Pharmacodynamic optimization of warfarin therapy

Evaluation of a Potential Interaction Between New Regimens to Treat Hepatitis C and Warfarin

OBJECTIVE

New regimens to treat hepatitis C virus infection have expanded the eligible patient population to include more patients receiving concurrent warfarin. The primary objective of this study was to assess whether a drug interaction occurs when these regimens are added to warfarin therapy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort design using a nationwide database of the Veterans Affairs Health System. Patients on warfarin therapy treated with sofosbuvir or ombitasvir, paritaprevir-ritonavir, and dasabuvir (OBV-PTV/r-DSV) from March 2014 through October 2015 were identified. The warfarin dose response was calculated using a warfarin sensitivity index (WSI) defined as the steady-state INR divided by the mean daily warfarin dose. The primary outcome was the change in WSI from hepatitis C treatment initiation to completion.

RESULTS

The final sample consisted of 271 patients. The WSI decreased 23% from a mean baseline value of 0.53 to 0.39 (decrease of 0.14; 95% CI = 0.11 to 0.16; P < 0.001). OBV-PTV/r-DSV produced a significantly greater decrease than any sofosbuvir regimen. Concurrent ribavirin accounted for an additional decrease in warfarin sensitivity of -0.09 (95% CI = -0.06 to -0.12; P < 0.001). The percentage of subtherapeutic INR results increased from 26% prior to hepatitis C treatment to 58% during treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate a clinically significant reduction in warfarin dose-response when hepatitis C treatment regimens were added to warfarin. They were most profound with OBV-PTV/r-DSV. Ribavirin was associated with an additive effect. Clinicians should be aware of this potential drug interaction to closely monitor and minimize subtherapeutic levels of anticoagulation.

Initiation of Warfarin Treatment in Outpatients with Nonrheumatic Atrial Fibrillation: A Scheme for Early Indication of Maintenance Dose

Eighty-four outpatients with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation starting oral anticoagulant treatment were adminis tered warfarin (10 mg/day) for the first 2 days of treatment. Prothrombin time, expressed as International Normalized Ratio (INR), was measured on day 3 and plotted against the weekly warfarin maintenance dose, defined as the dose able to maintain INR between 2.0 and 3.0 (therapeutic range) on three consecu tive occasions, 1 week apart. The data fit a regression line (r = 0.74, p < .0001) that we use to estimate the weekly maintenance dose of other patients.

A Bayesian method based on clotting factor activity for the prediction of maintenance warfarin dosage regimens

A Bayesian algorithm, employing a population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model, for the effective and rapid prediction of warfarin maintenance dosing requirements was developed. The algorithm was evaluated prospectively in five healthy volunteers who were given a 15-mg single dose of racemic warfarin. Based on previous population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters and factor VII response measurements taken during the first 48 hours, dosage regimens to achieve a subtherapeutic degree of anticoagulation (50% of normal) were determined. Three factor VII response measurements were sufficient to determine dosing requirements in the five volunteers. The advantage of the algorithm is that it does not require warfarin concentration measurements and uses non-steady-state data.

Pharmacodynamic optimization of warfarin therapy II

A pharmacodynamic (E(max)) model for optimizing warfarin initiation had previously been reported. This study assessed the validity of this model, adjusted further for age in both the initial cohort and another cohort distinct from that used for the formulation of the model. Thirty-one patients undergoing oral anticoagulation for mainly cardiac indications were recruited from Kuala Lumpur. Thirty-four patients undergoing oral anticoagulation for deep vein thrombosis were recruited from Cambridge. They were studied for their anticoagulant response to the initiation of warfarin. The former were intuitively dosed after a 2-day loading of 10 mg warfarin/d. The latter all were commenced on warfarin via a standard 4-day induction protocol of Fennerty et al that allows early estimation of the required maintenance dose. The actual maintenance doses in both cohorts were compared with their predicted doses on the initiation of therapy that was calculated both from this model and from the induction protocol of Fennerty et al. The third day's international normalized ratio and age combination was additive in terms of their influence on the maintenance dose. The predictive model in both cohorts returned similar results and explained at least two thirds of the interindividual variability in warfarin maintenance dose requirements, whereas the induction protocol of Fennerty et al explained only one third of this interindividual variability. Use of this model in the form of the included nomogram should be able to decrease both the occurrence of either under- or overanticoagulation as well as the time taken to initiate treatment and decide the correct maintenance dose during the initiation of oral anticoagulation with warfarin in hospitals. A prospective evaluation of the nomogram is recommended.