Journal of Cardiology and Catheterization

Original Research

PON-1 Q192R (rs662) Gene Polymorphism and the Risk of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Clopidogrel-Treated Patients with Coronary Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Ling-Yun Zhou1, Long Shen2, Xiao-Cong Zuo1 and Zhi-Chun Gu3,4*

1Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology Research Institute, Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, China

2Department of Cardiology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, China

3Department of Pharmacy, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, China

4School of Pharmacy, Shanghai Jiaotong University, China

Received: 20 August 2018

Accepted: 15 September 2018

Version of Record Online: 27 September 2018

Citation

Zhou L-Y, Shen L, Zuo X-C, Gu Z-C (2018) PON-1 Q192R (rs662) Gene Polymorphism and The Risk of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Clopidogrel-Treated Patients with Coronary Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Cardiol Catheter 2018(1): 01-15.

Correspondence should be addressed to

Zhi-Chun Gu, China

E-mail: guzhichun213@163.com

DOI: 10.33513/CACA/1801-01


Abstract

Aims: To determine the association between the PON1 Q192R (rs662) gene polymorphism and the risk of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE), especially the risk of Stent Thrombosis (ST), in clopidogrel-treated patients with Coronary Heart Disease (CHD).

Methods: We searched academic databases, book chapters and proceedings of international meetings for clinical trials investigating the relationship between the PON1 Q192R (rs662) gene polymorphism and the clinical outcome of CHD patients receiving clopidogrel as antiplatelet treatment. The pooled Odds Ratios (ORs) with 95% Confidence Interval (CI) were calculated using the STATA 12.0 software with random-effects model.

Results: We identified 18 clinical trials with a total number of 16801 CHD patients, seven using a case-control design (n=3098) and eleven a prospective cohort design (n=13703). Meta-analysis revealed that the PON1 Q192R (rs662) genetic polymorphism was not associated with an increased risk of MACE [Q allele vs. R allele: 1.10 (0.91-1.34), QQ vs. QR+RR: 1.08 (0.83-1.40), QQ+QR vs. RR: 1.19 (0.88-1.60), QQ vs. RR: 1.22 (0.83-1.79), QQ vs. QR: 1.05 (0.82-1.34), QQ+RR vs. QR: 0.98 (0.79-1.22)] in CHD patients treated with clopidogrel. However, when difference in ethnicity was taken into account, significant influence of PON1 Q192R (rs662) genetic polymorphism on the risk of ST was observed in Caucasus patients under PON1 Q192R (rs662) dominant [QQ vs. QR+RR: 1.69 (1.05-2.73), QQ vs. QR: 1.55 (1.06-2.28)], but not in Asians.

Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that the PON1 Q192R (rs662) polymorphism has no major impact on the risk of MACE. However, PON1 192 QQ genotype may be a determinant of high risk of ST in Caucasus CHD patients receiving clopidogrel, but not in Asians.

Keywords: Clopidogrel; Coronary Heart Disease; Gene Polymorphism; Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events; Stent Thrombosis; PON1

Abbreviations

MACE : Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events
ST : Stent Thrombosis
CHD : Coronary Heart Disease
ORs : Odds Ratios
CI : Confidence Interval
CYP450 : Cytochrome P450
PON1 : Paraoxonase-1
PCI : Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
MI : Myocardial Infarction
NOS : Newcastle-Ottawa Scale

Introduction

Clopidogrel is an irreversible inhibitor of the adenosine diphosphate P2Y12 receptor and can prevent recurrent ischemic events in CHD patients [1]. Although novel inhibitors of the platelet P2Y12 receptor have more rapid, potent, and consistent inhibitory effect on platelets compared with clopidogrel, the reduction in ischemic complications with prasugrel or ticagrelor treatment is at the expense of excess major bleeding [2,3]. Furthermore, cost-effectiveness analyses reveal that, in the developing countries, such as China, patients without drug plans cannot afford the higher cost of novel agents and might less likely to be compliant [4]. Thus, clopidogrel remains a better choice for those with increased bleeding risk or in developing countries. However, about 4~30% of the patients treated with clopidogrel display no or a low anti-platelet response [5,6], then inducing an increased risk of recurrent ischemic cardiovascular events [7].

The mechanisms of this phenomenon are not fully elucidated. One source of the variability may be the metabolism of clopidogrel, which is an inactive prodrug that requires enzymatic bioactivation into its active thiol metabolite before interacting with the P2Y12 receptor on blood platelets. Clopidogrel bioactivation is a two-step process in which the Cytochrome P450 (CYP450) system plays a major role [8]. As a result, mutations in the genes for these CYP450 enzymes may affect clopidogrel responsiveness. Among these genes, CYP2C19 is of great concern. Previous studies have revealed that mutation of CYP2C19 gene was associated with the different platelet response to clopidogrel in CHD patients [9,10]. However, recent researches elucidated that less than 10% of the observed variability of clopidogrel responsiveness in cardiovascular patients could be explained by CYP2C19 genotype polymorphism [11].

Paraoxonase-1 (PON1) was reported to be strongly involved in clopidogrel bioactivation [12]. Moreover, a common missense variant in PON1 Q192R (rs662) was a major determinant of clopidogrel efficacy. Several studies have been performed to evaluate the association between PON1 Q192R (rs662) gene polymorphism and the risk of MACE in CHD patients treated with clopidogrel [13-17]. The results from Asians demonstrated that PON1 192Q allele is an independent predictor of worse cardiovascular outcome in patients receiving drug-eluting stents [15]. However, a rebuttal response by Dansette and Camps has stated that the antithrombotic activity of clopidogrel is mainly due to one of its cis-thiolmetabolites whose formation is major dependent on CYP enzymes and only to a minor extent on esterases such as PON1 [16,17]. In addition, above associations were also challenged by a meta-analysis of 11 trials, published up to July 2012, which suggested that PON1 Q192R polymorphism has no major impact on the risk of MACE in Western population [18].

However, it is worth noting that a high number of clinical studies, especially Asian population, have finished in order to test the determinate effect of the PON1 Q192R in clopidogrel-treated patients recently [15,19-24]. Thus, it is necessary to conduct an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the eligible studies from different ethnic populations to determine the association between PON1 Q192R (rs662) gene polymorphism and risk of MACE, especially the risk of ST, in patients with CHD who use clopidogrel.

Materials and Methods

Literature search

Ethical approval and patient consent were not necessary as the present study was a meta-analysis. We carried out a comprehensive search with no language limitations. The search was based on electronic academic databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library Database, Wanfang database, CNKI database and VIP database). We also searched for book chapters, gray literature and unpublished work, such as conference papers, working papers, and reports published by research institutes or government organizations. The search was last updated on 5 July 2018. Key terms used for the systematic search were (‘PON1’ or ‘PON-1’ or ‘paraoxonase 1’ or ‘paraoxonase-1’) and ‘clopidogrel’. Articles were selected on the basis of the abstract before examining the full text. In addition, the reference lists of selected articles were hand-searched to identify additional relevant reports. Additionally, we wrote to authors asking for details of other published and unpublished studies. The reviewers were not blinded to the journal, authors or institution of the publications, as this has been shown to be unnecessary.

Inclusion criteria

The following criteria were used to determine eligibility for including studies: (1) the study must be a clinical study; (2) the study must address the relationship between the PON1 Q192R (rs662) gene polymorphism and the clinical outcome of patients receiving clopidogrel as antiplatelet treatment; (3) all patients must have conformed to the diagnostic criteria of CHD; (4) the study must provide sufficient information about the frequencies of the PON1 Q192R (rs662) gene polymorphism. Article that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded. When authors published several studies using the same subjects, either the most recent or the largest sample size publication was included [15].

Data extraction

To assess the specificity and characteristics of the identified studies, we abstracted information from each report on the surname of first author, year of publication, country of origin, ethnicity, the total sample size, the study design, undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) or not, the type of clinical endpoint, and study population characteristics (age, sex, vascular risk factors, patients with acute events or stable ischemic disease, type of stent, and 192Q allele frequency).

Major clinical outcome was defined in terms of MACE, including the occurrence of death, non-fatal Myocardial Infarction (MI), ST, or stroke, and was expressed as the number of patients concerned in each genotype group. Secondary clinical outcome was ST, which was defined from the definition of The Academic Research Consortium [25]. These numbers were extracted from the articles to prepare 2 × 2 tables.

Two authors each independently implemented the search strategy, selected the studies and recorded the abstracted data. In cases of conflicting evaluations, disagreements were resolved through discussion and careful re-examination of the full text by the authors.

Assessment of study quality

Methodological quality was evaluated separately by two authors using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) criteria [26]. The NOS criteria is based on three aspects: (1) subject selection: 0-4; (2) comparability of subject: 0-2; (3) clinical outcome: 0-3. NOS scores range from 0 to 9 with scores ≥7 indicating good quality [27].

Statistical analysis

Meta-analysis was performed using the STATA statistical software (version 12.0, Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA). Descriptive data on the patients were recorded for each study as the mean and standard deviation or percentage. The OR for ischemic events associated with the PON1 Q192R (rs662) genotype was assessed in each study, along with its 95% CI. The pooled OR was computed by using the method of the inverse of the variance with random-effects model, and the hypothesis OR =1 was tested [28]. Heterogeneity among studies was estimated with the Cochran’s Q-statistic and I2 tests. Predefined potential factors of heterogeneity, such as study design, sample size, ethnicity and undergoing PCI or not, were tested by comparing subgroups with random-effects model. Meanwhile, we did further interaction analysis for different subgroup. Meta-regression analysis was also performed to test the influence of stent type. In order to evaluate the influence of single study on the overall estimate, a sensitivity analysis was performed. The potential publication bias was explored for the OR by visual interpretation of the funnel plot, and the asymmetry of the funnel plot was checked with Begg’s test. Assessment of the quality of evidence was generated with the GRADEpro software.

Results

Study selection and characteristics of included studies

The flow of references through the review is shown in figure 1. Initially, our search strategy identified 255 articles. We reviewed the titles and abstracts of all articles and excluded 193 articles. After systematically reviewing the remaining full texts, we excluded another 44 articles. Finally, eighteen clinical studies met our inclusion criteria for qualitative data analysis, with a total of 16801 CHD patients [12-15,19-24,29-35]. Characteristics of subjects are shown in table 1. Overall, four studies were conducted among Asians and fourteen studies among Caucasians. Genotyping was performed using the polymerase chain reaction-ligation detection reaction or TaqMan assay methods. The NOS scores of all included studies were ≥6, meaning that the quality of the included studies were considered to be moderate to high (Table S1).

PON-1-Q192R-rs662-Gene-Polymorphism-and-The-Risk-of-Major-Adverse-Cardiovascular-Events-in-Clopidogrel-Treated-Patients-with-Coronary-Heart-Disease

Figure 1: Flow chart showing the literature selection procedure used in this study.

Source Year Ethnicity n Design Mean age Male (%) Diabetes (%) Clinical setting Type of stent (drug eluting stent, %) Doses Follow-up (months) 192Q allele frequency(%)
Bouman et al. (a) [12] 2011 Caucasians 112 case-control 61.2 (8.5) 79.5 25.9 ST VS NST PCI 40.2 600mg none 67.0%
Bouman et al. (b) [12] 2011 Caucasians 1982 cohort 62.2 (10.2) 71.3 24.3 PCI 30.9 600mg 12 63.9%
Campo et al. [32] 2011 Caucasians 300 cohort 66 (13) 77 23.7 PCI (61%NSTEMI, without STEMI) 71.3 600mg 12 66.7%
Cayla et al. [33] 2011 Caucasians 369 case-control 62.7 (12.2) 80.5 25.2 ST VS NST PCI 51.5 not noted none 66.9%
Delaney et al. [34] 2012 Caucasians 693 case-control 68.3 (11.7) 63.5 34.8 MI and PCI patients 62.8 not noted 12-24 69.0%
Hulot et al. [31] 2011 Caucasians 371 cohort 40.3 (5.5) 84.6 10.5 young post-MI patients NA 300mg/900mg 96 65.2%
Lewis et al. [30] 2011 Caucasian 210 cohort 64.3 (11.4) 59.9 36.6 Non-emergent PCI NA 75mg/300mg/600mg 12 68.1%
Rideg et al. [35] 2011 Caucasians 189 cohort 61.8 (8.4) 61.4 37.6 Non-emergent PCI 68.8 600mg 12 70.9%
Sibbing et al. [29] 2011 Caucasians 1439 case-control 67.6 (10.5) 77.5 29 ST VS NST PCI NA not noted none 79.4%
Simon et al. [14] 2011 Caucasians 1538 cohort 64.4 (13.1) 74.7 29.7 ACS with PCI NA 300mg 12 66.7%
Trenk et al. [13] 2011 Caucasians 760 cohort 66.3 (9.2) 78.3 24.3 PCI NA 600mg 12 70.5%
Chen et al. [19] 2012 Asians 60 case-control 68.5 (10.5) 78.3 35 ST VS NST PCI NA not noted none 34.2%
Quintana et al. [21] 2014 Caucasians 263 case-control 63.5 (9.7) 73.7 62.7 dual antiplatelet 55.1 75mg none 66.0%
Pare et al. [20] 2012 Caucasians 5020 cohort 63.8 (11) 59 21.1 ACS without STEMI NA 75mg none 69.6%
Park et al. [15] 2013 Asians 1336 cohort 64 (9) 68 32.2 PCI (57.9%SA, 42.1% ACS) 100 300mg/600mg 12 37.2%
Verschuren et al. [23] 2012 Caucasians 1327 cohort 65.5 (9.5) 76.1 10.8 PCI (STEMI) 63.5 600mg/75mg 12 70.2%
Tang et al. [22] 2013 Asians 670 cohort 58.9 (11.2) 76.9 31 PCI 95.8 300mg/75mg 12 35.4%
Xie et al. [24] 2014 Asians 162 case-control 65 (10.9) 79 24.69 PCI (CHD) 74.3 300mg/600mg/75mg none 21.0%

Table 1: Characteristics of included studies.

