Key result
Genotype-guided dosing of coumarin anticoagulants improved the percentage of time within the therapeutic INR range compared with standard, but not clinical, dosing.
Why the study?
Does genotype-guided dosing improve the percentage of time in therapeutic INR range in patients receiving coumarin anticoagulants?
Meta-Analysis
Does genotype-guided dosing improve the percentage of time in therapeutic INR range in patients receiving coumarin anticoagulants?
Genotype-guided dosing of coumarin anticoagulants improves time in therapeutic range and reduces adverse events compared to standard dosing, but offers no significant advantage over clinical variables-guided dosing.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Genotype-guided dosing offers no advantage over clinical algorithms; reinforces clinical variables as sufficient for INR optimization.
BACKGROUND: Coumarin anticoagulants (acenocoumarol, phenprocoumon, and warfarin) are generally used for the prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation or for the therapy and prevention of venous thromboembolism. However, the safe use of coumarin anticoagulants is restricted by a narrow therapeutic window and large interindividual dosing variations. Some studies found that the effectiveness and safety of coumarin anticoagulants therapy were increased by pharmacogenetic-guided dosing algorithms, while others found no significant effect of genotype-guided therapy. METHODS: Four electronic databases were searched from January 1, 2000, to March 1, 2014, for randomized controlled trials of patients who received coumarin anticoagulants according to genotype-guided dosing algorithms. The primary outcome was the percentage of time that the international normalized ratio (INR) was within the normal range (2.0-3.0). Secondary outcomes included major bleeding events, thromboembolic events, and INR ≥4 events. RESULTS: Eight studies satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Genotype-guided dosing of coumarin anticoagulants improved the percentage of time within the therapeutic INR range (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02-0.28; P = .02; I(2) = 70%). Subgroup analysis was performed after dividing the nongenotype-guided group into a standard-dose group (95% CI, 0.14-0.49; P = .0004; I(2) = 50%) and a clinical variables-guided dosing algorithm group (95% CI, -0.07-0.15; P = .48; I(2) = 34%). There is a statistically significant reduction in numbers of secondary outcomes (INR ≥4 events, major bleeding events, and thromboembolic events; 95% CI, 0.79-1.00; P = .04). Subgroup analysis of secondary outcomes showed no significant difference between genotype-guided dosing and clinical variables-guided dosing (95% CI, 0.84-1.10; P = .57; I(2) = 11%), but genotype-guided dosing reduced secondary outcomes compared with standard dosing (95% CI, 0.62-0.92; P = .006; I(2) = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis showed that genotype-guided dosing increased the effectiveness and safety of coumarin therapy compared with standard dosing but did not have advantages compared with clinical variables-guided dosing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tang et al. (2015) conducted a meta-analysis in Patients receiving coumarin anticoagulants. Genotype-guided dosing of coumarin anticoagulants vs. Nongenotype-guided dosing (standard-dose or clinical variables-guided) was evaluated on Percentage of time that the international normalized ratio (INR) was within the normal range (2.0-3.0) (95% CI 0.02-0.28, p=0.02). Genotype-guided dosing of coumarin anticoagulants improved the percentage of time within the therapeutic INR range compared with standard, but not clinical, dosing.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: