Key result
A pharmacodynamic model for warfarin initiation explained at least two thirds of the interindividual variability in maintenance dose requirements, compared to one third by a standard induction protocol.
Why the study?
Does an age-adjusted pharmacodynamic model better predict warfarin maintenance dose requirements compared to a standard induction protocol in patients initiating oral anticoagulation?
Cohort (n=65)
Yes
Does an age-adjusted pharmacodynamic model better predict warfarin maintenance dose requirements compared to a standard induction protocol in patients initiating oral anticoagulation?
An age-adjusted pharmacodynamic model explains significantly more interindividual variability in warfarin maintenance dosing than a standard induction protocol, potentially reducing under- or overanticoagulation during initiation.
May support model-guided warfarin initiation; leaves open outcome benefits versus standard protocols in prospective trials.
A pharmacodynamic (E(max)) model for optimizing warfarin initiation had previously been reported. This study assessed the validity of this model, adjusted further for age in both the initial cohort and another cohort distinct from that used for the formulation of the model. Thirty-one patients undergoing oral anticoagulation for mainly cardiac indications were recruited from Kuala Lumpur. Thirty-four patients undergoing oral anticoagulation for deep vein thrombosis were recruited from Cambridge. They were studied for their anticoagulant response to the initiation of warfarin. The former were intuitively dosed after a 2-day loading of 10 mg warfarin/d. The latter all were commenced on warfarin via a standard 4-day induction protocol of Fennerty et al that allows early estimation of the required maintenance dose. The actual maintenance doses in both cohorts were compared with their predicted doses on the initiation of therapy that was calculated both from this model and from the induction protocol of Fennerty et al. The third day's international normalized ratio and age combination was additive in terms of their influence on the maintenance dose. The predictive model in both cohorts returned similar results and explained at least two thirds of the interindividual variability in warfarin maintenance dose requirements, whereas the induction protocol of Fennerty et al explained only one third of this interindividual variability. Use of this model in the form of the included nomogram should be able to decrease both the occurrence of either under- or overanticoagulation as well as the time taken to initiate treatment and decide the correct maintenance dose during the initiation of oral anticoagulation with warfarin in hospitals. A prospective evaluation of the nomogram is recommended.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Suhail A.R. Doi (2001) conducted a cohort in Need for oral anticoagulation (n=65). Pharmacodynamic (E(max)) model for warfarin initiation vs. Induction protocol of Fennerty et al was evaluated on Proportion of interindividual variability in warfarin maintenance dose requirements explained. A pharmacodynamic model for warfarin initiation explained at least two thirds of the interindividual variability in maintenance dose requirements, compared to one third by a standard induction protocol.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: