Clinical versus fixed warfarin dosing and the impact on quality of anticoagulation (The ClinFix trial)

Author:

Fahmi Amr M.1ORCID,El Bardissy Ahmed1ORCID,Saad Mohamed Omar1ORCID,Elshafei Mohamed Nabil1ORCID,Bader Loulia2ORCID,Mahfouz Ahmed1ORCID,Kasem Mohamed1ORCID,Abdelsamad Osama1ORCID,Elzouki Abdelnasser3ORCID,Aquilante Christina L.4ORCID,Mraiche Fatima5ORCID,Soaly Ezeldin6,El Madhoun Ihab7ORCID,Asaad Nidal8,Arabi Abdulrahman8ORCID,Alhmoud Eman1ORCID,Elewa Hazem2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Pharmacy Department Hamad Medical Corporation Doha Qatar

2. College of Pharmacy Qatar University Doha Qatar

3. Department of Medicine, Hamad General Hospital Hamad Medical Corporation Doha Qatar

4. Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Colorado Aurora USA

5. Department of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry University of Alberta Edmonton Alberta Canada

6. Department of Cardiology AlWakra Hospital, Hamad Medical Corporation AlWakra Qatar

7. Department of Medicine AlWakra Hospital, Hamad Medical Corporation AlWakra Qatar

8. Department of Cardiology Heart Hospital, Hamad Medical Corporation Doha Qatar

Abstract

AbstractDifferent dosing strategies exist to initiate warfarin, most commonly fixed warfarin dosing (FWD), clinical warfarin dosing (CWD), and genetic‐guided warfarin dosing (GWD). Landmark trials have shown GWD to be superior when compared to FWD in the EU‐PACT trial or CWD in the GIFT trial. COAG trial did not show differences between GWD and CWD. We aim to compare the anticoagulation quality outcomes of CWD and FWD. This is a prospective cohort study with a retrospective comparator. Recruited subjects in the CWD (prospective) arm were initiated on warfarin according to the clinical dosing component of the algorithm published in www.warfarindosing.org. The primary efficacy outcome was the percentage time in the therapeutic range (PTTR) from day 3 to 6 till day 28 to 35. The study enrolled 122 and 123 patients in the CWD and FWD, respectively. The PTTR did not differ statistically between CWD and FWD (62.2 ± 26.2% vs. 58 ± 25.4%, p = 0.2). There was also no difference between both arms in the percentage of visits with extreme subtherapeutic international normalized ratio (INR) (<1.5; 15 ± 18.3% vs. 16.8 ± 19.1%, p = 0.44) or extreme supratherapeutic INR (>4; 7.7 ± 14.7% vs. 7.5 ± 12.4%, p = 0.92). We conclude that CWD did not improve the anticoagulation quality parameters compared to the FWD method.

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3