Why the study?
Is a fixed dose of direct thrombin and factor Xa inhibitors optimal for all patients requiring thromboprophylaxis?
Is a fixed dose of direct thrombin and factor Xa inhibitors optimal for all patients requiring thromboprophylaxis?
Highlights the potential dangers of a 'one size fits all' fixed-dose approach for new direct oral anticoagulants due to significant inter-individual variability in response.
Response variability to fixed-dose anticoagulants warrants caution against routine practice changes; hypothesis-generating for individualized dosing trials.
Enabling Technology, Genomics, Proteomics Preclinical Research New, direct thrombin and factor Xa inhibitors have been developed to reduce the well‐established drawbacks of currently available anticoagulants such as a protracted duration of action and high inter‐ and intra‐individual variation of dose‐effect. New anticoagulants are noninferior and no less effective for thromboprophylaxis than low‐molecular‐weight heparins or vitamin K antagonists. They are currently administered at fixed doses without control of their effect on the clotting system. Whether they need monitoring cannot be answered because relevant data are lacking and present means of monitoring are inadequate. The individual response to a standard dose of (any) anticoagulant—the modern direct inhibitors included—is highly variable (∼30%), and the clinical effect of all anticoagulants is not dose independent. Therefore a fixed dose that is optimal for the average patient is suboptimal for a fair percentage of patients that are low responders (risk of re‐thrombosis) and dangerous for an equally high percentage of high responders (risk of bleeding). A better understanding of individual differences in the response, either low or high, to anticoagulants, irrespective of their mode of action, should be a primary objective for pharmacotherapy over the next decade.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bloemen et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: