Assays using prothrombinase with protein substrates are better predictors of in vivo antithrombotic efficacy than purified factor Xa Ki using amidolytic substrates.
Should not yet inform clinical inhibitor selection; hypothesis-generating for prothrombinase assays as superior predictors of antithrombotic efficacy.
OBJECTIVE: In this study we test the hypothesis that blood/plasma-based prothrombinase assays, rather than inhibition of purified factor Xa (fXa), are predictive of in vivo antithrombotic activity. METHODS AND RESULTS: Six fXa inhibitors with equivalent nanomolar Ki were studied in thrombin generation assays using human plasma/blood and endogenous macromolecular substrate. In all assays, benzamidine inhibitors were more potent (100 to 800 nmol/L) than the aminoisoquinolines (5 to 58 micromol/L) or neutral inhibitors (3 to 10 micromol/L). A similar rank order of compound inhibition was also seen in purified prothrombinase assays as well as in a rabbit model of deep vein thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: Assays using prothrombinase with protein substrates are better predictors of in vivo efficacy than fXa Ki using amidolytic substrates.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sinha et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: