CYP2C19 genotype plus platelet reactivity-guided antiplatelet therapy in acute coronary syndrome patients: a decision analysis

Objectives We examined the cost-effectiveness of CYP2C19 genotype plus platelet reactivity-guided antiplatelet therapy (PG-PRT) from the perspective of US healthcare providers. Methods A decision-analytic model was used to simulate life-long medical costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of three antiplatelet strategies in a hypothetical cohort of 60-year-old patients with acute coronary syndrome after a percutaneous coronary intervention: (a) universal clopidogrel (75 mg daily), (b) universal alternative antiplatelet therapy (prasugrel or ticagrelor), and (c) all PG-PRT patients were genotyped. Noncarriers of the CYP2C19 loss-of-function (LOF) allele received clopidogrel 75 mg daily. CYP2C19 LOF allele(s) carriers who were poor metabolizers received prasugrel or ticagrelor. CYP2C19 LOF allele(s) carriers who were intermediate metabolizers (IM) received high-dose clopidogrel (225 mg daily) and were tested for high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR). IM patients with HTPR were switched to prasugrel or ticagrelor. Model inputs were derived from the literature. Results In base-case analysis, PG-PRT was the least costly (USD 71 887) strategy with highest QALYs gained (7.886 QALYs). Sensitivity analyses found universal clopidogrel to be the preferred strategy if the prevalence of the CYP2C19 LOF allele was less than 2.6% or the incidence of HTPR in IM patients was greater than 82.8%. In 10 000 Monte Carlo simulations, PG-PRT was less costly than universal clopidogrel by USD 91 [95% confidence interval (CI) 83–99; P=0.0499], with higher QALYs by 0.0257 (95% CI: 0.0256–0.0258; P<0.001). Compared with universal alternative antiplatelet therapy, PG-PRT was less costly by USD 2208 (95% CI: 2195–2221; P<0.001) and gained 0.0085 QALYs (95% CI: 0.0083–0.0087; P=0.0260). Conclusion PG-PRT seems to be cost-saving and effective for guiding selection of antiplatelet therapy in acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

[1]  Peter L Duffy,et al.  Sex differences in the effect of diabetes mellitus on platelet reactivity and coronary thrombosis: From the Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy with Drug-Eluting Stents (ADAPT-DES) study. , 2017, International journal of cardiology.

[2]  M. Jiang,et al.  Review of pharmacoeconomic evaluation of genotype-guided antiplatelet therapy , 2015, Expert opinion on pharmacotherapy.

[3]  M. Wiese,et al.  CYP2C19 Genotype Has a Greater Effect on Adverse Cardiovascular Outcomes Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and in Asian Populations Treated With Clopidogrel: A Meta-Analysis , 2014, Circulation. Cardiovascular genetics.

[4]  J. Mega,et al.  Variability of individual platelet reactivity over time in patients treated with clopidogrel: insights from the ELEVATE-TIMI 56 trial. , 2014, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[5]  Jin-qing Yuan,et al.  Impact of new oral or intravenous P2Y12 inhibitors and clopidogrel on major ischemic and bleeding events in patients with coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. , 2014, Atherosclerosis.

[6]  D. Owens,et al.  Cost-Effectiveness of Genotype-Guided and Dual Antiplatelet Therapies in Acute Coronary Syndrome , 2014, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[7]  Gary S. Mintz,et al.  Relationship Between Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance and Clinical Outcomes After Drug-Eluting Stents: The Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents (ADAPT-DES) Study , 2014, Circulation.

[8]  P. Merlini,et al.  Genetic and nongenetic factors influencing the response to clopidogrel , 2013, Journal of cardiovascular medicine.

[9]  Peter L Duffy,et al.  Relationship Between Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance and Clinical Outcomes After Drug-Eluting Stents: The ADAPT-DES Study , 2013 .

[10]  D. Sibbing,et al.  A model-based analysis of the clinical and economic impact of personalising P2Y12-receptor inhibition with platelet function testing in acute coronary syndrome patients , 2013, Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

[11]  C. Coleman,et al.  Universal versus platelet reactivity assay-driven use of P2Y12 inhibitors in acute coronary syndrome patients , 2013, Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

[12]  Jérôme Hugues,et al.  Model‐Based Analysis , 2013 .

