Evidence of platelet sensitization to ADP following discontinuation of clopidogrel therapy in patients with stable coronary artery disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epidemiological studies have linked clopidogrel discontinuation with an increased incidence of ischemic events. This has led to the hypothesis that clopidogrel discontinuation may result in a pharmacological rebound. We evaluated the impact of clopidogrel discontinuation on platelet function. Platelet aggregation was measured by light transmission aggregometry (LTA) in response to adenosine diphosphate (ADP) 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2.5, 5 and 10 µM and by VerifyNow® P2Y12, in 37 clinically stable coronary artery disease (CAD) patients scheduled to discontinue clopidogrel treatment, and 37 clinically stable CAD patients not taking clopidogrel. Platelet function was assessed the day before clopidogrel cessation and 1, 3, 7, 14, 21 and 28 days after. Clopidogrel had been initiated a median of 555 days (ranging from 200 to 2280 days) before the treating cardiologist recommended its discontinuation. All participants were taking aspirin, most commonly 80 mg daily although a minority was prescribed 325 mg daily. Following clopidogrel discontinuation, VerifyNow® P2Y12 did not detect any rebound platelet activity, but ADP-induced LTA showed platelet sensitization to ADP, particularly at low ADP levels. Increased platelet activity was detectable seven days after clopidogrel cessation and remained higher than in controls 28 days after discontinuation. No clinical event occurred in any of the participants during the 28 days following clopidogrel cessation. In conclusion, platelet sensitization to ADP as a consequence of chronic clopidogrel administration may partially explain the recrudescence of ischemic events following clopidogrel discontinuation in otherwise stable coronary artery patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".