Effects of aspirin and clopidogrel in healthy men measured by platelet aggregation and PFA-100
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are no generally accepted definitions for low-response (frequently called resistance) to the platelet inhibitors, aspirin and clopidogrel. Low-response may increase the risk of cardiovascular events in atherosclerotic patients. We aimed to define the normal drug responses in healthy men. Platelet function was measured in 20 healthy men during 11 days of aspirin or clopidogrel intake, using light transmission aggregometry (LTA) and the Platelet Function Analyzer 100 (PFA-100). The lower limits for LTA at baseline were 64% and 61%, using arachidonic acid and ADP as agonists, respectively. During aspirin intake the LTA results were stable from day to day, and an upper limit of 9% arachidonic acid stimulated aggregation was found. Clopidogrel intake was best shown by ADP induced aggregation. However, two out of 20 individuals exhibited low-response to clopidogrel. In the remaining 18 volunteers an upper limit of 48% aggregation was found. We found an upper limit for collagen-epinephrine stimulated PFA-100 results of 166 s at baseline. During aspirin intake, these results varied considerably from day to day in nine out of 20 men, resulting in an overlap between the reference ranges at baseline and during therapy. In conclusion, platelet inhibition by aspirin and clopidogrel assessed by aggregometry was stable during 11 days of treatment and reference ranges were established. The PFA-100 results varied greatly and low-response was not precisely defined by this method.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".