Dataset Information

Direct oral anticoagulants-Remove versus Taipan snake venom time for detection of a lupus anticoagulant in patients taking oral direct factor Xa inhibitors.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The optimal method of detecting a lupus anticoagulant (LA) for patients taking direct factor Xa inhibitor (DFXaI) direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) remains controversial. Methods include charcoal adsorption of the DOACs to allow testing with the activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and dilute Russell viper venom time (dRVVT), or use of the DFXaI-insensitive Taipan snake venom time (TSVT) and Ecarin time (ET) assays on neat plasma.

Objectives

The objective was to compare the utility of APTT and dRVVT analysis following DOAC Remove against TSVT/ET on untreated plasma for LA detection in spiked plasmas and routine clinical samples for patients on DFXaIs.

Patients/methods

Various LA-negative and LA-positive samples were assayed by APTT, dRVVT, and TSVT/ET, and then separately spiked with rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban calibrators to a concentration of ~190 ng/ml and the assays repeated on spiked plasma before and after DOAC Remove treatment. Testing of 284 consecutive samples from DFXaI-anticoagulated patients by APTT/dRVVT and TSVT/ET before and after DOAC Remove treatment was undertaken.

Results

In the spiking model, we found that both TSVT/ET and DOAC Remove strategies generally distinguished LA-negative and LA-positive samples, but some false-positive LA results occurred. In the investigation of 284 consecutive patient samples on DFXaIs, the percentage agreement for LA detection in neat samples tested by TSVT/ET versus APTT and dRVVT after DOAC Remove treatment was 90% (Cohen kappa 0.12).

Conclusion

Our data highlight uncertainty and disagreement for testing LA in patients on DFXaI. Further studies are required.

SUBMITTER: White D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8784856 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceClarithromycin is a commonly prescribed antibiotic associated with higher levels of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in the blood, with the potential to increase the risk of hemorrhage.ObjectiveTo assess the 30-day risk of a hospital admission with hemorrhage after coprescription of clarithromycin compared with azithromycin among older adults taking a DOAC.Design, setting, and participantsThis population-based, retrospective cohort study was conducted among adults of advanced age (mean [SD] age, 77.6 [7.2] years) who were newly coprescribed clarithromycin (n = 6592) vs azithromycin (n = 18 351) while taking a DOAC (dabigatran, apixaban, or rivaroxaban) in Ontario, Canada, from June 23, 2009, to December 31, 2016. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine the association between hemorrhage and antibiotic use (clarithromycin vs azithromycin). Statistical analysis was performed from December 23, 2019, to March 25, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresHospital admission with major hemorrhage (upper or lower gastrointestinal tract or intracranial). Outcomes were assessed within 30 days of a coprescription.ResultsAmong the 24 943 patients (12 493 women; mean [SD] age, 77.6 [7.2] years) in the study, rivaroxaban was the most commonly prescribed DOAC (9972 patients [40.0%]), followed by apixaban (7953 [31.9%]) and dabigatran (7018 [28.1%]). Coprescribing clarithromycin vs azithromycin with a DOAC was associated with a higher risk of a hospital admission with major hemorrhage (51 of 6592 patients [0.77%] taking clarithromycin vs 79 of 18 351 patients [0.43%] taking azithromycin; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.20-2.45]; absolute risk difference, 0.34%). Results were consistent in multiple additional analyses.Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that, among adults of advanced age taking a DOAC, concurrent use of clarithromycin compared with azithromycin was associated with a small but statistically significantly greater 30-day risk of hospital admission with major hemorrhage.