Anne Tamigniau

Comparison of calibrated chromogenic anti-Xa assay and PT tests with LC-MS/MS for the therapeutic monitoring of patients treated with rivaroxaban

Possibilities to monitor rivaroxaban therapy could be useful in certain circumstances. Prothrombin time (PT) or chromogenic anti-Xa assays such as the Biophen Direct Factor Xa Inhibitor® (DiXaI) have been proposed to estimate rivaroxaban concentrations but are mainly based on in vitro studies. The study aim was to compare PT and Biophen DiXaI® measurements with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) measurements in plasma samples from patients treated with Xarelto®. Fifty-two plasma samples were included. PT was performed using Innovin® and Triniclot PT Excel S®. Biophen DiXaI® was performed according to instructions from the manufacturer. The rivaroxaban plasma concentration ranged between 0 and 485 ng/ml as measured by LC-MS/MS. The limits of quantification were 30 ng/ml and 5 ng/ml for Biophen DiXaI® and LC-MS/MS, respectively. The linear correlation between Biophen DiXaI® and LC-MS/MS analyses was high for all rivaroxaban concentrations (r² = 0.95). For concentrations ≤100 ng/ml, r²-value was 0.83. The Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean difference of -16 ng/ml (SD: 25 ng/ml). The PT methods did not correlate well with plasma concentrations measured by LC-MS/MS (r² ≈ 0.60). In conclusion, the important inter-individual variability and the poor correlation with LC-MS/MS preclude the use of PT to estimate rivaroxaban concentrations. Thanks to its small inter-individual variability and good agreement with LC-MS/MS measurements, we recommend the use of Biophen DiXaI® assays to estimate concentrations of rivaroxaban >30 ng/ml. Quantification of low rivaroxaban levels (<30 ng/ml) requires the LC-MS/MS method.

Measurement of non-VKA oral anticoagulants versus classic ones: the appropriate use of hemostasis assays

Traditional anticoagulant agents such as vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), unfractionated heparin (UFH), low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) and fondaparinux have been widely used in the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic diseases. However, these agents are associated with limitations, such as the need for regular coagulation monitoring (VKAs and UFH) or a parenteral route of administration (UFH, LMWHs and fondaparinux).Several non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are now widely used in the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic diseases and in stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Unlike VKAs, NOACs exhibit predictable pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. They are therefore usually given at fixed doses without routine coagulation monitoring. However, in certain patient populations or special clinical circumstances, measurement of drug exposure may be useful, such as in suspected overdose, in patients experiencing a hemorrhagic or thromboembolic event during the treatment’s period, in those with acute renal failure, in patients who require urgent surgery or in case of an invasive procedure. This article aims at providing guidance on laboratory testing of classic anticoagulants and NOACs.

Anticoagulants directs oraux : actualités pour les biologistes

Non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs), thanks to their ease of use and their similar or superior safety/efficacy profiles versus warfarin, have now widely reached the lucrative market of anticoagulation. However, while the marketing authorization holders always claim, in a quite unclear way that no monitoring is required, accumulative evidence and cases of major bleeding have been described in the literature and reported by spontaneous reporting systems at the regulators level. These compounds are usually given at fixed doses without routine coagulation monitoring. However, new data suggests that an assessment of the response at the individual level could improve the benefit-risk ratio of, at least dabigatran. Therefore, in certain patient populations, i.e. acute or chronic renal impairment or multiple drug interactions, measurement of drug exposure may be useful to ensure an optimal treatment response. More specific circumstances such as patients experiencing a haemorrhagic or thromboembolic event during the treatment duration, patients who require urgent surgery or an invasive procedure, or patient with a suspected overdose could benefit from such a measurement. This article aims at providing guidance on how to best estimate the intensity of anticoagulation using laboratory assays in daily practice.