Rivaroxaban reversal with prothrombin complex concentrate or tranexamic acid in healthy volunteers

Essentials

• Specific reversal agents for managing severe factor Xa inhibitor‐associated bleeding are lacking.
• We assessed 4‐factor‐prothrombin complex concentrate (4F‐PCC) and tranexamic acid (TXA).
• 4F‐PCC, but not TXA, reduced the prothrombin time and increased endogenous thrombin potential.
• These agents may be viable options for reversal of therapeutic doses of rivaroxaban.

Summary

Background

Oral activated factor X inhibitors such as rivaroxaban are widely used, but specific reversal agents are lacking. Although four‐factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F‐PCC) and tranexamic acid (TXA) are sometimes used to manage serious bleeding, their efficacy is unknown. Prior studies in healthy subjects taking rivaroxaban revealed that 4F‐PCC partially reverses the prolonged prothrombin time (PT), and fully restores the endogenous thrombin potential (ETP). The effect of TXA has not been evaluated.

Methods

In this double‐blind, parallel‐group study, 147 healthy volunteers given rivaroxaban 20 mg twice daily for 3 days were randomized after their morning dose on day 4 to receive intravenous 4F‐PCC (50 IU kg^?1), TXA (1.0 g), or saline. Standardized punch biopsies were performed at baseline and after 4F‐PCC, TXA or saline administration. Reversal was assessed by measuring bleeding duration and bleeding volume at biopsy sites, and by determining the PT and ETP.

Results

As compared with saline, 4F‐PCC partially reversed the PT and completely reversed the ETP, whereas TXA had no effect. Neither 4F‐PCC nor TXA reduced bleeding duration or volume. All treatments were well tolerated, with no recorded adverse events.

Conclusions

Although 4F‐PCC reduced the PT and increased the ETP in volunteers given supratherapeutic doses of rivaroxaban, neither 4F‐PCC nor TXA influenced punch biopsy bleeding.

     

Rivaroxaban for thromboprophylaxis among patients recently hospitalized for acute infectious diseases: a subgroup analysis of the MAGELLAN study

Essentials

• Net benefit of venous thromboprophylaxis (VTE) in patients hospitalized for infections is unknown.
• MAGELLAN trial subgroup analysis was performed for patients hospitalized for acute infectious diseases.
• At day 35, prolonged rivaroxaban prophylaxis reduced VTE compared to enoxaparin (4.2% vs. 6.6%).
• Rivaroxaban prophylaxis reduced VTE in patients hospitalized for active lung infections.

Summary

Background

Despite the well‐established association between infection and venous thromboembolism (VTE), there are few data specifically assessing the efficacy and safety of the VTE prophylaxis strategies for patients hospitalized for acute infectious diseases.

Objectives

To estimate the incidence of VTE and bleeding outcomes, comparing prolonged prophylaxis with rivaroxaban 10 mg daily for 35 days with enoxaparin 40 mg daily for 10 days.

Patients/Methods

A subgroup analysis of patients hospitalized for acute infectious diseases in the MAGELLAN trial was performed. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of asymptomatic proximal or symptomatic VTE at days 10 and 35. The principal safety outcome was the composite of major or clinically relevant non‐major bleeding.

Results

Three thousand one hundred and seventy‐three patients with acute infectious diseases leading to hospitalization were randomized to either rivaroxaban (n = 1585) or enoxaparin/placebo (n = 1588), and received at least one dose of study medication. At day 10, primary composite efficacy outcomes did not differ between prophylaxis strategies (rivaroxaban, 2.7%; and enoxaparin, 3.7%). At day 35, there were fewer VTE events with rivaroxaban (4.2%) than with enoxaparin (6.6%) (relative risk [RR] 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45–0.92). Patients with pulmonary infections randomized to rivaroxaban had a lower incidence of VTE both at 10 days (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.28–0.90) and at 35 days (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.33–0.87). Primary safety outcome events were increased with rivaroxaban (RR 2.42, 95% CI 1.60–3.66).

Conclusions

Prolonged rivaroxaban prophylaxis reduced the incidence of VTE in patients hospitalized for acute infectious diseases, particularly those involving the lungs. Efficacy benefits were, in part, offset by bleeding outcomes. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT 00571649.

     

Contribution of rivaroxaban to the international normalized ratio when switching to warfarin for anticoagulation as determined by simulation studies

Aim

This study evaluated the influence of rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily on international normalized ratio (INR) during the co-administration period when switching from rivaroxaban to warfarin.

Methods

We developed a calibrated coagulation model that was qualified with phase I clinical data. Prothrombin time and INR values were simulated by use of phospholipid concentrations that matched Neoplastin Plus® and Innovin® reagents. To simulate the combined effects of rivaroxaban and warfarin on INR during switching, warfarin initiation was simulated by adjusting the magnitude of the warfarin effect to reach the desired target INRs over the course of 21 days. The warfarin effect values (obtained every 6 h) and the desired rivaroxaban plasma concentrations were used. Nomograms were generated from rivaroxaban induced increases in INR.

Results

The simulation had good prediction quality. Rivaroxaban induced increases in the total INR from the warfarin attributed INR were seen, which increased with rivaroxaban plasma concentration. When the warfarin only INR was 2.0–3.0, the INR contribution of rivaroxaban with Neoplastin Plus® was 0.5–1.2, decreasing to 0.3–0.6 with Innovin® at median trough rivaroxaban plasma concentrations (38 μg l⁻¹).

Conclusions

The data indicate that measuring warfarin induced changes in INR are best performed at trough rivaroxaban concentrations (24 h after rivaroxaban dosing) during the co-administration period when switching from rivaroxaban to warfarin. Furthermore, Innovin® is preferable to Neoplastin Plus® because of its substantially lower sensitivity to rivaroxaban, thereby reducing the influence of rivaroxaban on the measured INR.     

Direct Oral Anticoagulants: New Drugs and New Concepts

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are approved for multiple thromboembolic disorders and provide advantages over existing agents. As with all anticoagulants, management protocols for the eventuality of bleeding are important. Randomized phase III studies generally show that DOACs have a similar risk of clinically relevant bleeding compared with standard anticoagulants, with reductions in major bleeding in some cases. This may be particularly important in patients with atrial fibrillation, for whom the rate of intracranial hemorrhage was approximately halved with DOACs compared with warfarin. Conversely, the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding may be increased. Specific patient characteristics, such as renal impairment, comedications, and particular aspects of each drug, including the proportion eliminated by the kidneys, must be taken into account when assessing the risk of bleeding. Although routine coagulation monitoring of DOACs is not required, it may be useful under some circumstances. Of the traditional clotting assays, a sensitive and calibrated prothrombin time may be useful for detecting the presence or absence of clinically relevant factor Xa inhibitor concentrations (rivaroxaban or apixaban), but specific anti–factor Xa assays can measure drug levels quantitatively. For dabigatran, the results of an activated partial thromboplastin time test may exclude a clinically relevant pharmacodynamic effect, but a calibrated dilute thrombin time assay can be used for quantification of drug levels. In the event of mild or moderate bleeding, normal hemostatic support measures are recommended. For life-threatening bleeding, use of nonspecific prohemostatic agents may be considered, although clinical evidence is scarce. Specific antidotes are in development.     

Newer oral anticoagulant agents: a new era in medicine

After a gap of almost 60 years following the development of warfarin, 2 new categories of oral anticoagulant agents have been approved for clinical use - the direct thrombin inhibitors and factor Xa inhibitors. These agents promise to be more convenient to administer with fixed dosing but still have equivalent efficacy and improved bleeding risk compared to warfarin. The clinical community is looking forward to the widespread usage of these agents but there is also some apprehension regarding bleeding risks, non-availability of specific reversal strategies and lack of specific monitoring parameters. This review article will attempt to educate the reader about three representative drugs from these classes: Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban and Apixaban. We will discuss the historical perspective to the development of these drugs, available research data and pharmacology of these agents. The best strategies for monitoring and reversal of these drugs in special situations will also be touched upon.     

利伐沙班与低分子肝素预防膝关节翻修术后深静脉血栓的临床疗效分析

目的:比较利伐沙班与低分子肝素预防膝关节翻修术后深静脉血栓（Deep Vein Thrombosis,DVT）的临床疗效。方法:回顾分析2014年1月—2017年1月收治的58例（59膝）膝关节翻修患者的临床资料,按 DVT预防方式分为低分子肝素组33例（33膝）和利伐沙班组25例（26膝）,采用SPSS19.0统计软件进行分析,比较两组患者术后DVT及出血事件的发生率和膝关节疼痛、肿胀、淤血瘀斑、功能以及不良事件发生率的差异。结果:术后患者切口均Ⅰ期愈合,利伐沙班组和低分子肝素组DVT的发生率为分别为4.00%（1/25）和6.06%（2/33）,两组差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。利伐沙班组皮下瘀斑的发生率为36.00%（9/25）,显著高于低分子肝素组6.06%（2/33）,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。两组患者术后引流量、出凝血指标、肢体肿胀程度及膝关节HSS（Hospital for Special surgery knee Score）评分、VAS（Visual Analogue Score）疼痛评分、不良事件的发生率均无统计学差异（P＞0.05）。结论:利伐沙班和低分子肝素预防膝关节翻修术后DVT安全有效,二者效果相当,但利伐沙班增加了皮下瘀斑形成的风险。     

A Prospective Cohort Comparative Study of Rivaroxaban,Dabigatran, and Apixaban Oral Thromboprophylaxis in 2431 Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Patients: Primary Efficacy Outcomes and Safety Profile

BackgroundDirect oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have promised superior efficacy to low molecular weight heparins in the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in total hip and knee arthroplasty. However, there are concerns about raised associated bleeding and wound problems with these agents. This study aims to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of the 3 DOAC drugs: rivaroxaban, dabigatran and apixaban.MethodsThe primary outcome measures were rate of symptomatic VTE and major bleeding. Secondary outcome measures were wound healing problems and requirement for return to theater. A total of 2431 patients received one of the DOAC drugs as thromboprophylaxis following total hip arthroplasty (35 days) or total knee arthroplasty (14 days) between 2011 and 2015. Binary variables were compared between the 3 groups by using the chi-squared test or Fisher’s exact test. Relative risks of selected primary and secondary end points were also calculated for the prespecified pairwise comparison.ResultsThe overall symptomatic VTE rate was 2%. Rivaroxaban had a statistically significant superior efficacy for overall VTE prevention (0.8% vs 2.6%) compared with dabigatran (P < .01) and apixaban (P < .01), and deep vein thrombosis prevention (0.3% vs 2.2%) over dabigatran (P < .01). The overall rate of major bleeding was 1.2% with no significant difference observed between the 3 studied drugs.ConclusionAll 3 drugs had symptomatic VTE rates comparable with low molecular weight heparin from the published literature. Rivaroxaban appears to have superior efficacy in VTE prevention over apixaban and dabigatran. No statistical difference was observed for major bleeding with any of the 3 agents.