ACS: Acute Coronary Syndrome; CHD: Coronary Heart Disease; MI: Myocardial Infarction; NSTEMI: Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction; STEMI: ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction; SA: Stable Angina; NA: Not Available

Clinical outcome

Thirteen studies (n=14658) assessed the risk of MACE, two in a case-control design (n=956) and eleven in a prospective cohort design (n=13702). Nine studies (n=6520) assessed the risk of ST, five in case-control design (n=2142) and four in prospective cohort design (n=4378).

In terms of MACE, our results indicated that the PON1 Q192R (rs662) gene polymorphism was not correlated with an increased risk for MACE in CHD patients receiving clopidogrel as antiplatelet treatment (Q allele vs. R allele: 1.10 (0.91-1.34), QQ vs. QR+RR: 1.08 (0.83-1.40), QQ+QR vs. RR: 1.19 (0.88-1.60), QQ vs. RR: 1.22 (0.83-1.79), QQ vs. QR: 1.05 (0.82-1.34), QQ+RR vs. QR: 0.98 (0.79-1.22); respectively). Furthermore, subgroup analyses by study design, ethnicity, sample size and undergoing PCI or not demonstrated that the PON1 Q192R (rs662) polymorphism was not correlated with an increased risk of MACE in CHD patients (Table 2 and Figure 2).

PON-1-Q192R-rs662-Gene-Polymorphism-and-The-Risk-of-Major-Adverse-Cardiovascular-Events-in-Clopidogrel-Treated-Patients-with-Coronary-Heart-Disease

Figure 2: Meta-analysis forest plots of the correlations between the PON1 Q192R (rs662) gene polymorphism and MACE: A: Q vs R; B: QQ vs QR+RR; C: QQ+QR vs RR; D: QQ vs RR; E: QQ vs QR; F: QQ+RR vs. QR. The horizontal solid lines mean the Confidence Intervals (CI) of OR in each population. And if the upper limit of OR exceed the top scale, arrow would replace the solid line. The size of solid squares corresponds to the weight of the study in the meta-analysis. The lengths of the hollow diamonds represent the CI of the pooled OR.

  Allele model (Q allele vs R allele)   Dominant model ( QQ vs QR+RR)   Recessive model ( QQ+ QR vs RR)   Homozygous model (QQ vs RR)   Heterozygous model (QQ vs QR)   Over-dominant model (QQ+RR vs QR)  
  OR 95% CI P P* OR 95% CI P P* OR 95% CI P P* OR 95% CI P P* OR 95% CI P P* OR 95% CI P P*
MACE 1.10 0.91-1.34 0.33   1.08 0.83-1.40 0.58   1.19 0.88-1.60 0.25   1.22 0.83-1.79 0.30   1.05 0.82-1.34 0.72   0.98 0.79-1.22 0.86  
Design                                                
Case-control 1.06 0.84-1.33 0.63 0.83 1.05 0.78-1.42 0.75 1.00 1.12 0.71-1.77 0.63 0.80 1.14 0.70-1.83 0.60 0.82 1.02 0.74-1.42 0.89 1.00 1.00 0.73-1.36 0.99 0.81
Cohort 1.10 0.87-1.40 0.43   1.05 0.77-1.45 0.75   1.21 0.83-1.77 0.32   1.24 0.76-2.01 0.40   1.02 0.76-1.38 0.89   0.95 0.73-1.24 0.70  
Ethnicity                                                
Caucasians 1.07 0.87-1.31 0.52 0.66 1.07 0.81-1.41 0.62 0.96 1.17 0.89-1.53 0.26 0.11 1.19 0.82-1.73 0.35 0.26 1.06 0.82-1.39 0.64 0.54 1.05 0.84-1.30 0.68 0.14
Asians 1.42 0.55-3.65 0.47   1.10 0.41-2.95 0.86   2.98 0.20-44.58 0.43   2.40 0.13-44.21 0.56   0.79 0.32-1.94 0.61   0.53 0.19-1.50 0.23  
Procedural                                                
PCI 1.13 0.86-1.48 0.40 0.77 1.06 0.73-1.54 0.78 0.93 1.29 0.83-2.00 0.26 0.67 1.32 0.75-2.33 0.33 0.75 1.00 0.70-1.44 0.99 0.78 0.91 0.66-1.26 0.57 0.50
N-PCI 1.08 0.95-1.23 0.27   1.08 0.91-1.28 0.37   1.14 0.85-1.54 0.37   1.18 0.87-1.60 0.30   1.06 0.88-1.27 0.55   1.03 0.87-1.22 0.75  
Sample size                                                
N>300 1.10 0.88-1.36 0.43 0.81 1.05 0.78-1.40 0.77 0.60 1.20 0.86-1.66 0.28 0.89 1.22 0.80-1.85 0.35 1.00 1.01 0.77-1.33 0.93 0.55 0.95 0.74-1.21 0.66 0.49
N<300 1.18 0.72-1.92 0.51   1.29 0.70-2.40 0.43   1.08 0.31-3.75 0.90   1.22 0.34-4.39 0.76   1.30 0.68-2.48 0.43   1.26 0.67-2.37 0.47  

Table 2: Meta-analysis of the association between PON-1 Q192R polymorphism and MACE.

MACE: Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events; PCI: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; P*: P for interaction

In terms of ST, as shown in table 3 and figure 3, no significant positive correlation was found between the PON1 Q192R (rs662) polymorphism and an increased risk of ST in CHD patients receiving clopidogrel as antiplatelet treatment (Q allele vs. R allele: 1.37 (0.94-1.99), QQ vs. QR+RR: 1.50 (0.97-2.33), QQ+QR vs. RR: 1.44 (CI 0.72-2.88), QQ vs. RR: 1.68 (0.71-3.95), QQ vs. QR: 1.43 (0.99-2.07), QQ+RR vs. QR: 1.25 (0.94-1.66); respectively). However, subgroup analysis by ethnicity demonstrated that the PON1 Q192R (rs662) polymorphism was associated with an increased risk of ST in CHD patients receiving clopidogrel among Caucasus patients with PON1 Q192R (rs662) dominant model, heterozygous model or over-dominant model, but not in Asians (QQ vs. QR+RR: 1.69 (1.05-2.73), QQ vs. QR: 1.55 (1.06-2.28), QQ+RR vs. QR: 1.29 (1.01-1.64); respectively).

  Allele model (Q allele vs R allele)   Dominant model ( QQ vs QR+RR)   Recessive model ( QQ+ QR vs RR)   Homozygous model (QQ vs RR)   Heterozygous model (QQ vs QR)   Over-dominant model (QQ+RR vs QR)  
  OR 95% CI P P* OR 95% CI P P* OR 95% CI P P* OR 95% CI P P* OR 95% CI P P* OR 95% CI P P*
ST 1.37 0.94-1.99 0.11   1.50 0.97-2.33 0.07   1.44 0.72-2.88 0.31   1.68 0.71-3.95 0.23   1.43 0.99-2.07 0.06   1.25 0.94-1.66 0.13  
Design                                                
Case-control 1.30 0.87-1.93 0.20 0.81 1.48 0.93-2.35 0.10 0.93 1.41 0.74-2.69 0.30 0.92 1.77 0.76-4.12 0.19 0.96 1.35 0.93-1.96 0.12 0.98 1.18 0.92-1.52 0.20 0.82
Cohort 1.52 0.58-3.99 0.40   1.39 0.46-4.22 0.56   1.87 0.21-17.05 0.58   2.01 0.19-20.90 0.56   1.37 0.55-3.41 0.50   1.03 0.38-2.82 0.95  
Ethnicity                                                
Caucasians 1.55 1.00-2.43 0.05 0.30 1.69 1.05-2.73 0.03 0.14 1.73 0.69-4.35 0.25 0.51 2.10 0.75-5.91 0.16 0.53 1.55 1.06-2.28 0.02 0.13 1.29 1.01-1.64 0.04 0.30
Asians 0.99 0.48-2.03 0.97   0.73 0.25-2.13 0.57   0.98 0.34-2.83 0.97   0.94 0.17-5.30 0.94   0.68 0.22-2.08 0.50   0.74 0.25-2.21 0.59  
Sample size                                                
N>300 1.43 0.95-2.15 0.09 0.78 1.45 0.93-2.28 0.10 0.89 1.63 0.65-4.10 0.30 0.75 1.78 0.67-4.73 0.24 0.93 1.37 0.95-1.99 0.09 0.97 1.20 0.81-1.77 0.36 0.69
N<300 1.20 0.42-3.47 0.73   1.26 0.28-5.72 0.77   1.22 0.36-4.14 0.75   1.45 0.16-13.21 0.74   1.33 0.37-4.86 0.66   1.39 0.81-2.40 0.23  

Table 3: Meta-analysis of the association between PON-1 Q192R polymorphism and ST. ST: Stent Thrombosis; P*: P for interaction

PON-1-Q192R-rs662-Gene-Polymorphism-and-The-Risk-of-Major-Adverse-Cardiovascular-Events-in-Clopidogrel-Treated-Patients-with-Coronary-Heart-Disease

Figure 3: Meta-analysis forest plots of the correlations between the PON1 Q192R (rs662) gene polymorphism and ST: A: Q vs R; B: QQ vs QR+RR; C: QQ+QR vs RR; D: QQ vs RR; E: QQ vs QR; F: QQ+RR vs. QR. The horizontal solid lines mean the Confidence Intervals (CI) of OR in each population. And if the upper limit of OR exceed the top scale, arrow would replace the solid line. The size of solid squares corresponds to the weight of the study in the meta-analysis. The lengths of the hollow diamonds represent the CI of the pooled OR.

The results of interaction analysis are presented in table 2 and table 3, no differences in treatment effect were detected for MACE and ST. The meta-regression analysis failed to identify the significant impact of stent type on outcomes (Table S2).

 

GRADE

Assessment of the quality of evidence was generated with the GRADE. Then a modified table was made to summarize the findings regarding the endpoints relating to MACE and ST (Table S3).

Sensitivity analyses and publication bias

A sensitivity analysis suggested that no single study significantly influenced the pooled ORs of risk of MACE or ST (Figure S1 and Figure S2). However, most of the statistical heterogeneity was explained by two studies reported in one publication [12]. When each of these studies was removed, I2 fell from 36.5%~62.9% to 11.4%~58.2% for the total group, whereas removal of any of the other studies only marginally affected the level of heterogeneity. When both of these two studies were removed, I2 fell from 36.5%~62.9% to 0%~25.8% for the total group, whereas removal of any of the other studies only marginally affected the level of heterogeneity. No publication bias was detected on funnel plot with Begg’s test (Figure 4 and Figure 5).

PON-1-Q192R-rs662-Gene-Polymorphism-and-The-Risk-of-Major-Adverse-Cardiovascular-Events-in-Clopidogrel-Treated-Patients-with-Coronary-Heart-Disease

Figure 4: Funnel plot of publication biases for the relationships between the PON1 Q192R polymorphism and the risk of MACE: A: Q vs R; B: QQ vs QR+RR; C: QQ+QR vs RR; D: QQ vs RR; E: QQ vs QR; F: QQ+RR vs. QR.

PON-1-Q192R-rs662-Gene-Polymorphism-and-The-Risk-of-Major-Adverse-Cardiovascular-Events-in-Clopidogrel-Treated-Patients-with-Coronary-Heart-Disease

Figure 5: Funnel plot of publication biases for the relationships between the PON1 Q192R polymorphism and the risk of stent thrombosis: A: Q vs R; B: QQ vs QR+RR; C: QQ+QR vs RR; D: QQ vs RR; E: QQ vs QR; F: QQ+RR vs. QR.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis to extensively investigate the association between the PON-1 Q192R (rs662) gene polymorphism and the risk of MACE, especially the risk of ST, both in clopidogrel-treated Caucasus patients and Asian patients with CHD.

Despite widespread use of clopidogrel, large inter-individual variability in clopidogrel response has been reported [5]. To date, most researches have focused on genetic polymorphism of enzymes and transporters involved in clopidogrel metabolic activation [9-12]. Although many CYP450 enzymes have been implicated in the metabolic activation of clopidogrel, CYP2C19, as a major determinant of active thiol metabolite exposure, is generally considered to be the most important. However, recent researches elucidated that less than 10% of the observed variability of clopidogrel responsiveness in cardiovascular patients could be explained by CYP2C19 genotype polymorphism [11].

A new player in clopidogrel pharmacogenetics was recently reported by Bouman et al. [12], who identified PON1 as a potential major determinant of the efficiency of clopidogrel bioactivation and this drug’s clinical efficacy in European patients. In a series of biochemical, clinical and epidemiological studies, PON1 was shown to be the rate-limiting enzyme in clopidogrel metabolic activation [36]. In a case-cohort study of patients who underwent PCI and received clopidogrel, PON1 Q192R (rs662) heterozygotes and 192 QQ homozygotes had reduced plasma PON1 activity, lower plasma concentrations of active thiol metabolite, lower platelet inhibition, and a 4- and 12-fold increased incidence of ST respectively compared with homozygous wild-type 192 RR patients [36].

Despite early excitement about the potential significance of this work, the effect of PON1 on clopidogrel efficacy found in the studies by Bouman et al., [12] and Park et al., [15] has recently been refuted. Subsequently, numerous clinical studies have failed to confirm these results and detailed biochemical studies have suggested that PON1 can metabolize 2-oxo-clopidogrel by hydrolytic opening of the thiolactone ring but this leads to the pharmacologically inactive endo-thiol isome [37]. Hitherto, no clear correlation between PON1-Q192R (rs662) polymorphism and the risk of MACE or ST in CHD patients treated with clopidogrel as antiplatelet treatment has been demonstrated.

The results of our meta-analysis insights from Thirteen studies of 14658 patients do not support an increased risk of MACE of PON1 Q192R (rs662) polymorphism in patients receiving clopidogrel as antiplatelet treatment, independently of the study design (case-control or prospective cohort), ethnicity (Caucasians or Asians), sample size (n≥300 or n<300) and whether undergoing PCI or not. Those results suggest that the PON1 Q192R (rs662) gene polymorphism may not a determinant of MACE in both Caucasian and Asian CHD patients receiving clopidogrel. Our results are in line with the lack of correlation between PON1 activity and P2Y12 receptor inhibition (evaluated with the specific VASP assay) in 538 stable cardiovascular patients as well as with the lack of correlation between PON1 activity and clopidogrel active metabolite or other in vitro assays showing no impact of PON1 inhibition on the production of the clopidogrel active metabolite [38]. The trend towards an association between the PON1 Q192R (rs662) gene polymorphism and MACE observed in our meta-analysis was mainly driven by one study, which accounted for most of the observed heterogeneity [12]. A sensitivity analysis, in which we removed one study at a time, showed that a large part of the statistical heterogeneity was associated with the one study by Bouman et al., [12] whereas heterogeneity was not noticeably affected when the study was removed.

The main reason for the discrepancy between the original work Bouman el al., [12] and most subsequent studies may be that the paper of Bouman et al., used a flawed HPLC/MS method to measure the active thiol metabolite H4 of clopidogrel. However, their method nearly only detects the endo-thiol metabolite which is totally inactive on the P2Y12 receptor [16,17,39-50]. Previous studies, particularly by Dansette et al., [16,37,42-44] have elucidated the metabolic steps from clopidogrel to the active thiol acid in details. The metabolism of clopidogrel undergoes through two different pathways in the liver. Up to 85% of the administered parent drug might be transformed to carboxylic acid derivative of clopidogrel, which is inactive [51]. For many years, because of the very low plasma concentration of the parent drug, the determination of this inactive metabolite was used for studying the pharmacokinetics of clopidogrel [52]. However, the antithrombotic effect of clopidogrel depends mainly on its active thiol metabolite which was bio-transformed through a two-step hepatic pathway involving CYP450 isoenzymes including CYP2C19 and CYP3A4 [53]. There were four diastereoisomers of the thiol metabolites in human body: H1, H2, H3 and H4. Furthermore, vitro studies confirmed that H4 isomer can be considered to be the only active isomer of thiol metabolites [51]. However, only few HPLC-MS/MS assays have been published for determination of derivatized thiol metabolites in human plasma [54-57]. And most of the methods can’t distinguish between the four different isomers. According to the HPLC/MS method reported by Bouman et al., their method could only detect the endo-thiol, but not H4 isomer of clopidogrel. As all the mentioned above, though the paper of Bouman et al., was at the origin of a number of following clinical studies, we should re-interpret their conclusions. Differences in populations may be the second issue; the frequency of the Q192 allele is somewhat lower in their cohort study (63.9%) than in any of the other studies [21,23-26,31-35]. The observed clinical differences between PON1 gene variants may be due to clopidogrel-unrelated mechanisms, as PON1 plays a direct effect on atherogenesis by protecting low-density lipoprotein from oxidation [58]. This may partly explain the trend towards an association of the PON1-Q192R variant with MACE, best seen in four studies in addition to Bouman’s studies (Figure 2) [15,20]. It could also be that PON1 has an effect on the steady state concentration of the intermediary thiolactone.

Differences in clinical endpoints and ethnicity across studies might also be involved. Previous studies and meta-analysis evaluating the influence of PON1 Q192R (rs662) polymorphism on clinical outcomes have been confined mostly to Western populations [12-14,18,20,21,29-31]. In our meta-analysis, most of the studies addressing the association of the PON1 Q192R (rs662) variant with clinical events involved composite endpoints whose pathogenetic mechanisms are more intricate. Although, consistent with previous studies, we also did not observe a positive association between the PON1 Q192R (rs662) gene polymorphism and the development of ST in CHD patients undergoing antiplatelet treatment with clopidogrel, we conducted the subgroup analyses of eligible studies from different ethnic populations to determine the association between the PON1 Q192R (rs662) polymorphism and the risk of ST, in patients with CHD who use clopidogrel. Subgroup analysis by ethnicity demonstrated that a significant association between PON1-Q192R (rs662) gene polymorphism and the risk of ST was found among Caucasus patients with PON1 Q192R dominant model, heterozygous model or over-dominant model, but not in Asians. It revealed that there are ethnic differences in the effects of the PON1 Q192R (rs662) gene polymorphism on the risk of ST in clopidogrel-treated patients, but not all clinical outcomes. In previous study, Bouman et al., also found a strongest association with definite ST, while the association with all MACE was smaller. The low incidence of ST, small sample size and different prevalence of PON1 Q192R (rs662) allele may partly explain the different results between the different subgroups. Low incidence of ST and small size of clinical studies in Asian CHD patients may possibly leading to an underestimation of the clinical importance of the PON1 Q192R (rs662) genotype. It is worth noting that the distribution of the PON1 polymorphisms varies with ethnicity. The frequency of the 192R allele increases the further from Europe a population originates, the frequency in Caucasians of 15-30% increases to 70-90% in Far Eastern Oriental and Sub-Saharan African populations [59]. In the southern USA African-Americans are 5 times more likely to be RR than Caucasians [60]. These ethnic differences in SNP distribution can lead to large activity differences between populations [59]. The results of our meta-analyses show that there are approximately 63.9%~70.9% 192 Q allele in Caucasians and 21.0%~37.2% 192 Q allele in Asians, consistent with previous report. Ethnic heterogeneity across the different studies, resulting in genetic differences that might have influenced the response to clopidogrel [61]. Due to the very low frequency of 192 RR patients, there was no significant association between PON1 Q192R (rs662) genetic polymorphism and the risk of ST among Caucasians under recessive and homozygous models. To identify this result, further studies with large sample size may be needed to get the results with reliable statistical power.

Furthermore, CHD patients may co-administrated with different drugs, resulting in different drug-drug interactions. Drug-drug interactions, mainly via CYP3A4/5, are another important issue when analyzing the variability of clopidogrel responsiveness [61,62]. For example, platelet inhibition by clopidogrel is attenuated by co-administration of ketoconazole, a known CYP3A4/5 inhibitor, or atorvastatin, a competitive inhibitor, though it is debated for this latter drug [63,64]. Conversely, increased platelet inhibition is observed in hypo-responsive patients when CYP3A4/5 activity is induced by St. John’s Wort, an herbal remedy used for the treatment of depression [65]. Significant pharmacokinetic interactions also exist with proton pump inhibitors, probably through a CYP2C19 inhibition [63,66,67]. Hence, an imbalance of co-medication with drugs affecting CYP450 activities across genotype groups might have influenced the findings.

The present meta-analysis has some limitations. First, the numbers of clinical studies and sample size of studies in CHD Asians still too small to get a reliable result. Second, studies enrolled in the meta-analysis were observational studies, this conclusion should be interpreted cautiously, and hence high-quality and adequately powered RCTs are warranted. Third, the inclusion criteria of cases and controls were not well defined in all included studies, which might have also influenced our results. Last, because of the nature of the meta-analysis that has been conducted among published studies and not on individual patients’ data, we were not able to obtain information on some of the relevant issues, such as different clinical end-points, comorbidities or concomitant therapies.

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis provides evidence that the PON1 192 QQ genotype may increase the risk of ST in Caucasian CHD patients receiving antiplatelet treatment with clopidogrel. However, due to the limitations mentioned above, high-quality and adequately powered RCTs are still needed to provide a more representatively statistical analysis.

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the Research Funds of Shanghai health and family planning commission (20184Y0022), Program for Key Discipline of Clinical Pharmacy of Shanghai (2016-40044-002), Program for Key but Weak Discipline of Shanghai Municipal Commission of Health and Family Planning (2016ZB0304), and China Health Promotion Foundation (KNKT-ZX-1601).

References

  1. King SB, Smith SC, Hirshfeld JW, Jacobs AK, Morrison DA, et al. (2008) 2007 Focused Update of the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 Guideline Update for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 51: 172-209.
  2. DiNicolantonio JJ, D’Ascenzo F, Tomek A, Chatterjee S, Niazi AK, et al. (2013) Clopidogrel is safer than ticagrelor in regard to bleeds: a closer look at the PLATO trial. Int J Cardiol 168: 1739-1744.
  3. Wiviott SD, Braunwald E, McCabe CH, Montalescot G, Ruzyllo W, et al. (2007) Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes (TRITON-TIMI 38). N Engl J Med 357: 2001-2015.
  4. Cui M, Tu CC, Chen EZ, Wang XL, Tan SC, et al. (2016) A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Clopidogrel for Patients with Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome in China. Adv Ther 33: 1600-1611.
  5. Lev EI, Patel RT, Maresh KJ, Guthikonda S, Granada J, et al. (2006) Aspirin and clopidogrel drug response in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the role of dual drug resistance. J Am Coll Cardiol 47: 27-33.
  6. Muller I, Besta F, Schulz C, Massberg S, Schonig A, et al. (2003) Prevalence of clopidogrel non-responders among patients with stable angina pectoris scheduled for elective coronary stent placement. Thrombosis and haemostasis 89: 783-787.
  7. Combescure C, Fontana P, Mallouk N, Berdague P, Labruyere C, et al. (2010) Clinical implications of clopidogrel non-response in cardiovascular patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thromb Haemost 8: 923-933.
  8. Kazui M, Nishiya Y, Ishizuka T, Hagihara K, Farid NA, et al. (2010) Identification of the human cytochrome P450 enzymes involved in the two oxidative steps in the bioactivation of clopidogrel to its pharmacologically active metabolite. Drug metabolism and disposition: the biological fate of chemicals 38: 92-99.
  9. Frére C, Cuisset T, Gaborit B, Alessi MC, Hulot JS (2009) The CYP2C19*17 allele is associated with better platelet response to clopidogrel in patients admitted for non-ST acute coronary syndrome. J Thromb Haemost 7: 1409-1411.
  10. Yamamoto K, Hokimoto S, Chitose T, Morita K, Ono T, et al. (2011) Impact of CYP2C19 polymorphism on residual platelet reactivity in patients with coronary heart disease during anti-platelet therapy. J Cardiol 57: 194-201.
  11. Hochholzer W, Trenk D, Fromm MF, Valina CM, Stratz C, et al. (2010) Impact of cytochrome P450 2C19 loss-of-function polymorphism and of major demographic characteristics on residual platelet function after loading and maintenance treatment with clopidogrel in patients undergoing elective coronary stent placement. J Am Coll Cardiol 55: 2427-2434.
  12. Bouman HJ, Schömig E, van Werkum JW, Velder J, Hackeng CM, et al. (2011) Paraoxonase-1 is a major determinant of clopidogrel efficacy. Nature medicine 17: 110-116.
  13. Trenk D, Hochholzer W, Fromm MF, Zolk O, Valina CM, et al. (2011) Paraoxonase-1 Q192R polymorphism and antiplatelet effects of clopidogrel in patients undergoing elective coronary stent placement. Circ Cardiovasc Genet 4: 429-436.
  14. Simon T, Steg PG, Becquemont L,Verstuyft C, Kotti S, et al. (2011) Effect of paraoxonase-1 polymorphism on clinical outcomes in patients treated with clopidogrel after an acute myocardial infarction. Clin Pharmacol Ther 90: 561-567.
  15. Park KW, Park JJ, Kang J, Jeon KH, Kang SH, et al. (2013) Paraoxonase 1 gene polymorphism does not affect clopidogrel response variability but is associated with clinical outcome after PCI. PLoS One 8: e52779.
  16. Dansette PM, Rosi J, Bertho G, Mansuy D (2011) Paraoxonase-1 and clopidogrel efficacy. Nature medicine 17: 1040-1041.
  17. Camps J, Joven J, Mackness B, Mackness M, Tawfik D, et al. (2011) Paraoxonase-1 and clopidogrel efficacy. Nature medicine 17: 1041-1042.
  18. Reny JL, Combescure C, Daali Y, Fontana P (2012) Influence of the paraoxonase-1 Q192R genetic variant on clopidogrel responsiveness and recurrent cardiovascular events: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thromb Haemost 10: 1242-1251.
  19. Chen DY, Wang CY, Wen MS, Lee TH, Chu Y, et al. (2012) Paraoxonase-1 is not a major determinant of stent thrombosis in a Taiwanese population. PLoS One 7: e39178.
  20. Paré G, Ross S, Mehta SR, Yusuf S, Anand SS, et al. (2012) Effect of PON1 Q192R genetic polymorphism on clopidogrel efficacy and cardiovascular events in the Clopidogrel in the Unstable Angina to Prevent Recurrent Events trial and the Atrial Fibrillation Clopidogrel Trial with Irbesartan for Prevention of Vascular Events. Circ Cardiovasc Genet 5: 250-256.
  21. Martínez-Quintana E, Medina-Gil JM, Rodríguez-González F, Garay-Sánchez P, Limiñana JM, et al. (2014) Positive clinical response to clopidogrel is independent of paraoxonase 1 Q192R and CYP2C19 genetic variants. J Clin Pharmacol 54: 843-849.
  22. Tang XF, Wang J, Zhang JH, Meng XM, Xu B, et al. (2013) Effect of the CYP2C19 2 and 3 genotypes, ABCB1 C3435T and PON1 Q192R alleles on the pharmacodynamics and adverse clinical events of clopidogrel in Chinese people after percutaneous coronary intervention. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 69: 1103-1112.
  23. Verschuren JJ, Boden H, Wessels JA, van der Hoeven BL, Trompet S, et al. (2013) Value of platelet pharmacogenetics in common clinical practice of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Int J Cardiol 167: 2882-2888.
  24. Xie C, Ding X, Gao J, Wang H, Hang Y, et al. (2014) The effects of CES1A2 A(-816)C and CYP2C19 loss-of-function polymorphisms on clopidogrel response variability among Chinese patients with coronary heart disease. Pharmacogenet Genomics 24: 204-210.
  25. Cutlip DE, Windecker S, Mehran R, Boam A, Cohen DJ, et al. (2007) Clinical end points in coronary stent trials: a case for standardized definitions. Circulation 115: 2344-2351.
  26. Stang A (2010) Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol 25: 603-605.
  27. Yuhara H, Steinmaus C, Cohen SE, Corley DA, Tei Y, et al. (2011) Is diabetes mellitus an independent risk factor for colon cancer and rectal cancer? Am J Gastroenterol 106: 1911-1922.
  28. DerSimonian R, Laird N (1986) Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 7: 177-188.
  29. Sibbing D, Koch W, Massberg S, Byrne RA, Mehilli J, et al. (2011) No association of paraoxonase-1 q192r genotypes with platelet response to clopidogrel and risk of stent thrombosis after coronary stenting. Eur Heart J 32: 1605-1613.
  30. Lewis JP, Fisch AS, Ryan K, O’Connell JR, Gibson Q, et al. (2011) Paraoxonase 1 (PON1) gene variants are not associated with clopidogrel response. Clin Pharmacol Ther 90: 568-574.
  31. Hulot JS, Collet JP, Cayla G, Silvain J, Allanic F, et al. (2011) CYP2C19 but not PON1 genetic variants influence clopidogrel pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and clinical efficacy in post-myocardial infarction patients. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 4: 422-428.
  32. Campo G, Ferraresi P, Marchesini J, Bernardi F, Valgimigli M (2011) Relationship between paraoxonase Q192R gene polymorphism and on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity over time in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. J Thromb Haemost 9: 2106-2108.
  33. Cayla G, Hulot JS, O’Connor SA, Pathak A, Scott SA, et al. (2011) Clinical, angiographic, and genetic factors associated with early coronary stent thrombosis. JAMA 306: 1765-1774.
  34. Delaney JT, Ramirez AH, Bowton E, Pulley JM, Basford MA, et al. (2012) Predicting clopidogrel response using DNA samples linked to an electronic health record. Clin Pharmacol Ther 91: 257-263.
  35. Rideg O, Komocsi A, Magyarlaki T, Tokés-Füzesi M, Miseta A et al. (2011) Impact of genetic variants on post-clopidogrel platelet reactivity in patients after elective percutaneous coronary intervention. Pharmacogenomics 12: 1269-1280.
  36. Ford NF (2016) The Metabolism of Clopidogrel: CYP2C19 is a Minor Pathway. J Clin Pharmacol 56: 1474-1483.
  37. Dansette PM, Rosi J, Bertho G, Mansuy D (2012) Cytochromes P450 catalyze both steps of the major pathway of clopidogrel bioactivition, whereas paraoxonase catalyzes the formation of a minor thiol metabolite isomer. Chem Res Toxicol 25: 348-356.
  38. Gong IY, Crown N, Suen CM, Schwarz UI, Dresser GK, et al. (2012) Clarifying the importance of CYP2C19 and PON1 in the mechanism of clopidogrel bioactivation and in vivo antiplatelet response. Eur Heart J 33: 2856-2864.
  39. Savi P, Zachayus J, Delesque-Touchard N, Labouret C, Herve C, et al. (2006) The active metabolite of Clopidogrel disrupts P2Y12 receptor oligomers and partitions them out of lipid rafts. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103: 11069-11074.
  40. Pereillo JM, Maftouh M, Andrieu A, Uzabiaga MF, Fedeli O, et al. (2002) Structure and stereochemistry of the active metabolite of clopidogrel. Drug Metab Dispos 30: 1288-1295.
  41. Savi P, Pereillo J, Uzabiaga MF, Combalbert J, Picard C, et al. (2000) Identification and biological activity of the active metabolite of clopidogrel. Thromb Haemost 84: 891-896.
  42. Dansette PM, Levent D, Hessani A, Mansuy D (2015) Bioactivation of clopidogrel and prasugrel: factors determining the stereochemistry of the thiol metabolite double bond. Chem Res Toxicol 28: 1338-1345.
  43. Dansette PM, Levent D, Hessani A, Bertho G, Mansuy D (2013) Thiolactone sulfoxides as new reactive metabolites acting as bis-electrophiles: implication in clopidogrel and prasugrel bioactivation. Chem Res Toxicol 26: 794-802.
  44. Dansette PM, Libraire J, Bertho G, Mansuy D (2009) Metabolic oxidative cleavage of thioesters: evidence for the formation of sulfenic acid intermediates in the bioactivation of the antithrombotic prodrugs ticlopidine and clopidogrel. Chem Res Toxicol 22: 369-373.
  45. Karazniewicz-Lada M, Danielak D, Tezyk A, Zaba C, Tuffal G, et al. (2012) HPLC-MS/MS method for the simultaneous determination of clopidogrel, its carboxylic acid metabolite and derivatized isomers of thiol metabolite in clinical samples. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci 911: 105-112.
  46. Tuffal G, Roy S, Lavisse M, Brasseur D, Schofield J, et al. (2011) An improved method for specific and quantitative determination of the clopidogrel active metabolite isomers in human plasma. Thromb Haemost 105: 696-705.
  47. Furlong MT, Savant I, YuanM, Scott L, Mylott W, et al. (2013) A validated HPLC-MS/MS assay for quantifying unstable pharmacologically active metabolites of clopidogrel in human plasma: application to a clinical pharmacokinetic study. Journal of Chromatography B 926: 36-41.
  48. Bluet G, Blankenstein J, Brohan E, Prevost C, Cheve M, et al. (2014) Synthesis of the stabilized active metabolite of clopidogrel. Tetrahedron 70: 3893-3900.
  49. Shaw SA, Balasubramanian B, Bonacorsi S, Cortes JC, Cao K, et al. (2015) Synthesis of Biologically Active Piperidine Metabolites of Clopidogrel: Determination of Structure and Analyte Development. J Org Chem 80: 7019-7032.
  50. Farid NA, Kurihara A, Wrighton SA (2010) Metabolism and disposition of the thienopyridine antiplatelet drugs ticlopidine, clopidogrel, and prasugrel in humans. J Clin Pharmacol 50: 126-142.
  51. Mani H, Toennes SW, Linnemann B, Urbanek DA, Schwonberg J, et al. (2008) Determination of clopidogrel main metabolite in plasma: a useful tool for monitoring therapy? Ther Drug Monit 30: 84-89.
  52. Takahashi M, Pang H, Kawabata K, Farid NA, Kurihara A (2008) Quantitative determination of clopidogrel active metabolite in human plasma by LC-MS/MS. J Pharm Biomed Anal 48: 1219-1224.
  53. Delavenne X, Basset T, Zufferey P, Malouk N, Laporte S, et al. (2010) Ultra-performance LC MS/MS method for quanti?cation of clopidogrel active metabolite. J Sep Sci 33: 1968-1972.
  54. Peer CJ, Spencer SD, VanDenBerg DA, Pacanowski MA, Horenstein RB, et al. (2012) A sensitive and rapid ultra HPLC-MS/MS method for the simultaneous detection of clopidogrel and its derivatized active thiol metabolite in human plasma. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci 880: 132-139.
  55. Wheeler JG, Keavney BD, Watkins H, Collins R, Dancsh J (2004) Four paraoxonase gene polymorphisms in 11212 cases of coronary heart disease and 12786 controls: meta-analysis of 43 studies. Lancet 363: 689-695.
  56. La Du BN (1992) Human serum paraoxonase/arylesterase. In: Kalow W (ed.). Pharmacogenetics of Drug Metabolism. Pergamon Press, New York, USA.
  57. McDaniel CY, Mary BD, Wills RW, Chambers HW, Chambers JE (2014) Paraoxonase1 polymorphisms within a Mississippi USA population as possible biomarkers of enzyme activities associated with disease susceptibility. Biochem Genet 52: 509-523.
  58. Talameh JA, McLeod HL (2011) PON1 Q192R and clopidogrel: a case of the winner’s curse or inadequate replication? Clin Pharmacol Ther 90: 771-774.
  59. Ancrenaz V, Daali Y, Fontana P, Besson M, Samer C, et al. (2010) Impact of genetic polymorphisms and drug-drug inter actions on clopidogrel and prasugrel response variability. Curr Drug Metab 11: 667-677.
  60. Farid NA, Payne CD, Small DS, Winters KJ, Ernest CS, et al. (2007) Cytochrome P450 3A inhibition by ketoconazole affects prasugrel and clopidogrel pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics differently. Clin Pharmacol Ther 81: 735-741.
  61. Lau WC, Waskell LA, Watkins PB, Neer CJ, Horowitz K, et al. (2003) Atorvastatin reduces the ability of clopidogrel to inhibit platelet aggregation: a new drug-drug interaction. Circulation 107: 32-37.
  62. Lau WC, Welch TD, Shields T, Rubenfire M, Tantry US, et al. (2011) The effect of St. John’s Wort on the pharmacodynamic response of clopidogrel in hyporesponsive volunteers and patients: increased platelet inhibition by enhancement of CYP3A4 metabolic activity. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 57: 86-93.
  63. Sibbing D, Morath T, Stegherr J, Braun S, Vogt W, et al. (2009) Impact of proton pump inhibitors on the antiplatelet effects of clopidogrel. Thromb Haemost 101: 714-719.
  64. Juurlink DN (2009) Proton pump inhibitors and clopidogrel: putting the interaction in perspective. Circulation 120: 2310-2312.
  65. Lau WC, Waskell LA, Watkins PB, Neer CJ, Horowitz K, et al. (2003) Atorvastatin reduces the ability of clopidogrel to inhibit platelet aggregation: a new drug-drug interaction. Circulation 107: 32-37.
  66. Lau WC, Welch TD, Shields T, Rubenfire M, Tantry US, et al. (2011) The effect of St. John’s Wort on the pharmacodynamic response of clopidogrel in hyporesponsive volunteers and patients: increased platelet inhibition by enhancement of CYP3A4 metabolic activity. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 57: 86-93.
  67. Juurlink DN (2009) Proton Pump Inhibitors and Clopidogrel: Putting the Interaction in Perspective. Circulation 120: 2310-2.
Study Year Selection Comparability Outcome or exposure NOS score
Bouman et al. (a) 2011 3 1 2 6
Bouman et al. (b) 2011 4 1 1 6
Campo et al. 2011 3 1 2 6
Cayla et al. 2011 3 1 2 6
Delaney et al. 2012 3 1 2 6
Hulot et al. 2011 3 1 3 7
Lewis et al. 2011 2 1 3 6
Rideg et al. 2011 4 1 3 8
Sibbing et al. 2011 4 1 3 8
Simon et al. 2011 3 1 2 6
Trenk et al. 2011 3 1 3 7
Chen et al. 2012 4 1 1 6
Quintana et al. 2014 3 1 2 6
Pare et al. 2012 4 1 3 8
Park et al. 2013 3 1 3 7
Verschuren et al. 2012 3 1 2 6
Tang et al. 2013 2 1 3 6
Xie et al. 2014 3 1 2 6

Table S1 Quality assessment results of inclusive cohort study or case-control study. NOS: NEW-Castle Ottawa Scale; The summary risk of bias was determined as low (NOS scores≥7), moderate (4≤NOS scores≤6), and high (NOS scores≤3).

  MACE (P-value) Stent thrombosis (P-value)
Allele model 0.738 0.084
Dominant model 0.666 0.091
Recessive model 0.833 0.187
Homozygous model 0.805 0.175
Heterozygous model 0.669 0.110
Over-dominant model 0.695 0.140

Table S2. Meta-regression analysis of stent type.

P values: it is the results of meta-regression for the relationship between stent type and the outcomes; MACE: Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events

Outcomes Gene model OR (95% CI) No of participants (studies) Quality of the evidence
MACE Allele model 1.10 (0.91-1.34) 29316 (13 studies) Low
  Dominant model 1.08 (0.83-1.40) 14658 (13 studies) Low
  Recessive model 1.19 (0.88-1.60) 14658 (13 studies) Low
  Homozygous model 1.22 (0.83-1.79) 8263 (13 studies) Low
  Heterozygous model 1.05 (0.82-1.34) 12554 (13 studies) Low
  Over-dominant model 0.98 (0.79-1.22) 14658 (13 studies) Low
Stent thrombosis Allele model 1.37 (0.94-1.99) 13184 (9 studies) Low
  Dominant model 1.50 (0.97-2.33) 6592 (9 studies) Low
  Recessive model 1.44 (0.72-2.88) 6592 (9 studies) Low
  Homozygous model 1.68 (0.71-3.95) 3711 (9 studies) Low
  Heterozygous model 1.43 (0.99-2.07) 5459 (9 studies) Low
  Over-dominant model 1.25 (0.94-1.66) 6592 (9 studies) Low

Table S3. GRADE.

GRADE: Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation; MACE: Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events; OR: Odds Ratio; Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.

Ocimum Scientific Publishers

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.  Creative Commons License

Copyright © 2019 - All Rights Reserved - ocimumpublishers.com