HDA y Antiplaquetarios

Platelets
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/iplt20
Treatment inequity in antiplatelet therapy for

ischaemic heart disease in patients with advanced
chronic kidney disease: releasing the evidence
vacuum
Frances L. Varian, William A. E. Parker, James Fotheringham & Robert F.

Storey
To cite this article: Frances L. Varian, William A. E. Parker, James Fotheringham & Robert F.
Storey (2023) Treatment inequity in antiplatelet therapy for ischaemic heart disease in patients
with advanced chronic kidney disease: releasing the evidence vacuum, Platelets, 34:1, 2154330,
DOI: 10.1080/09537104.2022.2154330
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09537104.2022.2154330
© 2022 The Author(s). Published with Published online: 16 Dec 2022.

license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
Submit your article to this journal Article views: 1702
View related articles View Crossmark data
Citing articles: 1 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=iplt20
http://www.tandfonline.com/iplt
ISSN: 0953-7104 (print), 1369-1635 (electronic)
Platelets, 2023; 34(1): 2154330

© 2022 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09537104.2022.2154330
REVIEW
Treatment inequity in antiplatelet therapy for ischaemic heart disease in

patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: releasing the evidence
vacuum
1 1
Frances L. Varian , William A. E. Parker , James Fotheringham2, & Robert F. Storey1
1
Department of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK and and 2School of Health and Related Research,
University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
Abstract Keywords
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a global health problem and an independent risk factor for Acute coronary syndrome (ACS); antiplatelet;
cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Despite evidence-based therapies significantly improving cardiovascular disease; chronic kidney dis
cardiovascular mortality outcomes in the general population and those with non-dialysis- ease (CKD); end stage kidney disease (ESKD);
dependent CKD, this risk reduction has not translated to patients with end-stage kidney disease ischaemic heart disease (IHD); P2Y12 inhibi
(ESKD). Absent from all major antiplatelet trials, this has led to insufficient safety data for P2Y12 tor; renal replacement therapy (RRT)
inhibitor prescriptions and treatment inequity in this subpopulation. This review article presents
History
an overview of the progression of research in understanding antiplatelet therapy for ischaemic
heart disease in patients with advanced CKD (defined as eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2). Beyond trial Received 26 August 2022
recruitment strategies, new approaches should focus on registry documentation by CKD stage, Revised 1 November 2022
risk stratification with biomarkers associated with inflammation and haemorrhage and building Accepted 29 November 2022
a knowledge base on optimal duration of dual and single antiplatelet therapies.
Plain Language Summary

What is the context?
● Patients with kidney disease are more likely to experience a heart attack than those
without.
● Those with advanced kidney disease have a higher risk of death following a heart attack.
● Over the past two decades, advances in treatment following a heart attack have
reduced the risk of death, however this has not translated to those with advanced
kidney disease.
● Progression of kidney disease influences antiplatelet (e.g. clopidogrel) treatment
efficacy.
What is new?
● This contemporary review analyses registry and trial data to highlight some of the issues
surrounding treatment inequity in patients with advanced kidney disease.
● This article describes potential mechanisms by which progression of kidney disease can
influence clotting, bleeding and antiplatelet treatments.
What is the impact?
● Further research into antiplatelet therapy for patients with advanced kidney disease is
required.
● Registry and trial data can improve upon classification of kidney disease for future
research.
● Future trials in antiplatelet therapy for advanced kidney disease are anticipated.
Correspondence: Robert F. Storey, Department of Infection, Immunity

and Cardiovascular Disease, University of Sheffield, Beech Hill Road,
Sheffield S10 2RX, UK. Tel: +44-114-305 2038.
E-mail: [email protected]
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in
any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
2 F. L. Varian et al. Platelets, 2023; 34(1): 1–16
Introduction Aims and objectives

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a major health problem This review article provides an overview of antiplatelet agents
worldwide and an independent risk factor for cardiovascular in advanced CKD with an overarching aim to highlight areas
morbidity and mortality [1]. The 2015 global census accredited for future research. This is not a comprehensive systematic
8.92 million deaths to ischaemic heart disease (IHD) and review of each topic area and is therefore limited in this regard.
1.2 million to CKD [2]. Associated with an accelerated disease Evidence readily informing ESC guidelines in the management
course, these figures do not reflect the significant proportion of of ACSs [8] is included. Additional literature search terms
deaths from IHD underpinned by CKD [3]. The incidence were performed on PubMed to include ‘advanced CKD’,
estimates suggest 12 ,000 excess myocardial infarctions (MIs) ‘hemodialysis’, ‘dialysis’, ‘end stage kidney disease’, ‘end
occurred in CKD patients in England (2009–2010) compared to stage renal disease’ and ‘peritoneal dialysis’, pertaining to
the incidence of MI in age- and gender-matched controls with each of the objectives. This article provides a snapshot of
out CKD [4]. This incurred estimated costs of £174–178 million advanced CKD across the following areas:
[4]. With CKD progression, it is estimated that 70% of patients
have significant coronary atherosclerosis and 40% have symp (1) How is advanced CKD represented within ACS registries?
tomatic IHD or heart failure by the time of dialysis [5]. (2) Consideration of mechanisms within CKD that increase
Registry data of 289,699 cases of acute MI reported that bleeding and thrombotic risk
a proportionally higher percentage (79%) of dialysis-treated (3) Representation of advanced CKD within major clinical trials
MI patients presented with non-ST-segment elevation MI and selection of antiplatelet regimen
(NSTEMI) and only 21% presented with ST-segment- (4) How relevant are bleeding and thrombotic risk scores in
elevation MI (STEMI) [6]. While the greatest proportion of advanced CKD?
sudden cardiac death relates to non-atherosclerotic disease in
dialysis patients [7], patients on dialysis who have an MI have
twice the risk of death over the general dialysis population, and Advanced CKD within ACS registries
this risk has remained unchanged for more than a decade [6].
This is in stark contrast to patients experiencing MI who are CKD is caused by abnormal function and/or structure in the
not on dialysis, where there has been an impressive 3- to 5-fold kidney. It is classified into five stages according to eGFR [4].
reduction in risk of death over the same period [6]. Stages 1 and 2 are identified by albuminuria, abnormalities in
Furthermore, while 1-year mortality following MI on dialysis urine sediments or electrolytes associated with tubular disorders,
has improved from ≈60% to 41%, this does not appear to or histological changes. Stage 3 CKD is defined by eGFR 30–59
correlate with advances in evidence-based therapies for mana mL/min/1.73 m2, inclusive, on two separate occasions at least 90
ging acute coronary syndromes (ACS) [6]. This vast disparity days apart. Criteria for referral to a nephrologist include
in treatment outcomes for patients with advanced CKD sug ‘advanced CKD’ when eGFR is <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 (CKD
gests a historically neglected research population. stage 4), special circumstances such as rapid disease progression
Recently updated, the European Society of Cardiology or when the 5-year risk of needing renal replacement therapy
(ESC) guidelines [8] on management of non-ST-segment- (RRT) is calculated to be > 5% [4]. This includes CKD stage 5,
elevation ACS subheads CKD within special populations and or ESKD, defined when the eGFR is <15 mL/min/1.73 m2, with
highlights insufficient safety data for P2Y12 inhibitor prescrip or without dialysis therapy. Patients with cardiovascular disease
tion in those with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), defined (CVD) and concurrent stage 3 CKD, classified in most trials as
when estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), an index of ‘moderate’ renal impairment, are more likely to be managed by
kidney function, is less than 15 mL/min/1.73 m2. Contemporary their cardiologist and/or general practitioner in the UK than
reviews of P2Y12 inhibition within the CKD subgroup demon a nephrologist.
strate inequity through the absence of robust evidence due to Table I displays a subset of registries for ACS available across
underrepresentation or exclusion from the informing clinical the globe. Spanning nearly two decades, publications evaluating
trials [3]. Previous data have questioned the increased risk of patients with advanced CKD were analysed. Those without
harm, through bleeding, with more potent P2Y12 inhibitors advanced CKD data were excluded. These indicate a high pre
with advanced CKD [3] when eGFR is <30 mL/min/1.73 m2. valence of CKD within the ACS population. The proportion with
However, these statements are based on lower-grade evidence at least moderate CKD (eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m2) ranges from
and neglect to consider individualised risk stratification of 30% to 43% in the United States [11], 23% in Malaysia [28], 20%
bleeding and thrombotic risks. Some risk scores predicting in Australia [29], 40% in Taiwan [30] and 33% in Sweden [24].
bleeding risk with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) include The proportion with advanced CKD (CKD stage 4 or 5; eGFR
renal function [9, 29], but none has been validated for patients <30 ml/min/1.73 m2) ranges from 13.4–14.5% in CRUSADE and
with advanced CKD. GRACE registries [21,23] to 6.6% in SWEDEHEART [24].
A recent systematic review and meta-analysis comprising Strong correlations exist between advancing CKD, recurrent
small trials and observational data suggest that prasugrel and thrombotic events and major bleeding events. Subgroup analy
ticagrelor can provide beneficial clinical outcomes compared to sis from the PEGASUS-TIMI-54 trial showed independent,
clopidogrel with no significant increase in major bleeding events inverse and graded relationships between eGFR and ischaemic
[10]. While both offer dose adjustments, these have yet to be fully risk [33]. A literature review of 43 000 dialysis patients from
evaluated in advanced CKD [11–13]. The reduced efficacy of the US Renal Database System (USRDS) showed heterogene
clopidogrel in this cohort is well substantiated and is associated ity, with in-hospital mortality outcomes following a STEMI,
with poor clinical outcomes [10,14–16]. Contemporary trials are reported as 26% in ESKD patients on dialysis compared to 4–
boosting efforts to understand treatments in this subpopulation 8% in patients not receiving dialysis [34]. Even those perceived
[17–20]. Outcomes of the forthcoming TROUPER trial [17] – to have relatively preserved kidney function with stage 3 CKD
ticagrelor or clopidogrel in severe CKD patients (eGFR <30 ml/ (eGFR 30–59 ml/min/1.73 m2) have a substantially increased
min/1.73 m2 or chronic dialysis) undergoing percutaneous coron risk of cardiovascular mortality. In patients with CKD stage 3
ary intervention (PCI) for ACS – are eagerly anticipated. or 4 (eGFR range 15–59 ml/min/1.73 m2), 35–50% [5] of
Table I. Registry distribution of CKD with IHD; therapeutic patterns, mortality and bleeding events.
Distribution of CKD
eGFR ml/min/1.73 m2 or CrCl ml/
min
Advanced
CKD
Mild to eGFR or
Author Enrollment, Total moderate CrCl <30 or Follow-
name, year ACS Registry region Cohort No CKD CKD RRT up All-cause and cardiovascular mortality Bleeding risk and treatment preferences
Santopinto GRACE Global Registry of 1999– N = 11 CrCl CrCl 30–60 CrCl <30 Inpatient Mortality double when CrCl 30–60, Risk of major bleeding increased with
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09537104.2022.2154330
et al. [21] Acute Coronary Events present 774 ACS >60: N = 3397 N = 786 (Adj. OR 2.09 95% CI 1.55–2.81) and renal dysfunction, CrCl. 30–60 adj.OR
94 hospitals, (N = 4716 7591 (28.9%) (6.7%) almost four times when CrCl <30 (Adj. 1.52 [1.17–1.99], CrCl <30 Adj. OR
14 countries STEMI; (64.5%) STEMI STEMI OR 3.7 95% CI 2.57–5.37) compared to 2.78 [1.96–3.94] compared to CrCl >60
N = 7058 STEMI N = 1347 N = 301 patients with CrCl >60. A 10 ml/min mL/min. Clopidogrel prescriptions when
NSTEMI) N = 3068 (11.4%), (2.6%), decrease in CrCl had similar adverse CrCl <30 12.4% lower in ACS
(26.1%) NSTEMI NSTEMI N impact to 10-year increase in age. compared to CrCl >60 (P < .05).
NSTEMI N = 2050 = 485
N = 4523 (17.4%) (4.1%)
(38.4%)
Hemmelgarn APPROACH Alberta Provincial 1995–2001 N = 41 ‘Reference NDDKD: 8 years Adjusted 8 year survival reference group Compared with reference population
et al. [31] Project for Outcomes Assessment Alberta, 786 population’ with Creatinine for CABG Vs NR (85.5%), PCI Vs adjusted survival:
in Coronary Heart Disease Canada creatinine <200 ≥200 (80.4%) and NR (72.3%) P < .001. NDDKD: CABG Vs NR 45.9% (P
μmol/L: N = 40 374 N = 750 < .001), PCI Vs NR 32.7% (P = .48) and
(96.6%) (1.8%) NR 29.7%.
Dialysis Dialysis: CABG Vs NR 44.8%
N = 662 (P = .003) PCI Vs NR 41.2% (P = .03),
(1.6%) NR 30.4%.
Han et al. CRUSADE 2001–2003 N = 45 ‘Reference CKD either Inpatient In-hospital mortality and reinfarction CKD patients less likely to receive
[23] Can Rapid Risk Stratification of 312 US 343 population’ with creatinine was higher in CKD patients (adj OR aspirin (adj OR 0.86 95% CI 0.78–0.95),
Unstable Angina patients suppress hospitals NSTEMI creatinine ≤177 >177 μmol/ 1.45 95% CI 1.30–1.61) than non-CKD clopidogrel (adj OR 0.86 95% CI 0.78–
Adverse outcomes with Early with μmol/L: N = 38 783 L or on 0.95) nor PCI (adj OR 0.67 95% CI
Implementation of the ACA/AHA PCI service (85.5%) dialysis 0.62–0.71) compared to non-CKD
guidelines N = 6560
(14.5%) –
exact data
not available
Latif et al. EVENT Evaluation of Drug 2004–2005 N = 4791 CrCl CrCl 50– CrCl <30 Inpatient Death and MI increased from 5.8% CrCl Bleeding complications increased with
[32] Eluting Stents and Ischemic 42 US ACS >75 mL/ 75 mL/ mL/min: N and 12 >75 to 10% CrCl <30, P = .0016. Stent progressive CKD. For CrCl <50,
Events registry Centres min: min: N = = 140 (3%) months thrombosis (P = .99) and adjusted OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.01–2.5; and
N = 2827 1253 1% dialysis revascularisation (P = .51) showed no CrCl <30 OR 3.1 (95% CI 1.7–5.6).
(59%) (26%) statistical difference compared to Clopidogrel prescription 9% lower at 12
CrCl 30– CrCl >75 months with CrCl <30 compared to >75
49 mL/
min
N = 571
(12%)
Treatment inequity in antiplatelet therapy
(Continued )
3
4
Table I. (Continued).
F. L. Varian et al.
Distribution of CKD
min
Advanced
CKD
Mild to eGFR or
Szummer SWEDEHEART Swedish Web- 2003–2006 N = 57 N = 12 eGFR eGFR 15– Inpatient eGFR <15/dialysis 22% STEMI Bleeding 6.1% in eGFR <15 (adj OR
et al. [24] system for Enhancement and 71 hospitals, 477 ACS 344 60–90 N 29 N = 2349 compared to 41% eGFR >90. VT/VF/ 3.39 CI 2.16–5.33) compared to 1.5%
Development of Evidence-based Sweden (21.5%) = 25 970 (4%) cardiac arrest 6.2% eGFR <15 (adj OR eGFR ≥90.
care in Heart disease Evaluated (45.2%) NDDKD 1.89 CI 1.3–2.72) compared with 2.7% Lower primary PCI in STEMI 49.4% for
According to Recommended eGFR with eGFR eGFR ≥90. In-hospital mortality more eGFR <15/dialysis compared with
Therapies register 30–59 N <15 N = likely eGFR <60. 77.3% eGFR >90.
= 16 008 806 (1.4%)
(27.9%) Dialysis
N = 368
(0.6%)
Fox et al. NCDR-ACTION National 2007– N = 30 NSTEMI NSTEMI eGFR 15–29 Inpatient In-hospital death 31% eGFR <15 (adj Multivariable adjusted OR for major
[13] Cardiovascular Data Acute present 462 = 17 393 = 10 112 NSTEMI = OR 8.0) compared to 2.3% no CKD in bleeding in STEMI 2.1 (CI 1.4–2.9)
Coronary Treatment and 280 NSTEMI (57.1%) (33.2%) 1846 (6.1%) STEMI and 12.4% eGFR <15 (adj OR when eGFR <15 and 2.0 (CI 1.6–2.5)
Intervention Outcomes registry ACTION N = 19 STEMI STEMI STEMI = 4.1) compared to 1.8% in NSTEMI (p eGFR 15–30 compared to no CKD. Not
hospitals, 029 = 13 221 = 5001 554 (2.9%) < .0001). adjusted for significant overdosing of
US STEMI (69.5%) (26.3%) eGFR <15 glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in
NSTEMI = STEMI 55.6% in eGFR <15 and 40.9%
1111 (3.6%) in NSTEMI compared to 2.2% in those
STEMI = with no CKD (p < .0001).
253 (1.3%)
Baber et al. PARIS Patterns of non-adherence 2009–2010 N = 4190 CrCl CrCl <60 mL/min: 24 CrCl <60 independent predictor of CTE CrCl independent predictor of major
[26] to anti-platelet Regimen in US and CAD ≥60 mL/ N = 663 (15.8%) months at 2 years; 3.8% (HR 2.12 95% CI 1.46– bleeding CrCl <60 3.3% (HR 1.81 95%
Stented Patients Europe treated min 3.05, P < .001) compared to CrCl ≥60. CI 1.16–2.82, P = .01) compared to
with N = 3527 CrCl ≥60.
PCI (84.2%)
(DES)
(Continued )
Platelets, 2023; 34(1): 1–16
Table I. (Continued).
Distribution of CKD
min
Advanced
CKD
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09537104.2022.2154330
Mild to eGFR or
Gragnano START-ANTIPLATELET 2014–2018 N = 383 CrCl >30 mL/min CrCl <30 12 Composite end point of all-cause death, Mean CrCl overall higher in ticagrelor
et al. [25] survey on anticoagulated patients Italy High N = 196 Ticagrelor mL/min months MI stroke or major bleeding, after group 64.6 ± 25.9 compared with
register clinical trials.gov bleeding N = 138 Clopidogrel N = 13 multivariate adjustment, did not differ at clopidogrel 52.5 ± 27.1 (P < .001).
risk Ticagrelor 1-year adverse clinical outcomes Advanced age, high bleeding risk
(6.2%) associated between clopidogrel or criteria and longer DAPT duration were
N = 36 ticagrelor (19% versus 11%, respectively, independent predictors of composite
Clopidogrel adj HR 1.27 CI 0.71–2.27 P = .429) end point.
(20.7%)
De Luca PIRAEUS group – combined 2014–2019 STEMI eGFR eGFR <60 In- All-cause mortality lower with No difference in bleeding events
et al. [27] registries. Included for analysis: >60 N = 2968 (12.8%) hospital prasugrel/ticagrelor compared to between prasugrel and ticagrelor (OR
AAPCI/DAPT, AMIS Plus, N = 23 events clopidogrel (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62– 0.81 95% CI 0.53–1.24, P= .335)
EYESHOT 215 0.84, P < .001). Prasugrel Vs ticagrelor
non-inferior (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.77–
1.23, P = .81)
ACA, American College of Cardiology; ACS, acute coronary syndrome; AHA, American Heart Association; CAD, coronary artery disease; CI, confidence interval; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CrCl, creatinine
clearance mL/min; CTE, coronary thrombotic events; DES, Drug-eluting stent; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate ml/min/1.73m2 ; EBM, evidence based medications; ER, event rate; HTPR, high on-
treatment platelet reactivity; HR, hazard ratio; OR, odds ratio; NDDKD, non-dialysis-dependent kidney disease; NSTEMI, non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction; NR, no revascularisation; MACE,
major adverse cardiovascular event; MI, myocardial infarction; OR, odds ratio; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; RRT, renal replacement therapy; STEMI, ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction;
US, United State; VT, ventricular tachycardia; VF, ventricular fibrillation.
5
mortality is ascribed to CVD, three times that of patients with 2012/13 reflects clinical practice from 10 years earlier in patients
eGFR >90 ml/min/1.73 m2. An analysis of >100 000 patients not receiving dialysis [6]. Furthermore, historically found in 40–
with CKD demonstrated the hazard for cardiovascular mortality 55% [13], studies reporting in-hospital bleeding complications
increases exponentially by CKD stage [1] (adjHR 5.39 (CI often neglect to consider the impact of overdosing in patients
3.30–8.80) for eGFR 15–29 ml/min/1.73 m2 compared to with eGFR <30 ml/min/1.73 m2, with co-prescription of intrave
eGFR ≥90 ml/min/1.73 m2). Reinfarction, ventricular tachycar nous antiplatelets (i.e. glycoprotein IIa/IIIb inhibitors) during PCI.
dia, ventricular fibrillation and cardiac arrest are nearly three Efficacy of DAPT with aspirin and clopidogrel is affected by
times more likely in those with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 CKD progression [10,25,38]. Recognition of the pharmacological
versus those without [24]. Outcomes from the PLATO trial challenges in managing antiplatelet therapy in advanced CKD is
also showed that, for every 5 mL/min reduction in creatinine growing [3,10]. This demands awareness of the pharmacody
clearance (CrCl), relative increases in total mortality rates were namics and pharmacokinetics of P2Y12 inhibitors in this sub
19%, MI 8% and major bleeding 4% (all P < .001) [35]. group. Circulating platelet volume, reactivity and plasma
Observational studies suggest a 10 ml decrease in CrCl has constituents involved in platelet aggregation, coagulation and
a similar adverse impact to a 10-year advancement in age fibrinolysis all contribute to bleeding and thrombotic risks.
[21]. Notwithstanding the unmitigated proportional risk attrib Therapeutic targets of antiplatelets, as illustrated in Figure 1,
uted to pathophysiological processes, there remains consider include platelet activation via adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-
able potential to improve outcomes post-ACS, with targeted mediated activation of the P2Y12 receptor, cyclooxygenase
therapeutics in advanced CKD. (COX)-1-mediated production of thromboxane A2 (TXA2) and
thrombin-mediated activation of protease-activated receptor
(PAR)-1 and PAR-4 [39–41]. However, the safety profile of
Antiplatelet options for ACS in advanced CKD
vorapaxar, in particular regarding the increased risk of ICH,
Not only is CKD an independent predictor of death and further leaves PAR-1 as an unattractive target [42], especially given
cardiovascular events [3,36], but also it additionally is associated higher bleeding risks associated with advanced CKD.
with increased health-care costs per event. For example, the Aspirin therapy has proven benefit in secondary prevention of
estimated cost of stay of a patient with ACS and ESKD receiving established ACS, with reported absolute risk reductions of 38 per
haemodialysis (HD) is approximately 1.6 times that of patients 1000 patients treated for -month post-acute MI [44]. However, the
without CKD and 1.3 times higher than non-dialysis - dependent CKD subgroup is not well evidenced in this analysis. Aspirin is
kidney disease (NDDKD) [34]. a non-selective, irreversible inhibitor of COX-1 (antiplatelet) and,
Prescription of evidence-based medications, timing of revascu less sensitively, COX-2 (anti-inflammatory) enzymes. Oral bioa
larisation and selection for reperfusion or medical therapy are less vailability is 30–40% and peak plasma levels occur 30–40 min
predictable in this population. Despite limitations in delineation of after ingestion of plain or dispersible aspirin [45] (or 3–4 h for
CKD patients, registry data globally demonstrate wide variation in enteric-coated formulations). Inactivation of COX-1 inhibits the
clinical practice and outcomes in ACS management (Table I) formation and release of TXA2, a platelet activator and vasocon
[21,23,24,25–2728,29,31,32]. Lower prescriptions for evidence- strictor, and this effect lasts for the lifespan of the platelet. The
based medications in advanced CKD reportedly relate to concerns mean lifespan of the human platelet is around 7–10 days. As
about drug toxicity, deterioration in renal function, bleeding and approximately 10% of the platelet pool is replenished per day,
overall paucity in the evidence base [11,24,28,37,38]. Historical once-daily dosing should be sufficient to maintain almost com
failure of registry datasets to capture CKD stage has also missed plete inhibition [45]. However, the plasma half-life is short with
trends in antithrombotic prescriptions in advanced diseases. The differential exposure to platelet and systemic endothelium, lead
proportion of dialysis patients prescribed DAPT following MI in ing to inconsistent efficacy in groups with accelerated platelet
Figure 1. Graphical abstract of platelet activation pathways and mechanism of action of antiplatelet and antithrombotic therapies. Adapted from and
reproduced with permission from Storey, 2006 [43].
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09537104.2022.2154330 Treatment inequity in antiplatelet therapy 7
prasugrel is seen at 1 h compared to clopidogrel where maximum

