Key result
Concomitant calcium channel blockers do not decrease clopidogrel efficacy for reducing death, MI, or stroke.
Why the study?
Does concomitant use of calcium channel blockers reduce the efficacy of clopidogrel in preventing death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in patients undergoing planned PCI?
RCT (n=2,116)
randomly assigned
Does concomitant use of calcium channel blockers reduce the efficacy of clopidogrel in preventing death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in patients undergoing planned PCI?
Concomitant use of calcium channel blockers does not decrease the clinical efficacy of clopidogrel in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
No clopidogrel efficacy loss with concomitant CCBs post-PCI; challenges prior reports yet hypothesis-generating and should not change practice.
BACKGROUND: Clopidogrel is an inactive prodrug; it is converted to its active metabolite through the cytochrome P450 (CYP3A4) pathway, which also metabolizes calcium channel blockers (CCBs). Several studies have reported that CCBs reduce the ability of clopidogrel to inhibit platelet aggregability; one suggested that CCBs reduce the efficacy of clopidogrel. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a post hoc analysis of the Clopidogrel for the Reduction of Events During Observation (CREDO) study to compare the treatment effect of clopidogrel in patients on CCBs versus not on CCBs. In CREDO, 2116 patients were randomly assigned to pretreatment with 300 mg clopidogrel 3-24 hours before a planned percutaneous coronary intervention followed by 1 year of 75 mg/d clopidogrel, versus 75 mg clopidogrel at the time of the procedure and continued for 28 days only. The primary end points were a combined end point of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke at 28 days and 1 year. Among the 580 patients (27%) on CCBs at enrollment, at 28 days, the combined end point was reached in 17 patients (6%) on clopidogrel versus 28 (9%) on placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39-1.29). At 1 year, the combined end point was reached in 27 patients (10%) on clopidogrel versus 46 (15%) on placebo (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.42-1.09). The treatment effect of clopidogrel was similar in patients not on CCBs at 1 year (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.56-1.09). After adjustment for differences between patients on and not on CCB, there was still no evidence of an interaction between clopidogrel treatment and CCB (HR for patients not on CCBs, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.62-1.23; HR for patients on CCBs, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.45-1.21). CONCLUSIONS: In CREDO, there was no evidence that CCBs decrease the efficacy of clopidogrel.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Good et al. (2012) conducted an RCT in planned percutaneous coronary intervention (n=2,116). Clopidogrel vs. 75 mg clopidogrel at the time of the procedure and continued for 28 days only (placebo thereafter) was evaluated on Combined end point of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke at 1 year (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.42-1.09). Concomitant use of calcium channel blockers did not decrease the efficacy of clopidogrel for reducing death, MI, or stroke at 1 year (adjusted HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.45-1.21).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: