Dataset Information

Nonclinical evaluation of novel cationically modified polysaccharide antidotes for unfractionated heparin.

ABSTRACT: Protamine, the only registered antidote of unfractionated heparin (UFH), may produce a number of adverse effects, such as anaphylactic shock or serious hypotension. We aimed to develop an alternative UFH antidote as efficient as protamine, but safer and easier to produce. As a starting material, we have chosen generally non-toxic, biocompatible, widely available, inexpensive, and easy to functionalize polysaccharides. Our approach was to synthesize, purify and characterize cationic derivatives of dextran, hydroxypropylcellulose, pullulan and γ-cyclodextrin, then to screen them for potential heparin-reversal activity using an in vitro assay and finally examine efficacy and safety of the most active polymers in Wistar rat and BALB/c mouse models of experimentally induced arterial and venous thrombosis. Efficacy studies included the measurement of thrombus formation, activated partial thromboplastin time, bleeding time, and anti-factor Xa activity; safety studies included the measurement of hemodynamic, hematologic and immunologic parameters. Linear, high molecular weight dextran substituted with glycidyltrimethylammonium chloride groups at a ratio of 0.65 per glucose unit (Dex40-GTMAC3) is the most potent and the safest UFH inhibitor showing activity comparable to that of protamine while possessing lower immunogenicity. Cationic polysaccharides of various structures neutralize UFH. Dex40-GTMAC3 is a promising and potentially better UFH antidote than protamine.

SUBMITTER: Kalaska B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4362941 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundUnfractionated heparin (UFH) is an anticoagulant drug that is considered a high-risk medication because an excessive dose can cause bleeding, whereas an insufficient dose can lead to a recurrent embolic event. Therapeutic response to the initiation of intravenous UFH is monitored using activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) as a measure of blood clotting time. Clinicians iteratively adjust the dose of UFH toward a target, indication-defined therapeutic aPTT range using nomograms, but this process can be imprecise and can take ≥36 hours to achieve the target range. Thus, a more efficient approach is required.ObjectiveIn this study, we aimed to develop and validate a machine learning (ML) algorithm to predict aPTT within 12 hours after a specified bolus and maintenance dose of UFH.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of 3019 patient episodes of care from January 2017 to August 2020 using data collected from electronic health records of 5 hospitals in Queensland, Australia. Data from 4 hospitals were used to build and test ensemble models using cross-validation, whereas data from the fifth hospital were used for external validation. We built 2 ML models: a regression model to predict the aPTT value after a UFH bolus dose and a multiclass model to predict the aPTT, classified as subtherapeutic (aPTT <70 seconds), therapeutic (aPTT 70-100 seconds), or supratherapeutic (aPTT >100 seconds). Modeling was performed using Driverless AI (H2O), an automated ML tool, and 17 different experiments were iteratively conducted to optimize model accuracy.ResultsIn predicting aPTT, the best performing model was an ensemble with 4x LightGBM models with a root mean square error of 31.35 (SD 1.37). In predicting the aPTT class using a repurposed data set, the best performing ensemble model achieved an accuracy of 0.599 (SD 0.0289) and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.735. External validation yielded similar results: root mean square error of 30.52 (SD 1.29) for the aPTT prediction model, and accuracy of 0.568 (SD 0.0315) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.724 for the aPTT multiclassification model.ConclusionsTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first ML model applied to intravenous UFH dosing that has been developed and externally validated in a multisite adult general medical and surgical inpatient setting. We present the processes of data collection, preparation, and feature engineering for replication.

Project description:Failure to recognize the presence of competing risk or to account for it may result in misleading conclusions. We aimed to perform a competing risk analysis to assess the efficacy of the low molecular weight heparin dalteparin versus unfractionated heparin (UFH) in venous thromboembolism (VTE) in medical-surgical critically ill patients, taking death as a competing risk.This was a secondary analysis of a prospective randomized study of the Prophylaxis for Thromboembolism in Critical Care Trial (PROTECT) database. A total of 3746 medical-surgical critically ill patients from 67 intensive care units (ICUs) in 6 countries receiving either subcutaneous UFH 5000 IU twice daily (n?=?1873) or dalteparin 5000 IU once daily plus once-daily placebo (n?=?1873) were included for analysis.A total of 205 incident proximal leg deep vein thromboses (PLDVT) were reported during follow-up, among which 96 were in the dalteparin group and 109 were in the UFH group. No significant treatment effect of dalteparin on PLDVT compared with UFH was observed in either the competing risk analysis or standard survival analysis (also known as cause-specific analysis) using multivariable models adjusted for APACHE II score, history of VTE, need for vasopressors, and end-stage renal disease: sub-hazard ratio (SHR)?=?0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.70-1.21, P-value?=?0.56 for the competing risk analysis; hazard ratio (HR)?=?0.92, 95% CI: 0.68-1.23, P-value?=?0.57 for cause-specific analysis. Dalteparin was associated with a significant reduction in risk of pulmonary embolism (PE): SHR?=?0.54, 95% CI: 0.31-0.94, P-value?=?0.02 for the competing risk analysis; HR?=?0.51, 95% CI: 0.30-0.88, P-value?=?0.01 for the cause-specific analysis. Two additional sensitivity analyses using the treatment variable as a time-dependent covariate and using as-treated and per-protocol approaches demonstrated similar findings.This competing risk analysis yields no significant treatment effect on PLDVT but a superior effect of dalteparin on PE compared with UFH in medical-surgical critically ill patients. The findings from the competing risk method are in accordance with results from the cause-specific analysis.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00182143.

Project description:BackgroundLow molecular weight heparins (LMWH) have been extensively studied and became the treatment of choice for several indications including pulmonary embolism. While their efficacy in hemodialysis is considered similar to unfractionated heparin (UFH), their safety remains controversial mainly due to a risk of bioaccumulation in patients with renal impairment. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the safety of LMWH when compared to UFH for extracorporeal circuit (ECC) anticoagulation.MethodsWe used Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, Trip database and NICE to retrieve relevant studies with no language restriction. We looked for controlled experimental trials comparing LMWH to UFH for ECC anticoagulation among end-stage renal disease patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis. Studies were kept if they reported at least one of the following outcomes: bleeding, lipid profile, cardiovascular events, osteoporosis or heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Two independent reviewers conducted studies selection, quality assessment and data extraction with discrepancies solved by a third reviewer. Relative risk and 95% CI was calculated for dichotomous outcomes and mean weighted difference (MWD) with 95% CI was used to pool continuous variables.ResultsSeventeen studies were selected as part of the systematic. The relative risk for total bleeding was 0.76 (95% CI 0.26-2.22). The WMD calculated for total cholesterol was -28.70 mg/dl (95% CI -51.43 to -5.98), a WMD for triglycerides of -55.57 mg/dl (95% CI -94.49 to -16.66) was estimated, and finally LDL-cholesterol had a WMD of -14.88 mg/dl (95% CI -36.27 to 6.51).ConclusionsLMWH showed to be at least as safe as UFH for ECC anticoagulation in chronic hemodialysis. The limited number of studies reporting on osteoporosis and HIT does not allow any conclusion for these outcomes. Larger studies are needed to evaluate properly the safety of LMWH in chronic hemodialysis.

Dataset Information

Nonclinical evaluation of novel cationically modified polysaccharide antidotes for unfractionated heparin.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets