ReviewAmerican journal of translational research2019
Monitoring of biological response to clopidogrel after treatment for non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack.
Review in American journal of translational research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Importance of Platelets Response during Antiplatelet Treatment after Ischemic Stroke-Between Benefit and Risk: A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Multifactorial Background for a Low Biological Response to Antiplatelet Agents Used in Stroke Prevention.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeBiological response to clopidogrel prescribed after a non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) has been little studied. The aim of our study (AAPIX) was to assess this response and investigate the agreement between different biological assays in revealing poor responders.
methodsPatients hospitalized following a non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) and prescribed clopidogrel were consecutively included from September 2013 to November 2015 in the Stroke Center of Saint-Etienne Hospital. Blood was drawn after 5 to 8 days of standard-dose clopidogrel. Light transmission aggregometry (LTA) and flow cytometric assays, using vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein [VASP] and CD62P, were accomplished for all patients. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) was performed for a poor clopidogrel-responder and for a patient with discordant platelet assay results (platelet reactivity index (PRI) >50% and maximum platelet aggregation <70%), after activation with adenosine diphosphate (ADP) 10 µM.
results72 patients were included. According to LTA, VASP assay and CD62P test results, 65%, 71% and 0% of patients, respectively, had a low response to clopidogrel, indicating poor agreement between these assays. Images of ADP-activated platelet samples from a patient manifesting a low response to clopidogrel and from a patient with discordant platelet assay results showed an ultrastructural pattern typical of activation and a state of slight activation, respectively.
conclusionsPlatelet function results obtained using different assays for patients having experienced a non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke or TIA were discordant. Transmission electron microscopy could be useful in certain clinical contexts when platelet function assay results disagree.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31632514PMC6789282W2984775251What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.