A randomized comparison of a high clopidogrel maintenance dose in patients with diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease: Results of the Optimus (optimizing anti-platelet therapy in diabetes MellitUS) study

Background—After treatment with clopidogrel, patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have reduced platelet inhibition compared with patients who are not diabetic. Whether platelet inhibition can be enhanced by increasing clopidogrel maintenance dosage in T2DM patients is unknown. The aim of this pilot study was to assess the functional impact of a high maintenance dose in T2DM patients with suboptimal clopidogrel-induced antiplatelet effects. Methods and Results—T2DM patients on chronic dual antiplatelet therapy were screened to identify suboptimal clopidogrel responders. The latter were randomized to 30-day treatment with a standard (75 mg; n20) or high (150 mg; n20) daily maintenance dose. Platelet function was assessed at 3 time points: baseline, 30 days after randomization, and 30 days after resuming standard dosing. Platelet function parameters included adenosine diphosphate–induced (20 and 5 mol/L) maximal and late platelet aggregation, inhibition of platelet aggregation, platelet disaggregation, and P2Y12 reactivity index. A total of 64 T2DM patients were screened to identify 40 suboptimal responders. After randomization, maximal adenosine diphosphate–induced (20 mol/L) platelet aggregation was significantly reduced in the 150-mg group compared with the 75-mg group (P0.002; primary end point). However, suboptimal clopidogrel response was still present in 60 % of patients on the 150-mg regimen. All other platelet function parameters showed enhanced clopidogrel-induced antiplatelet effects with 150 mg, which returned to baseline values after resumption of standard dosing. Conclusions—A 150-mg maintenance dose of clopidogrel is associated with enhanced antiplatelet effects compared with 75 mg in high-risk T2DM patients. However, enhanced ex vivo platelet reactivity continues to persist, the clinical implications of which are unknown and need to be evaluated in large-scale clinical trials. (Circulation. 2007;115:708