Key result
UFH/LMWH-calibrated anti-factor Xa assays reliably determine antidote cutoffs for rivaroxaban and apixaban but fail for edoxaban.
Why the study?
To determine whether measuring DOAC levels is possible using heparin-calibrated chromogenic anti-factor Xa activity, and whether antidote treatment decision levels can be determined this way.
Can heparin-calibrated anti-factor Xa assays accurately measure DOAC levels and determine antidote treatment decision levels compared to DOAC-specific assays?
Can heparin-calibrated anti-factor Xa assays accurately measure DOAC levels and determine antidote treatment decision levels compared to DOAC-specific assays?
Heparin-calibrated anti-factor Xa assays can be used to determine antidote treatment cutoffs for rivaroxaban and apixaban, but are inaccurate for edoxaban and cannot calculate accurate DOAC concentrations overall.
May enable emergency DOAC assessment via existing AXA assays; leaves open whether it reliably guides antidote thresholds.
BACKGROUND: The first purpose of this study was to determine whether a measurement of the level of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) was possible with heparin-calibrated chromogenic anti-factor Xa activity (AXA). The second purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the antidote treatment decision level (30 or 50 ng/mL of DOAC) can be determined by unfractionated heparin (UHF)/low molecular weight heparin (LMWH)-calibrated AXA. METHODS: AXA was measured by using two reagents and dedicated analyzers (Sysmex CS-5100 analyzer and STA R Max3). Four types of calibrators were used: 1) Stago DOAC (rivaroxaban, edoxaban, and apixaban)-specific calibrator, 2) Stago LMWH calibrator, 3) Sysmex UHF calibrator, and 4) Sysmex LMWH calibrator. Regression analysis was used between assays. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were performed, and the concordance rate was calculated. RESULTS: The correlation coefficients were in the range of 0.75 - 0.91 for rivaroxaban and 0.81 - 0.94 for apixaban. The correlation coefficient between edoxaban-calibrated AXA and Sysmex LMWH/Sysmex UHF calibrator-calibrated AXA was low (r = 0.47). Overall correlation between DOAC-calibrated AXA and Stago LMWH-calibrated AXA was linear, at only low concentration in all three DOACs. The concordance rate (89.3 - 100%) is good for de-termining the antidote management level by UFH/LMWH-calibrated AXA, compared with those of DOAC-calibrated AXA in rivaroxaban and apixaban. The concordance rate ranged from 63% to 67% between Sysmex UFH/ LMWH-calibrated AXA and edoxaban-calibrated AXA. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of our study suggest limitations in calculating accurate concentrations, when using UFH/LMWH-calibrated AXA to measure DOAC. This study demonstrates that UFH/LMWH-calibrated AXA may be useful in determining the presence of DOACs at the cutoff level for the antidote treatment in rivarovaban and apixaban. However, in edoxaban, UFH/LMWH-calibrated AXA could not accurately measure the presence of DOACs at the cutoff for antidote treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ahn et al. (2024) studied Measurement of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). UFH/LMWH-calibrated anti-factor Xa activity (AXA) assay vs. DOAC-specific calibrated AXA assay was evaluated on Concordance rate for determining antidote treatment decision level (30 or 50 ng/mL of DOAC). UFH/LMWH-calibrated anti-factor Xa assays can determine antidote treatment cutoffs for rivaroxaban and apixaban (concordance 89.3-100%), but not accurately for edoxaban (concordance 63-67%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: