4.6 Article

Paraoxonase 1 (PON1) Gene Variants Are Not Associated With Clopidogrel Response

Journal

CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS
Volume 90, Issue 4, Pages 568-574

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/clpt.2011.194

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. University of Maryland General Clinical Research Center [M01 RR 16500]
  2. General Clinical Research Centers
  3. National Center for Research Resources (NCRR)
  4. Baltimore Veterans Administration Geriatric Research and Education Clinical Center (GRECC)
  5. Sinai Hospital of Baltimore
  6. Amish community
  7. AstraZeneca
  8. Daiichi-Sankyo
  9. Bayer Healthcare
  10. Eli Lilly
  11. Portola Pharmaceuticals
  12. Haemonetics
  13. Pozen
  14. Sanofi-Aventis
  15. National Institutes of Health
  16. [NIH U01 GM074518]
  17. [U01 HL105198]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A common functional variant in paraoxonase 1 (PON1), Q192R, was recently reported to be a major determinant of clopidogrel response. This variant was genotyped in 566 participants of the Amish Pharmacogenomics of Anti-Platelet Intervention (PAPI) study and in 227 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients. Serum paraoxonase activity was measured in a subset of 79 PAPI participants. PON1 Q192R was not associated with pre-or post-clopidogrel platelet aggregation in the PAPI study (P = 0.16 and P = 0.21, respectively) or the PCI cohort (P = 0.47 and P = 0.91, respectively). The Q192 allele was not associated with cardiovascular events (hazard ratio (HR) 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20-1.06; P = 0.07). No correlation was observed between paraoxonase activity and post-clopidogrel platelet aggregation (r(2) < 0.01, P = 0.78). None of 49 additional PON1 variants evaluated was associated with post-clopidogrel platelet aggregation. These findings do not support a role for PON1 as a determinant of clopidogrel response.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available