turnover [46]. This can be improved with twice-daily dosing [46]. effects of a 300 mg loading dose are seen at >6 h and 600 mg at
In those with enhanced inflammatory state, such as end-stage 2–4 h [65,67]. Furthermore, small studies suggest that low-dose
CKD, platelet turnover is demonstrably higher [47], but the effi prasugrel, as well as clopidogrel, demonstrates a reduction in
cacy of twice-daily dosing has yet to be evaluated in this setting. platelet inhibition post-HD (mean P2Y12 reaction units >208),
Although aspirin is a recommended option for secondary pre which requires further exploration [63].
vention, primary prevention studies of aspirin in non-end-stage Ticagrelor is a cyclopentyl triazolopyrimidine, or nucleoside
CKD showed no clear benefit, with a statistically significant analogue, that is bound 99.8% to plasma proteins and does not
doubling of major bleeding and progressive renal dysfunction require metabolic activation [68]. Median time to maximum pla
[48]. Hence, despite impairment of haemostasis, COX-1 inhibi telet inhibition is 2 h with declining plasma concentration at ~12
tion in this cohort was insufficient in primary prevention of h, requiring twice-daily dosing [57]. Compared to clopidogrel,
thrombotic events. HD patients were not well represented in this ticagrelor has shown more consistent P2Y12 inhibition, with
meta-analysis, and only studies evaluating the patency of dialysis a lower proportion of HTPR [69] and the lowest proportion of
access were included [48]. Smaller studies have shown pharma non-responders, reportedly ≈10% on dialysis [52] and 0% with
codynamic variation in aspirin response in CKD [49]. One cross- NDDKD [15]. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data sug
sectional study [49] (N = 116) demonstrated impaired response to gest that, unlike clopidogrel and prasugrel, ticagrelor’s platelet
aspirin with higher on-treatment TXA2 levels indicative of high inhibition response remains unchanged during HD [62].
on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) in patients with eGFR Significantly higher risks of MACE, MI and stent thrombosis
<60 ml/min/1.73 m2. As an NSAID, aspirin is also potentially are associated with ‘non-responders’ or HTPR (identified by
nephrotoxic, and even doses of 75 mg OD have shown a small, either light transmission aggregometry, VerifyNow P2Y12 and/or
but significant, reduction in serum creatinine, which is resolved vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation assays),
after cessation of therapy [50]. Additionally, it has been noted to as reported in a meta-analyses of 10 studies in advanced CKD
have pro-inflammatory properties in a human endotoxaemia [14]. Personalised antiplatelet therapy through genotyping to pre
model, in contrast to the anti-inflammatory effects of P2Y12 dict clopidogrel poor metabolisers and guide selective treatment
inhibition [51]. Further assessment of aspirin dosing and efficacy with clopidogrel instead of ticagrelor or prasugrel was shown to
in moderate and severe CKD is required [52–54]. Trends, how be non-inferior to standard therapy with ticagrelor or prasugrel in
ever, are shifting toward the benefits of single antiplatelet therapy reducing risk of MACE but did lower bleeding risk [70]. Only
(SAPT) with P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy. The TWILIGHT- 10% of this sample was represented by advanced CKD and sub
CKD subgroup analysis suggested that ticagrelor monotherapy group analysis of this cohort was not reported. Proportionately
leads to a lower incidence of bleeding compared with DAPT in fewer (3%) were included in TROPICAL-ACS [60], which was
patients with CKD without necessarily increasing the risk of also non-inferior for guided de-escalation of prasugrel therapy by
cardiovascular events although the analysis was underpowered platelet-function testing. Most of the dedicated trials for platelet
to provide robust evidence on this [55,56]. Larger trials for function testing failed to meet end-points [60] and the dispropor
monotherapy with a more potent P2Y12 inhibitor in dialysis- tionately low recruitment of advanced CKD undermines applic
dependent and advanced CKD are required. ability for this cohort. Despite this, a role for platelet-function
Clopidogrel is a second-generation thienopyridine prodrug testing in those with either ‘on-treatment stent thrombosis’, or
requiring intestinal absorption and metabolisation by liver ‘recent PCI on DAPT requiring cardiac or non-cardiac surgery’
enzymes to produce an active metabolite that binds irreversibly remains [60]. It should be noted that low haematocrit in patients
to the P2Y12 receptor for the life of the platelet [57]. Renal with CKD may affect results obtained with the VerifyNow P2Y12
dysfunction significantly suppresses biotransformation, and assay [71] and the optimal pharmacodynamic assay in advanced
genetic variation in absorption and cytochrome P450 (CYP) poly CKD patients remains to be established [72].
morphism leads to unpredictable variations in the on-treatment
platelet reactivity [14,15]. Table II shows a subset of pharmaco
Bleeding risk on antiplatelet therapy in advanced CKD
dynamic and pharmacokinetic studies within advanced CKD
across the globe to include a meta-analysis (N = 10) evaluating Bleeding complications are higher in CKD compared to the general
the prevalence of HTPR in CKD patients treated with clopidogrel, population. This has implications for antiplatelet therapy. A large
linked to poorer clinical outcomes [14]. HTPR with clopidogrel is observational study [73] reported a 1.6-fold (95% CI 1.2–2.2)
reportedly up to 84% with advanced CKD [58]. This exceeds increased risk of bleeding during antiplatelet therapy if diagnosed
estimates of 30% within the general population [59,61,64]. with CKD (defined as eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 or albuminuria)
Consistent evidence of poor response across a variety of research relative to the non-CKD population [73]. In the CKD population,
studies [14,15,52,59,61] has fuelled exploration of the safety and the majority of bleeding events (62%, N = 172) were unspecified
efficacy of newer P2Y12 inhibitors in advanced CKD. The timely nonintervention-related, followed by 30% (N = 83) intervention-
TROUPER trial – clopidogrel compared with ticagrelor following related and 6.6% (N = 18) due to ruptured abdominal aneurysm
PCI in ACS [17] – is a step towards closing treatment disparities [73]. These figures can be criticised for lack of risk stratification by
within this subgroup. stage since bleeding rates have been shown to increase with CKD
Prasugrel is a newer prodrug, with significantly enhanced progression. Clinically significant haemorrhage rates (of various
potency in reduction of platelet activation compared to clopido aetiology) in ESKD reportedly range from 2.1 to 16.1 per 100 per
grel. Rapidly hydrolysed by intestinal hydroxyesterases followed son-years [74]. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR, inclusive of aspirin
by CYP bioactivation, maximum plasma concentration of the use) for upper gastrointestinal bleeding in HD patients is increased
active metabolite is reached at 30–60 min [65]. Like clopidogrel, to 1.27 (95% CI 1.03–1.57) compared to a population without CKD
this third-generation thienopyridine blocks ADP binding to the [75], with the risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in ESKD more
P2Y12 receptor irreversibly and effectively reduces multiple than 3.5-fold higher than those with CKD stage 3 [76]. The inter
aspects of platelet activation and associated responses [66]. actions between bleeding, atherothrombosis and CKD are illu
Maximum effect of platelet inhibition after loading with 60 mg strated in Figure 2.
8
Table II. Efficacy of P2Y12 inhibitors in advanced CKD.
CKD
Distribution Platelet
eGFR mL/min/ function CKD
Author, year Design 1.73 m2 Intervention test analysis Outcome Bleeding risk
Trials
F. L. Varian et al.
Alexopoulos Randomised HD with Prasugrel 10 mg OD Vs VerifyNow CKD 84% HTPR on clopidogrel prior to randomisation. PRU Pharmacodynamic study, no clinical safety data
et al. 2011 single-blinded
HTPR (PRU clopidogrel 150 mg OD P2Y12 stage 5 lower with prasugrel compared to high-dose clopidogrel
[58] prospective ≥235) on (47.6% concurrent on HD (19% Vs 85.7%, P < .001). Genotyping for CYP2C19 × 2
cross-over trial
clopidogrel 75 aspirin) unhelpful
mg od
N = 21/25
randomised
Price et al. RCT: CrCl <60 ml/ Standard clopidogrel 75 VerifyNow No 40.8% HRPR (PRU ≥230) on clopidogrel at randomisation No increase in bleeding with higher dose.
2011 [59] GRAVITAS min in 40.5% mg OD Vs high-dose P2Y12 of whom 40.5% had CrCl <60 ml/min compared to 28%
441/1099 high clopidogrel 150 mg OD with CrCl <60 ml/min PRU <230. No benefit in MACE
dose despite reduction in absolute HTPR
456/1096
standard dose
Storey et al. Substudy of No CKD Ticagrelor 90 mg BD VerifyNow No PRU showed no significant difference between T90 and In RCT: non-significant lower rates of bleeding
2016 [12] RCT: N = 146 (81%) (T90) + aspirin and P2Y12 T60 though greater standard deviation in T60 group. HTPR T60. TIMI major bleeding was 2.69 (95% CI:
PEGASUS- CrCl <60 mL/ ticagrelor 60 mg BD LTA PRU >208 in 2 patients T60 group pre-dose, 1 was due to 1.96 to 3.70) and 2.32 (95% CI: 1.68 to 3.21) for
TIMI 54 min (T60) + aspirin VASP poor compliance. No CKD subgroup analysis T90 and T60, respectively
N = 9/64
placebo (9%),
N = 5/58 T60
(9%)
N = 9/58 T90
(16%)
Sibbing et al. RCT: N = 2106, Prasugrel Vs PFT guided Multiplate No PFT at 14 days. HTPR defined AU ≥ 46. HTPR noted 14% 6% BARC 2 or higher bleeding in control and
2017 [60] TROPICAL- N = 1304 de- de-escalation to in control group and 39% in clopidogrel de-escalation 5% in PFT group. No statistically significant
ACS escalation and clopidogrel at 14 days if group. Guided de-escalation non-inferior to standard reduction in bleeding events.
N = 1306 HTPR prasugrel treatment. No CKD subgroup analysis
control.
Renal
insufficiency
3%
Pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic studies in advanced CKD
Muller et al. Prospective 1 and 2: eGFR Monotherapy with VerifyNow Yes PRI correlated inversely with eGFR (VASPr = −0.307, P Pharmacodynamic study, no clinical safety data
2012 [61] study >60 N = 29 maintenance clopidogrel P2Y12 < .001) in both assays (VerifyNowr = −0.485, P < .001).
3a: eGFR 75 mg OD VASP HRPR with PRU ≥235 (and VASP) increased with eGFR
45–59 N = 21 for all stages. From 17.2%, Stage 1–2 to 63.6%, stage 5 (P
3b: eGFR < .001). No effect of dialysis session on HRPR.
30–44 N = 26
4: eGFR 15–29
N = 14
5: eGFR <15
ml/min N = 36
(Continued )
Platelets, 2023; 34(1): 1–16
Table II. (Continued).
CKD
Distribution Platelet
eGFR mL/min/ function CKD
Author, year Design 1.73 m2 Intervention test analysis Outcome Bleeding risk
Alexopoulos 2-center HD with Switch from clopidogrel VerifyNow CKD PRI decreased from 310.4 ± 52.9 to 137.7 ± 77.9 after No increased bleeding and drug tolerability was
et al. prospective HTPR 75 mg OD to ticagrelor P2Y12 stage 5 ticagrelor treatment (P < .001). good
2012 [52] study N = 24/27 had 90 mg BD Multiplate on HD 10% remained poor responders (PRU ≥235) at day 15
HTPR (89%)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09537104.2022.2154330
N = 20
included
Wang et al. RCT in N = 60 eGFR Ticagrelor 90 mg BD + VerifyNow CKD 3 PRU at 2 h, 8 h, 24 h and 30 days markedly lower in No clinical safety data
2018 [15] NSTEACS <60 with aspirin Vs clopidogrel 75 P2Y12 and 4 ticagrelor Vs clopidogrel and irrespective of eGFR or
NSTEACS mg OD + aspirin CYP2C19 genotype. Biotransformation of clopidogrel significantly
genotyping suppressed by renal dysfunction. HTPR with ticagrelor
3.3% at 24 h and 0% by 30 days compared to 58.6% on
clopidogrel
Teng et al. Prospective 14 HD Ticagrelor 90 mg pre-HD VerifyNow CKD Median time to maximum concentration was not No clinical safety data
2018 [62] study 13 healthy or 1 day post-HD P2Y12 stage 5 significantly different to healthy controls. Mean IPA >90%
(CrCl ≥90 mL/ LTA 20- on HD 2 h post-dose and was consistent across all treatments,
min) μM ADP regardless of timing on HD. PRU was unchanged by
dialysis, but overall values were higher than healthy
subjects.
Kamada Single-center HD N = 38 Switched to prasugrel VerifyNow CKD Prasugrel inhibited platelet aggregation more effectively Pharmacodynamic study but no short-term
et al. 2019 prospective 3.75 mg OD from P2Y12 stage 5 than clopidogrel pre-(PRU 175 Vs 226) and post-HD (PRU bleeding or other adverse events after 14 days
[63] study clopidogrel 75 mg OD on HD 210 Vs 256). Significant increase in PRU for both
monotherapy clopidogrel and prasugrel post-HD (p < .001)
Ohno et al. Multi-center HD N = 41 Clopidogrel 75 mg OD + VerifyNow CKD HTPR (PRU >208) in 75.7% clopidogrel prior to Pharmacodynamic study but no major bleeding
2019 [11] prospective aspirin 100 mg OD Vs P2Y12 stage 5 switching. 75% on low-dose prasugrel remained non- at 30 days, 1 minor episode.
study prasugrel 3.75 mg OD + CYP2C19 on HD responders with HTPR. Difference in overall PRU was
aspirin 100 mg OD genotyping significant but remained >208 PRU. Unclear of timings of
sampling in relation to HD
Wu et al. Meta-analysis No CKD N = Clinical outcomes NA ‘CKD’ HTPR demonstrated in CKD patients OR 1.34 (95% CI Cardiovascular events only, no inclusion for
2019 [14] 11138 (78.6%) associated with HTPR NOS 1.23–1.46). HTPR increases risk of MACE RR 2.99, (95% bleeding events.
CKD N = 3028 CI 1.19–7.53 p < .00001)
(21.4%) on
clopidogrel
AU, aggregation units; BARC, bleeding academic research consortium; BD, twice daily; CAD, coronary artery disease; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CrCl, creatinine clearance mL/min; CYP, cytochrome P450
enzymes; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate ml/min/1.73m2 ; HD, haemodialysis; HTPR, high on-treatment platelet reactivity; IPA, inhibition of platelet aggregation; LR, low responder (PRI ≥61%);
LTA, light transmittance aggregometry to adenosine diphosphate and arachidonic acid; NOS, not otherwise specified; NSTEACS, non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (includes unstable angina);
OD, once daily; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; PFT, platelet function testing; PRI, platelet reactivity index; PRU, P2Y12 reaction units; RCT, randomised controlled trial; TIMI, Thrombolysis In
Myocardial Infarction; T90, ticagrelor 90 mg BD; T60, ticagrelor 60 mg BD; VASP, vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation.
9
Figure 2. Graphical abstract of interactions between chronic kidney disease (CKD), atherothrombosis and bleeding in patients with coronary artery
disease. CI, confidence interval; DAPT, dual antiplatelet therapy; SAPT, single antiplatelet therapy. Adapted from and reproduced with permission
from the European Society of Cardiology. Parker, Storey, 2021 [56].
Advanced CKD in antiplatelet trials Bleeding and thrombotic risk scores for ACS treatment
Table III describes the distribution of CKD populations within the in advanced CKD
major trials over the past 20 years. Treatment inequalities have Scores aimed at balancing the ischaemic and bleeding risks
manifest because advanced CKD is poorly ascribed within these with DAPT prescription [83,84] are not robustly validated for
trials. Recruitment of patients with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 patients with advanced CKD. The DAPT risk score was devel
has historically comprised <25% across all major trials [3]. oped in a population treated with aspirin and clopidogrel with
Developing robust generalised findings for DAPT/SAPT in this a low prevalence of CKD (15.8%) and validated with even
cohort is paramount. fewer (7.7%) [83]. This sample is not representative of registry
Few trials segregate CKD by disease stage, dichotomising demographics, has no relationship to more potent P2Y12 inhi
as ‘non-CKD’ and ‘CKD’ for eGFR ≥60 and <60 ml/min/1.73 bitors and does not consider dynamic changes in renal function
m2, respectively. Evidence is heavily reliant upon subgroup or duration of DAPT. PRECISE-DAPT [85] was developed to
analyses. Recent head-to-head trial evaluation of more potent address some of these issues by integrating dynamic variation
P2Y12 inhibitors in ISAR-REACT-5 [20,82] also did not stra in renal function. This score utilises haemoglobin (g/dL), age
tify CKD further than eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (N = 760/ (years), white blood cells (109/L), creatinine clearance (mL/
4012 [18.9%]), and ESKD was excluded. While a reduction min) and prior bleeding. Derived from eight trials (N = 14
in eGFR was associated with increased bleeding and ischaemic 963), with median CrCl = 79.1 mL/min (range 60.8–98.0 mL/
events, it was concluded that this had no significant impact on min), 44.4% had stable CAD undergoing PCI and the remain
the relative benefit of a prasugrel-based strategy on the primary der ACS. It was validated in two cohorts, the PLATO trial (N
end point of death, MI or stroke compared to a ticagrelor-based = 8595) and the BernPCI registry 2009–2014 (N = 6172). CKD
strategy (HR 1.47 [1.04–2.08]) with no significant difference in however is neither stratified by stage nor highly proportioned
bleeding risk [82]. PEGASUS-TIMI-54 CKD subgroup analysis in either of these populations. PLATO participants with CrCl
(CrCl <60 ml/min = 23.2%, N = 4849) demonstrated a more <60 mL/min comprised 21% of those with baseline measure
marked relative MACE risk reduction with ticagrelor (with ments with median CrCl in the overall population of 84.6 mL/
aspirin) in those with eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m2 [RR 0.72, min (67.3–102.9 mL/min) and a similar median CrCl of 87.6
95% CI 0.59–0.89] compared to those with eGFR ≥60 ml/ mL/min (range 65.4–105.4 mL/min) within the BernPCI regis
min/1.73 m2 [RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72–0.96] [33], although the try [85]. The absence of categorisation of renal function means
interaction P value for this subgroup analysis was not signifi neither validation dataset includes an accurately observed risk
cant. In contrast to PEGASUS-TIMI-54, POPular AGE, com relationship with progressive renal dysfunction. Failure to cap
prising 37% (N = 377) with eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m2, found ture advanced CKD means that PRECISE-DAPT risk scores
clopidogrel and aspirin to be non-inferior to ticagrelor and can therefore be criticised for extrapolating risk percentages for
aspirin in the older population (>70 years) following NSTEMI such cases [83]. Pooled analysis of individual patient data
with fewer BARC 3 and 5 bleeding events [18]. These findings, could enhance validation of current risk tools; however, his
however, are underpowered and any relationship to advanced torically poor labeling, disproportionately low enrollment, and
CKD remains unclear. Further head-to-head comparisons of lack of dynamic renal assessment in advanced CKD are
DAPT in advanced CKD are awaited [17]. restrictive.
Table III. CKD distribution, efficacy of antithrombotic therapies and bleeding risk in major trials.
CKD distribution
Author, year RCT Population Intervention eGFR mL/min/1.73 m2 Outcomes Bleeding risk
Ahmed CLARITY- N = 3491 Clopidogrel Excluded creatinine >220 μmol/L) Ischaemic 30-day bleeding
et al. TIMI −28 eGFR data 75 mg Vs eGFR ≥90 (N = 841, 26%) complications higher increase as eGFR
2011 [77] available placebo with eGFR 60–89 (N = 1897, 58%) in moderate eGFR declines.
for 3252 fibrinolysis eGFR <60 (n = 514, 16%) (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.0–
(93%) 2.1, P = .04).
STEMI Clopidogrel no benefit
Vs Placebo when
eGFR <60.
Bhatt et al. CHARISMA N = 15 603 Clopidogrel + Diabetic nephropathy subgroup (eGFR Clopidogrel plus Severe bleeding RR
2006 [78] Stable CVD aspirin Vs undefined) aspirin not 1.25 (95% CI 0.97–
placebo N = 1006 (clopidogrel), N = 1003 significantly more 1.61, P = .09),
+aspirin (placebo) (12.9%) effective in reducing Moderate bleeding
MI, stroke or death RR 1.62 (95%
from CVD, potential CI1.27–2.08, P
benefit in patients with < .001). No
prior MI. No subgroup subgroup analysis.
analysis.
Wiviott TRITON- N = 13 608 Prasugrel Vs CrCl ≥60 ml/min; N = 11 890 (87%) Superior efficacy of Higher rate of life-
2007 [79] TIMI-38 ACS clopidogrel CrCl <60 ml/min; N = 1490 (11%) (data prasugrel for reduction threatening bleeding
missing 2%) in MI. Subgroup with prasugrel.
Matched in groups 11% Prasugrel and showed no benefit in
12% Clopidogrel CrCl <60 ml/min. Net
harm; prior CVA, >75
years or <60 kg.
Best et al. CREDO N = 2002 Clopidogrel +
CrCl >90 ml/min; N = 999 (49.9%) No significant No difference in
2008 [80] Elective aspirin Vs Mild: CrCl 60-89 ml/min = 672 (33.5%) difference in outcomes bleeding events
PCI placebo + Moderate CrCl <60 mL/min = 331 in clopidogrel Vs compares to placebo
aspirin (16.5%) placebo in patients in moderate CKD
Excluded creatinine >3 mg/dL or 265 with CKD. group (9.8% Vs
μmol/L 5.1%, P = .106)
James et al. PLATO N = 18 624 Ticagrelor + Excluded dialysis, median CrCl 80.3 mL/ Ticagrelor reduced Increased risk of
2010 [35] PCI for aspirin Vs min (63–99) ischaemic end points major and minor
ACS clopidogrel + Crcl <60 mL/min N = 3237 (17.4%) and mortality without bleeding with CKD
aspirin significant increase in not differentiated by
major bleeding. stage.
Ticagrelor increased
non-procedure-related
bleeding
Roe et al. TRILOGY N = 7243 Prasugrel Vs Excluded dialysis No significant No significant
2012 [81] ACS, not clopidogrel Median CrCl 81 ml/min (IQR 63–102 ml/ difference in end point difference in
STEMI min) matched both groups or bleeding bleeding events
Magnani PEGASUS- N = 20 898 Ticagrelor 90 CrCl <60 mL/min N = 4849 (23.2%) Platelet inhibition No increased risk of
2016 [33] TIMI 54 (99% of mg BD and 60 eGFR ≥90 N = 3251 (15.6%) similar with 60 mg to major bleeding but
overall trial mg BD vs eGFR 60–90 N = 12 798 (61.2%) 90 mg dose, superior excess minor
population) placebo eGFR 45 to < 60 N = 3536 (16.9%) to placebo. Relative bleeding
MI patients eGFR <45 N = 1313 (6.3%) Excluded risk reduction of
with history dialysis MACE was similar but
of MI greater absolute risk
reduction with eGFR
<60 as this subgroup
at higher overall risk
2.7% vs 0.96%
Schupke ISAR- N = 4018 Ticagrelor 90 Dialysis excluded N= Incidence of No comparative
et al. REACT5 ACS mg OD Versus Creatinine 88 ± 27 μmol/L Ticagrelor composite end point significant increase
2019 [20] (Majority prasugrel 10 (5.8% <83 μmol/L) including MI lower in in major bleeding
PCI) mg OD 88 ± 31 μmol/L Prasugrel (4.9% <83 prasugrel compared
μmol/L) with ticagrelor, but
this was not sustained
when creatinine <83
μmol/L
(Continued )
Table III. (Continued).
CKD distribution
Author, year RCT Population Intervention eGFR mL/min/1.73 m2 Outcomes Bleeding risk
Gimbel POPular N = 1002 Clopidogrel + Dialysis excluded Clopidogrel non- BARC 3 and 5
et al. AGE NSTE-ACS aspirin versus eGFR <60: inferior. Favorable bleeding clopidogrel
2020 [18] >70 yrs ticagrelor + N = 181 (36%) Clopidogrel alternative with lower 6% Vs ticagrelor 9%
aspirin or N = 186 (37%) Ticagrelor rates of (HR 0.61 CI 0.38–
prasugrel + <1% Prasugrel discontinuation 0.98, p = .034)
aspirin without increased risk
of MACE.
Bangalore ISCHEMIA- N = 777 Invasive versus Renal transplant 24/777 (3.1%) 83% patients on No record of
et al. CKD conservative- eGFR <15 on dialysis N = 415/777 aspirin at baseline and bleeding events
2020 [19] strategy with at (53.4%) (83.7% HD, 14.6% PD) 87% at last FU visit.
least moderate eGFR <30 N = 362/777 (46.6%) (eGFR 22.6% on clopidogrel
ischaemia on <15 not on dialysis (51/362 (14.1%), at baseline. 10%
exercise or eGFR 15 to < 30 311/262 (85.9%)) anticoagulated. Higher
stress testing incidence of non-
procedural stroke in
invasive
Stefanini TWILIGHT- N = 1111 3 month switch eGFR <60 excluding dialysis Rates of death, MI or T90 + placebo
et al. CKD (16.3%) to ticagrelor N = 796 eGFR 45–59 (71.6%) stroke were not reduced BARC
2021 [55] eGFR <60 (T90) + N = 315 eGFR 15–45 (28.4%) significantly different (2,3,5) 4.6% Vs 9%;
placebo Vs between the two HR 0.5 95% CI
ticagrelor groups. 7.9% Vs 5.7%; 0.31–0.8.
(T90) + aspirin HR 1.4, 95% CI 0.88–
2.22
ACS, acute coronary syndrome; BARC, bleeding academic research consortium; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CI, confidence interval; CrCl,
creatinine clearance mL/min; CVA, cerebrovascular attack; CVD, cardiovascular disease; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate as ml/min/
1.73m2 ; HD, haemodialysis; HR, hazard ratio; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular event; MI, myocardial infarction; NSTE-ACS, non-ST-segment
elevation acute coronary syndrome (includes unstable angina); PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; PD, peritoneal dialysis; RCT, randomised
controlled trial; RR, relative risk; STEMI, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.
Absent from current antiplatelet risk scores is urine albumin-to associated with inflammatory conditions and prediction of major
-creatinine (uACR) ratio. uACR is increasingly evidenced as an bleeding and cardiovascular events [93]. Levels are significantly
important distinguishing factor when risk profiling for CVD [86]. higher in patients with ESKD and CVD and further associated
In patients with uACR >1.1 mg/mmol (>10 mg/g), cardiovascular with dialysis vintage [22]. The relationships between duration of
mortality increases independent of CKD stage, with proportio DAPT, uACR, troponin and inflammatory markers, on the one
nately higher risk depending on progression of CKD and uACR hand, and bleeding and thrombotic outcomes on the other have yet
[1]. Even in those with eGFR >90 ml/min/1.73 m2, the presence to be explored.
of uACR 1.1–3.3 mg/mmol (10-29 mg/g) conferred an adjusted The utility of platelet-function testing for individualisation of
HR for cardiovascular mortality of 1.63 (CI 1.20–2.19) [1]. These DAPT in HD patients with bleeding (or concerns for bleeding,
figures increase exponentially with deteriorating renal function such as severe anaemia) is also worth exploring, particularly as
[1]. Importantly, bleeding risk is also increased with albuminuria bleeding risk scores such as HAS-BLED, ATRIA,
regardless of CKD stage [73]. Monitoring uACR is recommended HEMORR2HAGES and ORBIT for those requiring concurrent
for diabetic patients and those with eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m2 or anticoagulants have poor predictive abilities [74] and the DAPT
suspected CKD [4]. Despite therapeutic implications, in-patient and PRECISE-DAPT scores have yet to be validated for dialysis
testing is not routinely recommended in comparison to other risk patients [83]. An alternative strategy for de-escalation warranting
markers, such as lipid profile and HbA1c [8,87]. In-patient testing further exploration is the withdrawal of aspirin and the use of
of uACR for secondary prevention of CVD in advanced CKD ticagrelor monotherapy in DAPT-treated patients with advanced
offers prognostic potential if utilised in targeting treatment CKD and high bleeding risk.
strategies.
High-sensitivity troponin T is an additional risk biomarker,
The future for advanced CKD patients with IHD
associated with a 2- to 5-fold increased risk of death in otherwise
stable patients with ESKD [88,89], with further prognostic value Table IV summarises contemporary evidence for advanced CKD
in interval monitoring if receiving peritoneal dialysis treatment patients with IHD and outlines avenues for future research.
[90]. C-reactive protein has also been shown to be an independent
predictor of death in patients receiving HD [91] and peritoneal
dialysis [90] after adjusting for confounders. The utility of high- Conclusion
sensitivity CRP, as a measure of low-grade inflammation, did not This review presents an overview of advanced CKD within the
show a strong predictive performance for all-cause mortality and ACS population. Although not exhaustive, search criteria incor
MACE regardless of CKD stage in a large East Asian cohort [92]. porated studies targeting this sub-population to evaluate regis
Geographical and ethnic variations may, however, contribute to try inclusion, antiplatelet choice and bleeding risk. Under-
the lower cardiovascular event rate observed in this observational representation of advanced CKD in large RCT supporting
study [92]. Growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF15) is also guidelines for management of ACS has created a void in
Table IV. Evidence and opportunities for the CKD population with IHD.
Current evidence in advanced CKD Opportunities for future research
● CKD progression has independent association with increased ● Population studies and ACS registries to discriminate between all CKD stages
● Differentiate between ‘at-risk’ CKD groups to further optimise and target treatment
mortality and MACE
strategies for underlying CV risks (e.g. hypertension, albuminuria)
● CKD stage considered in some risk tools assessing bleeding ● Tools not specifically validated in CKD cohorts
risk, e.g. PRECISE-DAPT
● Albuminuria has independent association with cardiovascular ● Benefits of routine measurement of uACR following a CV event in risk stratification for
risk DAPT/SAPT
● High-sensitivity troponin T has an independent association ● Utility of uACR and troponin in risk score stratification for prescription of DAPT/SAPT
with cardiovascular risk
● Inflammatory markers inversely associated with eGFR and ● Utility of inflammatory markers for risk stratification of bleeding and thrombosis in
uACR patients on antiplatelet therapy
● Prescribing preference for clopidogrel despite lack of efficacy ● PD studies and clinical outcomes in patients with advanced CKD on P2Y12 inhibitor
with HTPR
● TROUPER RCT outcomes awaited
● Lower overall prescription of antiplatelets and anticoagulants ● Duration and choice of DAPT/or SAPT and combination antithrombotic therapies
in advanced CKD
● Lower bleeding risk without increased ischaemic burden for ● Adequately powered trial for ticagrelor monotherapy in advanced CKD
ticagrelor monotherapy after 3 months DAPT
● Appropriate duration and timing of dose-adjustments in DAPT post-PCI in patients with

