Search

Aims: Warfarin dose requirement varies significantly. We compared the clinically established doses based on international normalized ratio (INR) among patients with severe thrombosis and/or thrombophilia with estimates from genetic dosing algorithms., Methods: Fifty patients with severe thrombosis and/or thrombophilia requiring permanent anticoagulation, referred to the Helsinki University Hospital Coagulation Center, were screened for thrombophilias and genotyped for CYP2C9*2 (c.430C>T, rs1799853), CYP2C9*3 (c.1075A>C, rs1057910) and VKORC1 c.-1639G>A (rs9923231) variants. The warfarin maintenance doses (target INR 2.0-3.0 in 94%, 2.5-3.5 in 6%) were estimated by the Gage and the International Warfarin Pharmacogenetics Consortium (IWPC) algorithms. The individual warfarin maintenance dose was tailored, supplementing estimates with comprehensive clinical evaluation and INR data., Results: Mean patient age was 47 years (range 20-76), and BMI 27 (SD 6), 68% being women. Forty-six (92%) had previous venous or arterial thrombosis, and 26 (52%) had a thrombophilia, with 22% having concurrent aspirin. A total of 40% carried the CYP2C9*2 or *3 allele and 54% carried the VKORC1-1639A allele. The daily mean maintenance dose of warfarin estimated by the Gage algorithm was 5.4 mg (95% CI 4.9-5.9 mg), and by the IWPC algorithm was 5.2 mg (95% CI 4.7-5.7 mg). The daily warfarin maintenance dose after clinical visits and follow-up was higher than the estimates, mean 6.9 mg (95% CI 5.6-8.2 mg, P < 0.006), with highest dose in patients having multiple thrombophilic factors (P < 0.03)., Conclusions: In severe thrombosis and/or thrombophilia, variation in thrombin generation and pharmacodynamics influences warfarin response. Pharmacogenetic dosing algorithms seem to underestimate dose requirement., (© 2019 The British Pharmacological Society.)

Background: Uncontrollable bleeding is the leading cause of death in traumatically injured patients. The extent to which direct factor Xa inhibitors interfere with the applied resuscitation measures is presently unknown., Study Design and Methods: In this study, we investigated the effect of the resuscitation fluids saline, albumin, fresh frozen plasma (FFP) and solvent/detergent (S/D)-treated plasma, fibrinogen concentrate, prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC), and combinations thereof on the hemostatic profile of rivaroxaban-anticoagulated whole blood and plasma. We used rivaroxaban-spiked whole blood and plasma from healthy donors, as well as plasma from patients on rivaroxaban, and mimicked a resuscitation approach in a 50% plasma dilution setting. Thromboelastography, thrombin generation, and fibrin generation clot lysis test were assessed using tissue factor to initiate coagulation and tissue plasminogen activator to induce clot lysis., Results: Rivaroxaban resulted in a hypocoagulant state that remained largely unaltered upon subsequent 50% dilution with S/D-treated plasma or FFP. Using S/D-treated plasma as a diluent, clot stability decreased due to its low α 2 -antiplasmin. Dilution with saline and albumin induced a profibrinolytic state and further deteriorated the impaired hemostatic potential of rivaroxaban-anticoagulated blood, even after PCC and fibrinogen support. Combined use of plasma (either FFP or S/D treated) and PCC, however, considerably improved both coagulation and clot stability., Conclusion: In the setting of rivaroxaban anticoagulation and major blood loss, transfusing plasma together with PCC may provide the most effective resuscitation approach with the notion that additional antifibrinolytic drug support (e.g., tranexamic acid) is likely required., (© 2018 AABB.)

Background: Laboratory tests to assess novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are under evaluation. Routine monitoring is unnecessary, but under special circumstances bioactivity assessment becomes crucial. We analyzed the effects of NOACs on coagulation tests and the availability of specific assays at different laboratories., Methods: Plasma samples spiked with dabigatran (Dabi; 120 and 300 μg/L) or rivaroxaban (Riva; 60, 146, and 305 μg/L) were sent to 115 and 38 European laboratories, respectively. International normalized ratio (INR) and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) were analyzed for all samples; thrombin time (TT) was analyzed specifically for Dabi and calibrated anti-activated factor X (anti-Xa) activity for Riva. We compared the results with patient samples., Results: Results of Dabi samples were reported by 73 laboratories (13 INR and 9 APTT reagents) and Riva samples by 22 laboratories (5 INR and 4 APTT reagents). Both NOACs increased INR values; the increase was modest, albeit larger, for Dabi, with higher CV, especially with Quick (vs Owren) methods. Both NOACs dose-dependently prolonged the APTT. Again, the prolongation and CVs were larger for Dabi. The INR and APTT results varied reagent-dependently (P < 0.005), with less prolongation in patient samples. TT results (Dabi) and calibrated anti-Xa results (Riva) were reported by only 11 and 8 laboratories, respectively., Conclusions: The screening tests INR and APTT are suboptimal in assessing NOACs, having high reagent dependence and low sensitivity and specificity. They may provide information, if laboratories recognize their limitations. The variation will likely increase and the sensitivity differ in clinical samples. Specific assays measure NOACs accurately; however, few laboratories applied them., (© 2013 American Association for Clinical Chemistry.)

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) interfere in laboratory coagulation testing. The aim here was to study how commercial DOAC removal methods, DOAC Filter® and DOAC-Stop™, perform to eliminate DOAC concentrations and false positive results in lupus anticoagulant (LAC) testing. We acquired 50 patient samples with high concentrations of DOACs: apixaban (n = 18, range 68–572 ng/mL), dabigatran (n = 8, range 47–154 ng/mL), edoxaban (n = 8, range 35–580 ng/mL) and rivaroxaban (n = 16, range 69–285 ng/mL). DOACs were removed ex vivo with either DOAC Filter® (n = 28) or DOAC-Stop™ (n = 22). Additionally, commercial control and calibrator samples were studied (n = 13 for DOAC Filter®, n = 14 for DOAC-Stop™). LAC screening was performed before and after DOAC removal. Both DOAC Filter® and DOAC-Stop™ were effective in removing DOAC concentrations in samples: DOAC concentrations decreased to median of 0 ng/mL (range 0–48 ng/mL). Only one sample had more than residual 25 ng/mL of DOAC (apixaban). Before DOAC removal, 96% (48/50) of patient samples and over 90% (12/13 DOAC Filter®, 13/14 DOAC-Stop™) of control/calibrator samples were positive in the LAC screening. In patient samples, LAC screening turned negative in 61% (17/28) after DOAC Filter® and 45% (10/22) after DOAC-Stop™ treatment. All control samples became negative after DOAC removal. In conclusion, DOAC removal ex vivo reduces false positives in LAC screening. DOAC removal halved the need for confirmation or mixing tests- Although a subset of patients would require further testing, DOAC removal reduces unnecessary repeated LAC testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a survey in European laboratories with dabigatran and rivaroxaban to assess the anticoagulant effects on routine coagulation assays. Topics discussed include lyophilized apixaban samples sent by EQA organization Labquality Ltd. to laboratories, correlation between activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and apixaban concentration; and recommend apixaban-calibrated anti-factor Xa chromogenic substrate method for determination of apixaban.