Maria Efthymiou

Rivaroxaban versus warfarin to treat patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome, with or without systemic lupus erythematosus (RAPS): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2/3, non-inferiority trial

Summary Background Rivaroxaban is established for the treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism, but whether it is useful in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome is uncertain. Methods This randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2/3, non-inferiority trial, done in two UK hospitals, included patients with antiphospholipid syndrome who were taking warfarin for previous venous thromboembolism, with a target international normalised ratio of 2·5. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to continue with warfarin or receive 20 mg oral rivaroxaban daily. Randomisation was done centrally, stratified by centre and patient type (with vs without systemic lupus erythematosus). The primary outcome was percentage change in endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) from randomisation to day 42, with non-inferiority set at less than 20% difference from warfarin in mean percentage change. Analysis was by modified intention to treat. Other thrombin generation parameters, thrombosis, and bleeding were also assessed. Treatment effect was measured as the ratio of rivaroxaban to warfarin for thrombin generation. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN68222801. Findings Of 116 patients randomised between June 5, 2013, and Nov 11, 2014, 54 who received rivaroxaban and 56 who received warfarin were assessed. At day 42, ETP was higher in the rivaroxaban than in the warfarin group (geometric mean 1086 nmol/L per min, 95% CI 957–1233 vs 548, 484–621, treatment effect 2·0, 95% CI 1·7–2·4, p<0·0001). Peak thrombin generation was lower in the rivaroxaban group (56 nmol/L, 95% CI 47–66 vs 86 nmol/L, 72–102, treatment effect 0·6, 95% CI 0·5–0·8, p=0·0006). No thrombosis or major bleeding were seen. Serious adverse events occurred in four patients in each group. Interpretation ETP for rivaroxaban did not reach the non-inferiority threshold, but as there was no increase in thrombotic risk compared with standard-intensity warfarin, this drug could be an effective and safe alternative in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome and previous venous thromboembolism. Funding Arthritis Research UK, Comprehensive Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, LUPUS UK, Bayer, National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre.

Interactions between rivaroxaban and antiphospholipid antibodies in thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome.

Rivaroxaban can affect lupus anticoagulant (LA) testing and antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) may interfere with the anticoagulant action of rivaroxaban.

Anti-protein C antibodies are associated with resistance to endogenous protein C activation and a severe thrombotic phenotype in antiphospholipid syndrome

Antiphospholipid antibodies may interfere with the anticoagulant activity of activated protein C (APC) to induce acquired APC resistance (APCr).

Rivaroxaban limits complement activation compared with warfarin in antiphospholipid syndrome patients with venous thromboembolism

Essentials Complement activation has a pathogenic role in thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). Coagulation proteases such as factor Xa can activate complement proteins. Complement activation markers were elevated in anticoagulated thrombotic APS patients. Complement activation decreased in APS patients switching from warfarin to rivaroxaban.

Determination of APTT factor sensitivity – the misguiding guideline

The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) has produced a guideline detailing how to determine the activated partial thromboplastin times (APTT) sensitivity to clotting factor deficiencies, by mixing normal and deficient plasmas. Using the guideline, we determined the factor sensitivity of two APTT reagents.

Thrombin generation and factor X assays for the assessment of warfarin anticoagulation in thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome.

Monitoring warfarin anticoagulation in patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) may be complicated by the sensitivity of different thromboplastins to lupus anticoagulant. The aim of this study was to compare the degree of anticoagulation intensity in thrombotic APS and non-APS patients (50 in each group) on long-term warfarin, by measurement of the INR with two widely available thromboplastins with instrument-specific ISI values, and to investigate the potential role of amidolytic FX levels and thrombin generation (TG) testing in the assessment of anticoagulant intensity in thrombotic APS patients. There were no overall differences in INR between reagents or patient groups, but 20% (10/50) of APS patients showed ≥0.5 INR unit difference between reagents, which would have resulted in altered clinical management in some patients. FX levels were useful in assessing anticoagulation intensity for INR 2.0-3.0, but showed poor utility at INR ≥3.5 where the lowest measured FX level was 12IU/dL. In contrast, ETP and peak thrombin showed significant inverse correlations with the INR, suggesting that TG testing may be helpful in the determination of true anticoagulant intensity in APS patients, including those with ≥3.5 INR. TG testing also highlighted a subgroup of APS patients with increased peak thrombin relative to the intensity of anticoagulation as assessed by INR and FX, suggesting that TG testing may be useful in identifying an ongoing prothrombotic state in patients with apparently adequate anticoagulation intensity as assessed by INR.

Rivaroxaban and warfarin achieve effective anticoagulation, as assessed by inhibition of TG and in-vivo markers of coagulation activation, in patients with venous thromboembolism

INTRODUCTION Rivaroxaban is non-inferior to warfarin for the treatment of venous thromboembolism, with regard to clinical efficacy and safety. The ex-vivo effects of warfarin versus therapeutic dose rivaroxaban on in-vivo markers of coagulation activation and thrombin generation remain undefined. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of warfarin and therapeutic dose rivaroxaban on ex-vivo thrombin generation (TG), and the in-vivo markers of coagulation activation, prothrombin fragment 1.2 (F1.2), thrombin-antithrombin complex (TAT), and D-dimer. METHODS Eighty-five patients with venous thromboembolism were studied, 45 on warfarin, target INR 2.5 and 40 on rivaroxaban 20mg once daily. RESULTS Anticoagulation was in therapeutic range in 71% (32/45) warfarin and 65% (26/40) rivaroxaban treated patients. 8 patients on warfarin and 9 patients on rivaroxaban had subtherapeutic INR and rivaroxaban levels respectively. Both rivaroxaban and warfarin reduced endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) and peak thrombin, and prolonged lag time and time to peak, compared to normal controls (p<0.0001). The lag time and time to peak TG were longer, and peak thrombin was lower in patients receiving rivaroxaban (p<0.0001) compared with warfarin, although warfarin-treated patients had lower ETP (p=0.0008). In-vivo coagulation activation markers were within the normal ranges in all rivaroxaban-treated patients (including those with levels considered to be subtherapeutic) and in 37/45 warfarin-treated patients who had an INR≥2.0. The warfarin-treated patients with subtherapeutic INRs exhibited slightly raised F1.2 and/or TAT. CONCLUSION In conclusion, both rivaroxaban and warfarin provided effective anticoagulation, as assessed by inhibition of TG and makers of in-vivo coagulation activation.

Use of direct oral anticoagulants in antiphospholipid syndrome

The direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are therapeutic alternatives to warfarin and other vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), and constitute the standard of care for many indications. VKAs constitute the conventional therapy for the treatment and secondary thromboprophylaxis of thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), but are often problematic, owing to the variable sensitivity of thromboplastins to lupus anticoagulant. Thus, the International Normalized Ratio may not accurately reflect anticoagulation intensity, or be clinically effective. Definition of the current role of DOACs in the treatment of APS is based on limited clinical trial data and information from other sources, including manufacturers’ data, case series or cohort studies, and expert consensus. The Rivaroxaban in Antiphospholipid Syndrome (RAPS) randomized controlled trial (RCT), which had a laboratory surrogate primary outcome measure, suggests that rivaroxaban has the potential to be an effective and convenient alternative to warfarin in thrombotic APS patients with a single venous thromboembolism event requiring standard‐intensity anticoagulation. However, further studies, in particular to provide better long‐term efficacy and safety data, are needed before it can be widely recommended. APS patients are clinically heterogeneous, with the risk of recurrent thrombosis and the intensity of anticoagulation being influenced by their clinical phenotype and risk profile. DOAC trials involving homogeneous thrombotic APS populations, with the antiphospholipid antibody status well defined, will help to optimize the appropriate treatment in APS patient subgroups. Ongoing and emerging DOAC RCTs should provide further information to guide the use of DOACs in APS patients. Optimal identification of APS patients is a key step in working towards improved therapeutic strategies in these individuals.

Comparative sensitivity of commonly used thromboplastins to ex vivo therapeutic rivaroxaban levels

Comparative sensitivity of commonly used thromboplastins to ex vivo therapeutic rivaroxaban levels -

Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Thromboprophylaxis in Patients with Antiphospholipid Syndrome

&NA; The current mainstay of the treatment and secondary thromboprophylaxis of thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is anticoagulation with warfarin or other vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). In addition to their well‐known limitations, VKAs are often problematic in APS patients because of the variable sensitivity of thromboplastins to lupus anticoagulant. As a result, the international normalized ratio may not accurately reflect the intensity of anticoagulation. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are established as therapeutic alternatives to VKAs for a wide range of indications, including the treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism. Definition of the role of DOACs in the treatment of thrombotic APS is emerging with the results of recent and ongoing clinical studies. This review focuses on the current situation with regard to DOACs for secondary thromboprophylaxis in APS and issues pertinent to DOAC use in APS patients, as well as potential future directions.