Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: in vitro studies on the interaction of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and low-sulfated heparin, with platelet factor 4 and anti-PF4/heparin antibodies.
ABSTRACT Heparin is a widely used anticoagulant. Because of its negative charge, it forms complexes with positively charged platelet factor 4 (PF4). This can induce anti-PF4/heparin IgG Abs. Resulting immune complexes activate platelets, leading to the prothrombotic adverse drug reaction heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). HIT requires treatment with alternative anticoagulants. Approved for HIT are 2 direct thrombin inhibitors (DTI; lepirudin, argatroban) and danaparoid. They are niche products with limitations. We assessed the effects of the DTI dabigatran, the direct factor Xa-inhibitor rivaroxaban, and of 2-O, 3-O desulfated heparin (ODSH; a partially desulfated heparin with minimal anticoagulant effects) on PF4/heparin complexes and the interaction of anti-PF4/heparin Abs with platelets. Neither dabigatran nor rivaroxaban had any effect on the interaction of PF4 or anti-PF4/heparin Abs with platelets. In contrast, ODSH inhibited PF4 binding to gel-filtered platelets, displaced PF4 from a PF4-transfected cell line, displaced PF4/heparin complexes from platelet surfaces, and inhibited anti-PF4/heparin Ab binding to PF4/heparin complexes and subsequent platelet activation. Dabigatran and rivaroxaban seem to be options for alternative anticoagulation in patients with a history of HIT. ODSH prevents formation of immunogenic PF4/heparin complexes, and, when given together with heparin, may have the potential to reduce the risk for HIT during treatment with heparin.
- SourceAvailable from: PubMed Central[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a relatively common cardiovascular emergency. PE and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) are considered expressions of the same disease, termed as venous thromboembolism (VTE). In the present review, we describe and meta-analyze the efficacy and safety data available with the direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC; dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban) in clinical trials testing these new compounds in the acute/long-term and extended therapy of VTE, providing subgroup analyses in patients with index PE. We analyzed ten studies in 35,019 randomized patients. A total of 14,364 patients (41%) had index PE. In the acute/long-term treatment of VTE, the DOAC showed comparable efficacy in preventing recurrent VTE to standard treatment in patients with index PE (risk ratio [RR]: 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70-1.11) and index DVT (RR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.75-1.16) (P for subgroup differences =0.76). VTE recurrence depending on PE anatomical extension and presence/absence of right ventricular dysfunction was only reported in two trials, with results being consistent with those obtained in the overall study populations. In the single trial comparing extended therapy of VTE with DOAC versus warfarin, the point estimate for recurrent VTE tended to disfavor the DOAC in patients with index PE (RR: 2.05; 95% CI: 0.83-5.03) and in patients with index DVT (RR: 1.11; 95% CI: 0.49-2.50) (P for subgroup differences =0.32). In trials that compared DOAC versus placebo for extended therapy, the reduction in recurrent VTE was consistent in patients with PE (RR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.01-1.82) and in patients with DVT (RR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.10-0.61) (P for subgroup differences =0.71). The DOAC were associated with a consistently lower risk of clinically relevant bleeding (CRB) than standard treatment of acute VTE and higher risk of CRB than placebo for extended therapy of VTE regardless of index event. In summary, the DOAC were as effective as, and safer than, standard treatment of (hemodynamically stable) PE. Their efficacy in preventing recurrent VTE seemed consistent regardless of anatomical extension of PE (extensive, intermediate, or limit) or presence/absence of right ventricular dysfunction although the data are limited. For extended therapy, the DOAC were more effective than placebo in preventing recurrent VTE but were associated with an increase in CRB regardless of index event.Vascular Health and Risk Management 01/2014; 10:627-639.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To review the recent developments in understanding the pathophysiology of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and in applying this knowledge to the treatment of patients with suspected and proven HIT.Current Opinion in Hematology 07/2014; · 4.05 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background Patients undergoing total hip replacement (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR) surgery are at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE). Thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin, such as enoxaparin, is standard of care in these patients. Recently, three direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs; dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban), have been approved for this indication, but their cost effectiveness is still unclear as it has usually been extrapolated from surrogate venographic outcomes in clinical trials. Objective To conduct a pharmacoeconomic evaluation of the DOACs versus subcutaneous (SC) enoxaparin for the prevention of VTE after THR or TKR surgery. Methods A decision-tree model was developed using TreeAge Pro 2011 to compare the cost utility and cost effectiveness of the DOACs with SC enoxaparin, with separate models for THR and TKR over a 3-month postoperative time horizon from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System. The probabilities of events (symptomatic VTE, clinically relevant bleedings, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and deaths) were derived from a systematic review and meta-analysis. We used local cost estimates (€2013) and utility values were obtained from the literature. We reported costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and symptomatic VTE events. We conducted sensitivity analyses to evaluate parameter uncertainty. Results The average costs per 1,000 patients treated with enoxaparin were higher than costs incurred by dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban in THR (€435,208 vs. €283,574, €257,900 and €212,472, respectively) and TKR (€336,550 vs. €219,856, €251,734 and €201,946, respectively), with cost savings ranging from €151,634 to €222,766 in THR, and from €84,816 to €134,604 in TKR. Cost differences were largely driven by differences in costs associated with drug administration. The average QALYs per 1,000 patients treated were very similar for enoxaparin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban in THR (199.34, 198.83, 199.08 and 199.68, respectively) and TKR (198.95, 199.41, 198.75 and 199.97, respectively). Rivaroxaban (in TKR and THR) and apixaban (in THR) avoided additional symptomatic VTE events compared with enoxaparin. Sensitivity analyses generally supported the robustness of the analysis to changes in model parameters. Conclusions Our model suggests, based on its underlying assumptions and data, that the DOACs are cost-saving alternatives to SC enoxaparin for the prevention of VTE after THR or TKR, in the Spanish healthcare setting.PharmacoEconomics 06/2014; · 3.34 Impact Factor