● Benefits of lower-dose ticagrelor long term in high-risk advanced CKD to consider 1,3 and 12 months DAPT vs. SAPT
patients post-PCI with CKD
ACS, acute coronary syndrome; uACR, urine albumin creatinine ratio; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CV, cardiovascular; DAPT, dual antiplatelet
therapy; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate ml/min/1.73m2; HTPR, high on-treatment platelet reactivity; ICH, intracranial haemorrhage;
MACE, major adverse cardiovascular events; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; PD, pharmacodynamic; RCT, randomised controlled trial;
SAPT, single antiplatelet therapy.
evidence for this subpopulation. In the past few years, there has Authorship roles
been an increasing focus on this subgroup following recogni Varian prepared the manuscript, including tables and figures, in consulta
tion of the substantial disparity in treatments compared to those tion with R. F. Storey and assisted by W. A. E. Parker and
without advanced CKD. Research efforts are focussing on J. Fotheringham.
choice, dose and timing of antiplatelet regimens including
DAPT and SAPT. Large trials specifically recruiting CKD
patients offer opportunities to validate risk scores and explore ORCID
markers for bleeding and thrombotic risk stratification. Study Frances L. Varian http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4644-8391
designs should involve increasing frequency of renal function William A. E. Parker http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7822-8852
measurement and consider integrating uACR, troponin and
inflammatory markers into assessment. Guided de-escalation
with withdrawal of aspirin and use of ticagrelor monotherapy References
in DAPT-treated patients with advanced CKD and high bleed 1. Chronic Kidney Disease Prognosis Consortium, Matsushita K, van
ing risk is also worth exploring. Such advances could help der Velde M, Astor BC, Woodward M, Levey AS, de Jong P,
close the treatment gap for this high-risk population. Coresh J, Gansevoort RT. Association of estimated glomerular
filtration rate and albuminuria with all-cause and cardiovascular
mortality: a collaborative meta-analysis of general population
Disclosure statement cohorts. Lancet. 2010;375(9731):2073–2081.
2. Wang H, Naghavi M, Allen C, Barber RM, Bhutta ZA, Carter A,
RF Storey reports institutional research grants/support from
et al.; GBD 2015 Mortality and Causes of Death Collaborators.
AstraZeneca, Cytosorbents, GlyCardial Diagnostics and
Global, regional, and national life expectancy, all-cause mortality,
Thromboserin; consultancy/speaker fees from Alnylam, AstraZeneca,
and cause-specific mortality for 249 causes of death, 1980–2015:
Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chiesi, CSL-Behring, Cytosorbents,
a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study
Daiichi Sankyo, GlyCardial Diagnostics, HengRui, Idorsia, Intas
2015. Lancet. 2016 Oct 8;388(10053):1459–1544. doi: 10.1016/
Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Pfizer, PhaseBio, Portola, Sanofi Aventis
S0140-6736(16)31012-1.
and Thromboserin. J Fotheringham reports speaker honoraria and/or
3. Bonello L, Angiolillo DJ, Aradi D, Sibbing D. P2Y12-ADP
research funding from Fresenius Medical Care, Novartis, and Vifor
receptor blockade in chronic kidney disease patients with acute
Pharma. Other authors have no relevant disclosures.
coronary syndromes: review of the current evidence. Circulation.
2018;138(15):1582–1596. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.
Funding 118.032078.
4. Kerr M. Chronic kidney disease in England: the human and
The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work financial cost. NHS Kidney Care. 2012 [accessed 2022 Aug
featured in this article. 8];1–44 [pdf online]. Layout 1 england.nhs.uk.
5. Van der Velde M, Matsushita K, Coresh J, Astor B, 18. Gimbel M, Qaderdan K, Willemsen L, Hermanides R,
Woodward M, Levey A, de Jong P, Gansevoort R; The chronic Bergmeijer T, de Very E, Heestermans T, Tjon Joe Gin M,
kidney disease prognosis consortium. Lower estimated glomeru Waalewijn R, Hofma S, et al. Clopidogrel versus ticagrelor or
lar filtration rate and higher albuminuria are associated with all prasugrel in patients aged 70 years or older with non-ST-elevation
cause and cardiovascular mortality. A collaborative meta-analysis acute coronary syndrome (POPular AGE): the randomised,
of high-risk population cohorts. Kidney Int. 2011;79 open-label, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2020; 395
(12):1341–1352. doi: 10.1038/ki.2010.536. (10233):1374–1381. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30325-1.
6. Szummer K, Linghagen L, Evans M, Spaak J, Koul S, 19. Bangalore S, Maron DJ, O’Brien SM, Fleg JL, Kretov EI,
Akerblom A, Carrero JJ, Jernberg T. Treatments and mortality Brigouri C, Kaul U, Reynolds HR, Mazurek T, Sidhu MS, et al.
trends in cases with and without dialysis who have an acute Management of coronary disease in patients with advanced kidney
myocardial infarction: an 18-year nationwide experience. Circ disease. NEJM. 2020;382(17):1608–1618. doi: 10.1056/
Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2019;12(9):e005879. doi: 10.1161/ NEJMoa1915925.
CIRCOUTCOMES.119.005879. 20. Schupke S, Neumann FJ, Menichelli M, Mayer K, Bernlochner I,
7. Genovesi S, Boriani G, Covic A, Vernooj RWM, Combe C, Wohrle J, Richardt G, Liebetrau C, Witzenbichler B, Antoniucci D,
Burlacu A, Davenport A, Kanbay M, Kirmizis D, Schneditz D, et al. Ticagrelor or Prasugrel in patients with acute coronary
et al. Sudden cardiac death in dialysis patients: different causes syndromes. N Eng J Med. 2019;381(16):1524–1534. doi: 10.1056/
and management strategies. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2021;36 NEJMoa1908973.
(3):396–405. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfz182. 21. Santopinto JJ, Fox KAA, Goldberg RJ, Budaj A, Pinero G,
8. Collet JP, Thiele H, Barbato E, Barthelemy O, Bauersachs J, Avezum A, Gulba D, Esteban J, Gore JM, Johnson J, et al.
Bhatt DL, Dendale P, Dorobantu M, Edvardsen T, Folliguet T, Creatinine clearance and adverse hospital outcomes patients with
et al. 2020 ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary acute coronary syndromes: findings from the global registry of acute
syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment coronary events (GRACE). Heart. 2003;89:1003–1008. doi: 10.
elevation: the task force for the management of acute coronary 1136/heart.89.9.1003.
syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment 22. Jehn U, Schutte-Hutgen K, Henke U, Bautz J, Pavenstadt H,
elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart Suwelack B, Reuter S. Prognostic value of growth differentiation
J. 2021;42(14):1289–1367. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa575. factor 15 in kidney donors and recipients. J Clin Med. 2020; 9
9. Choi SY, Kim PMH, Cho YR, Park JS, Lee KM, Park TH, Yun SC. (5):1333. doi: 10.3390/jcm9051333.
Performance of PRECISE-DAPT score for predicting bleeding com 23. Han JH, Chandra A, Mulgund J, Ohman EM, Lindsell CJ,
plication during dual antiplatelet therapy. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. Gibler WB, Patel U, Ohman EM, Lindsell CJ, Gibler WB.
2018;11(12):e006837. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.118. Chronic kidney disease in patients with non–ST-segment elevation
006837. acute coronary syndromes. Am J Med. 2006 Mar;119(3):248–254.
10. Park S, Choi YJ, Kang JE, Kim MJ, Geum MJ, Kim SD, Rhie SJ. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.08.057.
P2Y12 antiplatelet choice for patients with chronic kidney disease 24. Szummer K, Lundman P, Jacobson SH, Schon S, Lindback J,
and acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Stenestrand U, Wallentin L, Jernberg T. Relation between renal
J Pers Med. 2021;11(3):222. doi: 10.3390/jpm11030222. function, presentation, use of therapies and in-hospital complication
11. Ohno Y, Kitaha H, Fujii K, Kohno Y, Ariyoshi N, Mishi T, in acute coronary syndrome: data from the SWEDEHEART register.
Fujimoto Y, Kobayashi Y. High residual platelet reactivity after J Intern Med. 2010 July; 268(1):40–49. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2796.
switching from clopidogrel to low-dose prasugrel in Japanese 2009.02204.x.
patients with end-stage renal disease on haemodialysis. J Cardiol. 25. Gragnano F, Moscarella E, Calabro P, Arturo C, Pafundi PC,
2019;73(1):71–57. doi: 10.1016/j.jjcc.2018.07.001. Lelas A, Patti G, Cavallari I, Antonucci E, Cirillo P, et al.
12. Storey RF, Angiolillo J, Bonaca MP, Thomas MR, Judge HM, Clopidogrel versus ticagrelor in high-bleeding risk patients present
Rollini F, Franchi F, Ahsan AJ, Bhatt DL, Kuder JF, et al. Platelet ing with acute coronary syndromes insights from the multicenter
inhibition with ticagrelor 60mg versus 90mg twice daily in the START-ANTIPLATELET registry. Intern Emerg Med. 2020;16
PEGASUS-TIMI 54 trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67 (2):379–387. doi: 10.1007/s11739-020-02404-1.
(10):1145–1154. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.12.062. 26. Baber U, Mehran R, Giustino G, Cohen DJ, Henry TD, Sartori S,
13. Fox CS, Muntner P, Chen AY, Alexander KP, Roe MT, Cannon CP, Ariti C, Litherland C, Dangas G, Gibson M, Pocock S, et al.
Saucedo JF, Konton MC, Wiviott SD. Use of evidence-based thera Coronary thrombosis and major bleeding after PCI with
pies in short-term outcomes of ST-segment elevation myocardial drug-eluting stents: risk scores from PARIS. J Am Coll Cardiol.
infarction and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in 2016; 67(19):2224–2234. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.02.064.
patients with chronic kidney disease: a report from the national 27. De Luca L, Zeymer U, Claeys MJ, Dorler J, Erne P, Matter CM,
cardiovascular data acute coronary treatment and intervention out Radovanovic D, Weidinger F, Luscher TF, Jukema JW; on behalf of
comes network registry. Circulation. 2010;121(3):357–365. doi: 10. the PIREUS group. Comparison of P2Y12 receptor inhibitors in
1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.865352. patient with ST-elevation myocardial infarction in clinical practice
14. Wu Y, Song Y, Pan Y, Gong Y, Zhou Y. High on-clopidogrel a propensity score analysis of five contemporary European
platelet reactivity and chronic kidney disease: a meta-analysis of registries. Eur Heart J – Cardiovasc Pharmacother. 2021; 7(2).
literature studies. Scan Cardiovasc J. 2019;53(2):55–61. doi: 10. 94–103. doi: 10.1093/ehjcvp/pvaa002.
1080/14017431.2019.1598571. 28. Ismail MD, Jalalonmuhalio M, Azhari Z, Mariapun J, Lee ZV,
15. Wang H, Qi J, Li Y, Tang Y, Li C, Ki J, Han Y. Pharmacodynamics Abindin IZ, Ahmad WAW, Zuhdi ASM. Outcomes of STEMI
and pharmacokinetics of ticagrelor vs clopidogrel in patients with patients with chronic kidney disease treated with percutaneous cor
acute coronary syndromes and chronic kidney disease. Br J Clin onary intervention: the Malaysian National Cardiovascular Disease
Pharmacol. 2018;84(1):88–96. doi: 10.1111/bcp.13436. Database – Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (NCVD-PCI) reg
16. Stone GW, Witzenbichler B, Weisz G, Rinaldi MJ, Neumann FJ, istry data from 2007 to 2014. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2018; 18
Metzger C, Henry TD, Cox DA, Duffy PL, Mazzaferri E, et al. (1):184. doi: 10.1186/s12872-018-0919-9.
Platelet reactivity and clinical outcomes after coronary artery 29. Brieger D, Hyun K, Chew D, Amerena J, Farouque O, MacIsaac A,
implantation of drug-eluting stents (ADAPT-DES): a prospective Goodman S, Yan A. The relationship between the proportion of
multicentre registry study. Lancet. 2013;382(9892):614–623. doi: admitted high risk ACS patients and hospital delivery of evidence
10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61170-8. based case. Int J Cardiol. 2016;222:86–92. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.
17. Laine M, Lemesle G, Burtey S, Cayla G, Range G, Quaino G, 2016.07.053.
Canault M, Pnakert M, Paganell F, Puymirat E, et al. TicagRelor 30. Lin TH, Hsin HT, Wang CL, Lai WT, Li AH, Kuo CT, Hwang JJ,
or Clopidogrel in severe or terminal chronic kidney patients Chiang FT, Chang SC, Chang CJ. Impact of impaired glomerular
Undergoing PERcutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary filtration rate and revascularisation strategy on one-year cardiovas
syndrome: the TROUPER trial. Am Heart J. 2020;225:19–26. doi: cular events in acute coronary syndrome full spectrum registry.
10.1016/j.ahj.2020.04.013. BMC Nephrol. 2014;15(1):66. doi: 10.1186/1471-2369-15-66.
31. Hemmelgarn BR, Southern D, Culleton BF, Mitchell LB, 47. Filipov P, Bozicv D, Mijovic R, Mitic G. Platelet turnover and
Knudtson ML, Ghali WA; APPROACH investigators. Survival function in end-stage renal disease. Vojnosanit Pregl. 2018;75
after coronary revascularisation among patients with kidney (6):604–610. doi: 10.2298/VSP160720374F.
disease. Circulation. 2004;110(14):1890–1895. doi: 10.1161/01. 48. Major RW, Dawson S, Riddleston H, Oozerally I, Gray LJ,
CIR.0000143629.55725.D9. Brunskill N. Aspirin and cardiovascular primary prevention in
32. Latif F, Kleiman NS, Cohen DJ, Pencina MJ, Yen CH, Cutlip DE, chronic kidney disease: a meta-analysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant.
Moliterno DJ, Nassif D, Lopez JJ, Saucedo JF. In hospital and 2015;30(3):164. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfv174.25.
1-year outcomes among percutaneous coronary intervention patients 49. Polzin A, Dannenberg L, Sansone R, Levkau B, Kelm M,
with chronic kidney disease in the era of drug-eluting stents: Hohlfeld T, Zeus T. Antiplatelet effects of aspirin in chronic kidney
a report from the EVENT (evaluation of drug eluting stents and disease patients. J Thromb Haemostat. 2015;14(2):375–380. doi: 10.
ischaemic events) registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2 1111/jth.13211.
(1):37–45. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2008.06.012. 50. Segal R, Lubart E, Leibovitz A, Berkovitch M, Habot B, Yaron M,
33. Magnani G, Storey RF, Steg G, Bhatt DL, Cohen M, Kider J, Im K, Caspi D. Early and late effects of low-dose aspirin on renal function
Aylward P, Ardissino D, Isaza D, et al. Efficacy and safety of in elderly patients. Am J Med. 2003;115(6):462–466. doi: 10.1016/
ticagrelor for long-term secondary prevention of atherosclerotic S0002-9343(03)00436-4.
events in relation to renal function: insights from the 51. Thomas MR, Outteridge SN, Ajjan RA, Phoenix F, Sangha GK,
PEGASUS-TIMI 54 trial. Eur Heart J. 2016;37(4):400–408. doi: Faulkner RE, Ecob R, Judge HM, Khan H, West LE, et al. Platelet
10.1093/eurheartj/ehv482. P2Y12 inhibitors reduce systemic inflammation and its prothrombotic
34. Lingel JM, Srivastava MC, Gupta A. Management of coronary effects in an experimental human model. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol.
artery disease and acute coronary syndrome in the chronic kidney 2015 Dec;35(12):2562–2570. doi: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.115.306528.
disease population – a review of the current literature. Haemodial 52. Alexopoulos D, Xanthopoulou I, Plakomyti TE, Goudas P,
Int. 2017;21(4):472–482. doi: 10.1111/hdi.12530. Koutroulia E, Goumenos D. Ticagrelor in clopidogrel-resistant
35. James S, Budaj A, Aylward P, Buck KK, Cannon CP, Cornel JH, patients undergoing maintenance haemodialysis. Am J Kidney
Harrington R, Horrow J, Katus H, Keltai M, et al. Ticagrelor versus Disease. 2012;60(2):332–333. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2012.05.001.
clopidogrel in acute coronary syndromes in relation to renal func 53. Nylander S, Femia EA, Scavone M, Berntsson P, Asztely AK,
tion. Results from the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes Nelander K, Lofgren L, Nilsson RG, Cattaneo M. Ticagrelor inhi
(PLATO) trial. Circulation. 2010;122(11):1056–1067. doi: 10. bits human platelet aggregation via adenosine in addition to P2Y12.
1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.933796. Antagonism J Thromb Haemostat. 2013;11(10):1867–1876. doi: 10.
36. Best PJM, Lennon R, Ting HH, Bell MR, Rihal CS, Holmes DR, 1111/jth.12360.
Berger PB. The impact of renal insufficiency on clinical outcomes 54. Bonello L, Laine M, Kipson N, Mancini J, Helal O, Fromonot J,
in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions. JACC. Gariboldi V, Condon J, Thuny F, Frere C, et al. Ticagrelor increases
2002;39(7):1113–1119. doi: 10.1016/S0735-1097(02)01745-X. adenosine plasma concentration in patients with an acute coronary
37. Blicher TM, Hommer K, Olesen JB, Torp-Pedersen C, Madsen M, syndrome. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(9):872–877. doi: 10.1016/j.
Kamper AL. Less use of standard guidelines-based treatment of jacc.2013.09.067.
myocardial infarction in patients with chronic kidney disease: 55. Stefanini GG, Briguori C, Cao D, Baber U, Sartori S, Zhang Z,
a Danish nation-wide cohort study. Eur Heart J. 2013 Oct;34 Dangas G, Angiolillo DJ, Mehta S, Cohen DJ, et al. Ticagrelor
(37):2916–2923. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/eht220. monotherapy in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing
38. Morel O, Muller C, Jesel L, Moulin B, Hannedouche T. Impaired percutaneous coronary intervention: TWILIGHT-CKD. Eur Heart
platelet P2Y12 inhibition by thienopyridines in chronic kidney dis J. 2021;42(45):ehab533. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab533.
ease: mechanisms, clinical relevance and pharmacological options. 56. Parker WAE, Storey RF. Ticagrelor monotherapy in CKD: better
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2013;28(8):1994–2002. doi: 10.1093/ndt/ safety at what price?. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(45):ehab607. editorial.
gft027. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab607.
39. Berger JS. Oral antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention of 57. Dobesh PP, Oestreich JH. Ticagrelor: pharmacokinetics, pharmaco
acute coronary syndrome. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2018;18 dynamics, clinical efficacy and safety. Pharmacotherapy. 2014;34
(6):457–472. doi: 10.1007/s40256-018-0291-2. (10):1077–1090. doi: 10.1002/phar.1477.
40. Storey RF, Kotha J, Smyth SS, Moliterno DJ, Rorick TL, 58. Alexopoulos D, Panagiotou A, Xanthopoulou I, Komninakis D,
Moccetti T, Valgimigli M, Dery JP, Cornel JH, Thomas GS, et al. Kassimis G, Davlouros P, Fourtounas C, Goumenos D.
Effects of vorapaxar on platelet reactivity and biomarker expression Antiplatelet effects of prasugrel vs double clopidogrel in patients
in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes. The TRACER in haemodialysis and with high on-treatment platelet reactivity.
Pharmacodynamic Substudy. J Thromb Haemostat. 2014 May J Thromb Haemost. 2011;9(12):2379–2385. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-
5;111(5):883–891. doi: 10.1160/TH13-07-0624. 7836.2011.04531.x.
41. Parker WA, Storey RF. Antithrombotic therapy for patients with 59. Price MJ, Berger PB, Teirstein PS, Tanguay JF, Angiolillo DJ,
chronic coronary syndromes. Heart. 2021 June;107(11):925–933. Spriggs D, Puri S, Robbins M, Garratt KN, Bertrand OF, et al.
doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2020-316914. Standard-vs high dose clopidogrel based on platelet function after
42. Morrow DA, Braunwald E, Bonaca MP; Ameriso SF for the percutaneous coronary intervention. The GRAVITAS randomised
TRA2P-TIMI 50 Steering committee and investigators. Vorapaxar trial. JAMA. 2011; 305(11):1097–1105. doi: 10.1001/jama.2011.
in the secondary prevention of atherothrombotic evens. N Engl 290.
J Med. 2012;366(15):1404–1413. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1200933. 60. Sibbing D, Aradi D, Jacobshagen C, Gross L, Trenk D, Geisler T,
43. Storey RF. Biology and pharmacology of the platelet P2Y12 Orban M, Hadamitzky M, Merkley B, Kiss RG, et al. Guided
receptor. Curr Pharma Des. 2006; 12(10). 1255–1259. doi: 10. de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment in patients with acute coron
2174/138161206776361318. ary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention
44. Antithrombotic trialists collaboration. Collaborative meta-analysis (TROPICAL-ACS): a randomised, open-label, multicentre trial.
of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy for prevention of death, Lancet. 2017;390(10104):1747–1757. doi: 10.1016/S0140-
myocardial infarction, and stroke in high risk patients. BMJ. 6736(17)32155-4.
2002;324(7329):71–86. doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7329.71. 61. Muller C, Caillard S, Jesel L, Ghannudi SE, Ohlmann P,
45. Patrono C, Coller B, Fitzgerald G, Hirsh J, Roth G. Platelet-active Sauleau E, Hannedouche T, Gachet C, Moulin B, Morel O.
drugs: the relationship among dose, effectiveness and side effects: Association of estimated GFR with platelet inhibition in patients
the seventh ACCP conference on antithrombotic and thrombolytic treated with clopidogrel. Am J Kidney Disease. 2012;59
therapy. Chest. 2004;126(3):234S–264S. doi: 10.1378/chest.126.3_ (6):777–785. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2011.12.027.
suppl.234S. 62. Teng R, Muldowney S, Zhao Y, Berg JK, Lu J, Khan ND.
46. Parker WAE, Storey RF. Aspirin dosing for atherosclerotic cardio Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of ticagrelor in subjects
vascular disease: should we be more ADAPTABLE?. Cardiovasc on hemodialysis and subjects with normal renal function. Eur
Res. 2021;111(10):e123–125 [clinical commentaries]. doi: 10.1093/ J Pharmacol. 2018;74(9):1141–1148. doi: 10.1007/s00228-018-
cvr/cvab251. 2484-7.
63. Kamada T, Iwasaki M, Konishi A, Shinke T, Okamoto H, 80. Best PJ, Steinhubl SR, Berger PB, Dasgupta A, Brennan DM,
Hayashi T, Hirata K. A pharmacodynamics comparison of prasu Szczech LA, Califf RM, Topol EJ. The efficacy and safety of
grel and clopidogrel in patients undergoing hemodialysis. Heart short- and long-term dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with mild
Vessels. 2019;34(6):883–887. doi: 10.1007/s00380-018-1313-3. or moderate chronic kidney disease: results from the clopidogrel for
64. Grinstein J, Cannon CP. Aspirin resistance: current status and role the reduction of events during observation (CREDO) Trial. Am
of tailored therapy. Clin Cardiol. 2012; 35(11):673–681. doi: 10. Heart J. 2008;155(4):687–693. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2007.10.046.
1002/clc.22031. 81. Roe MT, Armstrong PW, Fox KA, White HD, Prabhakaran D,
65. Thomas MR, Morton AC, Hossain R, Chen B, Luo L, Shahari NN, Goodman SG, Cornel JH, Bhatt DL, Clemmernsen P, Martinez F,
Hua P, Beniston RG, Judge HM, Storey RF. Morphine delays the et al. Prasugrel versus clopidogrel for acute coronary syndromes
onset of action of prasugrel in patients with prior history of without revascularisation. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(14):1297–1309.
ST-elevation myocardial infarction. J Thromb Haemostat. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1205512.
2016;116(07):96–102. doi: 10.1160/TH16-02-0102. 82. Wöhrle J, Seeger J, Lahu S, Mayer K, Bernlochner I, Gewalt S,
66. Judge HM, Buckland RJ, Sugidachi A, Jakubowski JA, Storey RF. Menichelli M, Witzenbichler B, Hochholzer W, Sibbing D, et al.
The active metabolite of prasugrel effectively blocks the platelet Ticagrelor or prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome in
P2Y12 receptor and inhibits procoagulant and pro-inflammatory relation to estimated glomerular filtration rate. JACC Cardiovasc
platelet responses. Platelets. 2008 Mar;19(2):125–133. doi: 10. Interv. 2021 Sept 13;14(17):1857–1866. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.06.
1080/09537100701694144. 028. Epub 2021 Aug 23.
67. Gurbel PA, Bliden KP, Butler K, Tantry US, Gesheff T, Wei C, 83. Covic A, Genovesi S, Rossignol P, Kalra P, Oritz A, Banach M,
Teng R, Antonino MJ, Patil SB, Karunakaran A, et al. Burlacu A. Practical issues in clinical scenarios involving CKD
Randomized double-blind assessment of the ONSET and patients requiring antithrombotic therapy in light of the 2017 ESC
OFFSET of the antiplatelet effects of ticagrelor versus clopido guideline recommendations. BMC Med. 2018;16(1):158. doi: 10.
grel in patients with stable coronary artery disease: the ONSET/ 1186/s12916-018-1145-0.
OFFSET study. Circulation. 2009 Dec 22;120(25):2577–2585. 84. Valgimigli M, Bueno H, Byrne RA, Collet JP, Costa F, Jeppsson A,
doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.912550. Juni P, Kastrati A, Kolh P, Mauri L, et al. 2017 ESC focused update
68. Sanderson NC, Parker WAE, Storey RF. Ticagrelor: clinical devel on dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease developed in
opment and future potential. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2021 June 30;22 collaboration with EACTS: the task force for dual antiplatelet ther
(2):373–394. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2202044. apy in coronary artery disease of the European Society of
69. Orme R, Parker W, Thomas M, Judge H, Baster K, Sumaya W, Cardiology (ESC) and of the European Association for
Morgan KP, Wheeldon M, Hall IR, Iqbal J, et al. Study of two dose Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J. 2018;39
regimens of ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel in patients under (3):213–260. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx419.
going percutaneous coronary intervention for stable coronary artery 85. Costa F, van Klaveren D, James S, Heg D, Raber L, Feres F,
disease. Circulation. 2018;138(13):1290–1300. doi: 10.1161/ Pilgrim TR, Hong MK, Kim HS, Colombo A, et al. Derivation
CIRCULATIONAHA.118.034790. and validation of the predicting bleeding complications in patients
70. Claassens DMF, Vos GJA, Bergmeijer TO, Hermanides RS, van’t undergoing stent implantation and subsequent dual antiplatelet ther
Hof AWJ, van der Harst P, Barbato E, Morisco C, Tjon Joe apy (PRECISE-DAPT) score: a pooled analysis of individual-patient
Gin RM, Asselbergs FW, et al. A genotype-guided strategy for datasets from clinical trials. Lancet. 2017 Mar 11;389
oral P2Y12 inhibitors in primary PCI. N Eng J Med. 2019;381 (10073):1025–1034 .10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30397-5.
(17):1621–1631. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1907096. 86. Matssushita K, Jassal SK, Sang Y, Ballew SH, Grams ME,
71. Choi SY, Kim MH. Comparison factors affecting platelet reactivity Surapaneni A, Arnlov J, Bansal N, Bozic M, Brenner H, et al.
in various platelet function tests. Platelets. 2019;30(5):631–636. doi: Incorporating kidney disease measures into cardiovascular risk pre
10.1080/09537104.2018.1499887. diction: development and validation in 9 million adults from 72
72. Guo LZ, Kim MH, Kim TH, Park JS, Jin E, Shim XH, Choi SY, datasets. J E Clin Med. 2020; 27(100552):2589–5370. doi: 10.
Serebruany VL. Comparison of three tests to distinguish platelet 1016/j.eclinm.2020.100552.
reactivity in patients with renal impairment during dual antiplatelet 87. Mosenzon O, Wiviott SD, Heerspink HJL, Dwyer JP, Cahn A,
therapy. Nephron. 2016;132(3):191–197. doi: 10.1159/000444027. Goodrich EL, Rozenberg A, Schechter M, Yanuv I, Murphy SA,
73. Ocak G, Rookmaaker MB, Algra A, Borst GJ, Doevendans PA, et al. The effect of dapagliflozin on albuminuria in DECLARE-TIMI
Kappelle LJ, Verhaar MC; Visseren FL for the SMART study 58. Diabetes Care. 2021;44(8):1805–1815. doi: 10.2337/dc21-0076.
group. Chronic kidney disease and bleeding risk in patients at high 88. Apple FS, Murakami MM, Pearce LA, Herzswog CA. Predictive
cardiovascular risk: a cohort study. J Thromb Haemostat. 2017;16 value of cardiac troponin I and T for subsequent death in end-stage
(1):65–73. doi: 10.1111/jth.13904. renal disease. Circulation. 2002;106(23):2941–2945. doi: 10.1161/
74. Ocak G, Ramspek C, Rookmaamer MB, Blankestijn PJ, 01.CIR.0000041254.30637.34.
Verhaar MC, Bos WJW, Dekker FW, Diepen M. Performance of 89. Kalaji FR, Albitar S. Predictive value of cardiac troponin T and I in
bleeding risk scores in dialysis patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant. haemodialysis patients. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl. 2012;23
2019;34(7):1223–1231. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfy387. (5):939045. doi: 10.4103/1319-2442.100868.
75. Kuo CC, Kuo HW, Lee IM, Lee CT, Yang CY. The risk of upper 90. Chen T, Hassan HC, Qian P, Vu M, Makris A. High-sensitivity
gastrointestinal bleeding in patients treated with haemodialysis: a troponin T and C-reactive protein have different prognostic values in
population-based cohort study. BMC Nephrol. 2013;14 hemo- and peritoneal dialysis populations: a cohort study. J Am
(15):1471–2369. doi: 10.1186/1471-2369-14-15. Heart Assoc. 2018;7(5):e007876. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.117.007876.
76. Liang CC, Wang SM, Kuo HL, Chang CT, Liu JH, Lin HH, 91. de Filippi C, Wasserman S, Rosanio S, Tiblier E, Sperger H,
Wang IK, Yang YF, Lu YJ, Chou CY, et al. Upper gastrointestinal Tocchi M, Christenson R, Uretsky B, Smiley M, Gold J, et al.
bleeding in patients with CKD. CJASN. 2014;9(8):1354–1359. doi: Cardiac troponin T and C-reactive protein for predicting prognosis,
10.2215/CJN.09260913. coronary atherosclerosis, and cardiomyopathy in patients under
77. Ahmed S, Gibson M, Cannon CP, Murphy S, Sabatine MS. Impact going long-term haemodialysis. JAMA. 2003; 290(3):353–359.
of reduced glomerular filtration rate on outcomes in patients with doi: 10.1001/jama.290.3.353.
ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing fibrinolysis: 92. Lee C, Park KH, Joo YS, Nam KH, Chang T, Kang EW, Lee J,
a CLARITY-TIMI 28 analysis. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2011;31 Oh YK, Jung JY, Ahn C, et al. Low high-sensitivity c-reactive
(4):493–500. doi: 10.1007/s11239-011-0566-9. protein level in Korean patients with chronic kidney disease and
78. Bhatt D, Fox K, Hacke W, Berger P, Henry R; et al for the its predictive significance for cardiovascular events, mortality, and
CHARISMA investigators. Clopidogrel and Aspirin versus Aspirin adverse kidney outcomes: results from KNOW-CKD. J Am Heart
alone for the prevention of atherosclerotic events. N Eng J Med. Assoc. 2020;9(21):e017980. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.120.017980.
2006;354(16):1706–1717. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa060989. 93. Hagström E, James SK, Bertilsson M, Becker RC, Himmelmann A,
79. Wiviott SD, Braunwald E, McCabe C, Montalescot G, Ruzyll W, Husted S, Katus HA, Steg PG, Storey RF, Siegbahn A, et al. Growth
Gottlieb S, Neumann FJ, Ardissino D, De Servi S, Murphy SA, differentiation factor-15 level predicts major bleeding and cardio
et al. Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary vascular events in patients with acute coronary syndromes: results
syndromes. N Eng J Med. 2007;357(20):2001–2015. doi: 10.1056/ from the PLATO study. Eur Heart J. 2016 Apr 21;37
NEJMoa0706482. (16):1325–1333. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv491.

HDA y Antiplaquetarios

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

HDA y Antiplaquetarios

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

HDA y Antiplaquetarios

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Platelets

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/iplt20

Treatment inequity in antiplatelet therapy for

Frances L. Varian, William A. E. Parker, James Fotheringham & Robert F.

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09537104.2022.2154330

© 2022 The Author(s). Published with Published online: 16 Dec 2022.

Submit your article to this journal Article views: 1702

View related articles View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Platelets, 2023; 34(1): 2154330

Treatment inequity in antiplatelet therapy for ischaemic heart disease in

Plain Language Summary

Correspondence: Robert F. Storey, Department of Infection, Immunity

Introduction Aims and objectives

prasugrel is seen at 1 h compared to clopidogrel where maximum

Table III. (Continued).

Current evidence in advanced CKD Opportunities for future research

● Appropriate duration and timing of dose-adjustments in DAPT post-PCI in patients with

You might also like