 4: UM/RM/NM started on clopidogrel, continued clopidogrel. Death due to cardiac causes, bleeding events, non-fatal MI, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and MACE in all four categories were considered at 1, 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: We did not observe significant difference between phenotypes for MACE at 1 (p = 0.274), 6 (p = 0.387), and 12 months (p = 0.083). Death due to cardiac causes, MI, and bleeding events were not significant at 1, 6, and 12 months. There was no significant difference in TVR at 6 (p = 0.491), and 12 months (p = 0.423) except at 1 month (p = 0.012). CONCLUSION:CYP2C19 genotype-based intervention can be implemented effectively and reliably to guide selection of P2Y12 inhibitor to optimize patient quality and safety when appropriate in post PCI patients.