[13]  J. Mega,et al.  Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Guidelines for CYP2C19 Genotype and Clopidogrel Therapy: 2013 Update , 2013, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[14]  M. Price,et al.  Efficacy and safety of intensified antiplatelet therapy on the basis of platelet reactivity testing in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention: systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2013, International journal of cardiology.

[15]  Peter L Duffy,et al.  Platelet reactivity and clinical outcomes after coronary artery implantation of drug-eluting stents (ADAPT-DES): a prospective multicentre registry study , 2013, The Lancet.

[16]  C. Combescure,et al.  Tailored Thienopyridine Therapy: No Urgency for CYP2C19 Genotyping , 2013, Journal of the American Heart Association.

[17]  J. Hochman,et al.  Genetic testing in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a cost‐effectiveness analysis , 2013, Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH.

[18]  E. Vicaut,et al.  Bedside monitoring to adjust antiplatelet therapy for coronary stenting. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[19]  M. Pencina,et al.  Dosing clopidogrel based on CYP2C19 genotype and the effect on platelet reactivity in patients with stable cardiovascular disease. , 2011, JAMA.

[20]  Betti Giusti,et al.  High residual platelet reactivity after clopidogrel loading and long-term cardiovascular events among patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing PCI. , 2011, JAMA.

[21]  J. T. ten Berg,et al.  Impact of CYP2C19 variant genotypes on clinical efficacy of antiplatelet treatment with clopidogrel: systematic review and meta-analysis , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[22]  J. T. ten Berg,et al.  High on-treatment platelet reactivity to both aspirin and clopidogrel is associated with the highest risk of adverse events following percutaneous coronary intervention , 2011, Heart.

[23]  N. Schork,et al.  Standard- vs high-dose clopidogrel based on platelet function testing after percutaneous coronary intervention: the GRAVITAS randomized trial. , 2011, JAMA.

[24]  E. Antman,et al.  Reduced-function CYP2C19 genotype and risk of adverse clinical outcomes among patients treated with clopidogrel predominantly for PCI: a meta-analysis. , 2010, JAMA.

[25]  B. J. Barratt,et al.  Effect of CYP2C19 and ABCB1 single nucleotide polymorphisms on outcomes of treatment with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel for acute coronary syndromes: a genetic substudy of the PLATO trial , 2010, The Lancet.

[26]  P. Teirstein,et al.  Pilot study of the antiplatelet effect of increased clopidogrel maintenance dosing and its relationship to CYP2C19 genotype in patients with high on-treatment reactivity. , 2010, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[27]  Claes Held,et al.  Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[28]  E. Antman,et al.  Cytochrome p-450 polymorphisms and response to clopidogrel. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  P. Morange,et al.  Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors improve outcome after coronary stenting in clopidogrel nonresponders: a prospective, randomized study. , 2008, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[30]  K. Kim,et al.  The Effect of CYP2C19 Polymorphism on the Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Clopidogrel: A Possible Mechanism for Clopidogrel Resistance , 2008, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[31]  J. Menzin,et al.  One-year costs of ischemic heart disease among patients with acute coronary syndromes: findings from a multi-employer claims database* , 2008 .

[32]  E. Antman,et al.  Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[33]  A. Bura,et al.  Cytochrome P450 2C19 loss-of-function polymorphism is a major determinant of clopidogrel responsiveness in healthy subjects. , 2006, Blood.

[34]  Patrick W. Sullivan,et al.  Preference-Based EQ-5D Index Scores for Chronic Conditions in the United States , 2006, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[35]  M Sculpher,et al.  Clopidogrel used in combination with aspirin compared with aspirin alone in the treatment of non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndromes: a systematic review and economic evaluation. , 2004, Health technology assessment.

[36]  S. Mason,et al.  EVALUATE hysterectomy trial: a multicentre randomised trial comparing abdominal, vaginal and laparoscopic methods of hysterectomy. , 2004, Health technology assessment.

[37]  M. Weinstein,et al.  Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. , 1996, JAMA.