Key result
Six anti-Xa assays not supplemented with antithrombin showed good concordance with HPLC-UV for quantifying apixaban and rivaroxaban, with bias ranging from -26.9 to 22.3 ng/mL for apixaban.
Why the study?
The performance of seven chromogenic anti-Xa assays and an HPLC-UV method for measuring apixaban and rivaroxaban concentrations needed investigation in patient samples.
Are chromogenic anti-Xa assays and HPLC-UV reliable for quantifying apixaban and rivaroxaban levels in treated patients?
Observational (n=251)
Yes
Are chromogenic anti-Xa assays and HPLC-UV reliable for quantifying apixaban and rivaroxaban levels in treated patients?
Anti-Xa assays not supplemented with antithrombin and HPLC-UV are reliable methods for quantifying apixaban and rivaroxaban levels in clinical practice.
Anti-Xa assays without antithrombin may suffice for DOAC quantification in practice; extends assay validation data but leaves standardization questions open.
INTRODUCTION: To measure direct factor Xa inhibitor (apixaban, edoxaban, rivaroxaban) concentrations, dedicated chromogenic anti-Xa assays are recommended as suitable methods to provide rapid drug quantification. Moreover, the high-performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection (HPLC-UV) is reported as a reliable quantitative technique. We investigated seven anti-Xa assays and an HPLC-UV method for measurement of apixaban and rivaroxaban levels in patients enrolled in the START-Register. METHODS: A total of 127 apixaban and 124 rivaroxaban samples were tested by HPLC-UV and the following anti-Xa assays: Biophen DiXaI and Heparin LRT (Hyphen BioMed), Berichrom and Innovance Heparin (Siemens), STA-Liquid Anti-Xa (Stago Diagnostics), Technochrom anti-Xa (Technoclone), and HemosIL Liquid Anti-Xa (Werfen). Each method was performed in one of the participating laboratories: Bologna, Cremona, Florence, and Padua. RESULTS: Our data confirmed the overestimation of apixaban and rivaroxaban levels by the antithrombin-supplemented anti-Xa method (Berichrom). Performances and reproducibility of the six anti-Xa assays not supplemented with antithrombin and the HPLC-UV method were good, with limits of quantification from 8-39 ng/mL (apixaban) and 15-33 ng/mL (rivaroxaban). The six chromogenic methods showed good concordances with the quantitative HPLC-UV [bias: -26.9-22.3 ng/mL (apixaban), -11.3-18.7 ng/mL (rivaroxaban)]. Higher bias and wider range between limits of agreement were observed at higher concentrations [<100 ng/mL: bias -21.3-4.1 ng/mL (apixaban) and -6.2-3.8 ng/mL (rivaroxaban); >200 ng/mL: bias -42.2-36.8 ng/mL (apixaban) and -20.1-68.9 ng/mL (rivaroxaban)]. CONCLUSION: Overall, the anti-Xa assays not supplemented with antithrombin and the HPLC-UV method proved to be suitable for apixaban and rivaroxaban quantification.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cini et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Patients treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban (n=251). Chromogenic anti-Xa assays vs. HPLC-UV method was evaluated on Concordance and bias between anti-Xa assays and HPLC-UV. Six anti-Xa assays not supplemented with antithrombin showed good concordance with HPLC-UV for quantifying apixaban and rivaroxaban, with bias ranging from -26.9 to 22.3 ng/mL for apixaban.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: