Re-exposure to recombinant (r)-hirudin in antihirudin antibody-positive patients with a history of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Severe anaphylactic reaction after repeated intermittent exposure to lepirudin

Lepirudin, a recombinant DNA derivative of hirudin, is used to prevent thromboembolic complications caused by heparin-induced thrombocytopenia type II. Anaphylactic and anaphylactoid reactions have been reported with its use in patients both with and without known previous exposure to lepirudin. We describe the case of a 57-year-old woman who received five uneventful courses of lepirudin therapy before having a severe anaphylactic reaction during administration of the intravenous bolus dose that began her sixth course. The patient experienced cardiorespiratory arrest but recovered from the reaction. The decision to administer lepirudin to a patient who has previously received it should be reached with due consideration of the risk:benefit ratio and strategies to manage risk resulting from readministration. Risk factors for an anaphylactic reaction to lepirudin may include use of an initial bolus dose, intravenous rather than subcutaneous administration, length of any single course of therapy beyond 3 days, and repeat administration of lepirudin within 100 days.

Treatment of Patients with a History of Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia and Anti-Lepirudin Antibodies with Argatroban

Patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) type II require anticoagulation with non-heparin immediate acting anticoagulants. Danaparoid may cross react with HIT-antibodies and lepirudin may generate anti-lepirudin antibodies influencing anticoagulation. We hypothesised, that the synthetic small molecular thrombin inhibitor argatroban does not induce immunoglobulins reacting towards lepirudin in patients with anti-lepirudin antibodies in the history and that titration of the anticoagulation may be easier with argatroban. We report on the treatment of four patients of a study, which was terminated prematurely due to official warnings for a repeated use of lepirudin. Two patients each received argatroban and lepirudin intravenously. A blinded assessor adjusted the doses of the anticoagulants to 1.5-3.0 fold prolongation of the aPTT. Ecarin clotting time (ECT), concentrations of lepirudin (ELISA) and of argatroban (gas-chromatography with mass spectrometry), and the generation of lepirudin antibodies (ELISA) were measured. APTT-adjusted dosages for argatroban was 2.0-2.6 microg/kg.min and for lepirudin 48-149 microg/kg.h. ECT was prolonged 2.1 to 4.5-fold with lepirudin and 4 to 7-fold with argatroban. The concentration of lepirudin ranged between 750 and 1500 ng/ml and of argatroban between 400 and 1100 ng/ml. Patients on argatroban did not generate immunoglobulin IgG reacting towards lepirudin in contrast to both patients on lepirudin who developed anti-lepirudin antibodies. Both treatments were well tolerated. Despite the low number of patients argatroban seems to lead to a more stable anticoagulant response than lepirudin resulting in a lower variability of the dosage for prophylaxis or treatment of thromboembolism of patients with a history of HIT and lepirudin antibodies.

The Management of Patients With Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia Who Require Anticoagulant Therapy

For patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), reexposure to heparin is generally not recommended. However, these patients are likely to require anticoagulation therapy at some point in the future. During acute HIT, when thrombocytopenia and anti-heparin-platelet factor 4 antibodies (or HIT antibodies) are present, therapy with heparin must be avoided. In patients with subacute HIT, when platelets have recovered but HIT antibodies are still present, therapy with heparin should be avoided. In patients with a remote history of HIT, when HIT antibodies have cleared, heparin reexposure may be safe, although recurrent HIT has been described in some patients. For all of these patients, the use of alternate anticoagulant agents, including direct thrombin inhibitors and anti-Xa agents, is preferable. There is an increasing amount of data supporting the use of these alternative agents in a wide variety of clinical circumstances, including thromboprophylaxis and treatment of acute thrombosis. Except for a few clinical situations, it is generally possible to avoid heparin reexposure in patients with a history of HIT.

Excessive Anticoagulation and Anaphylactic Reaction After Rechallenge with Lepirudin in a Patient with Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia

Approximately 40% of patients who receive lepirudin for 5-10 days develop antihirudin antibodies. These antibodies lead to decreased renal elimination of lepirudin, ultimately resulting in elevated activated partial thromboplastin times (aPTTs). A small percentage of patients with antihirudin antibodies develop hypersensitivity reactions to lepirudin with reexposure. Thus, patients who are reexposed to lepirudin must be monitored closely for hypersensitivity. A 45-year-old African-American woman received lepirudin for anticoagulation after being diagnosed with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia type II. She developed supratherapeutic aPTTs after 10 days of lepirudin therapy. Lepirudin was then withheld for 6 days, during which her aPTT remained supratherapeutic. After lepirudin infusion was restarted, the patient developed an anaphylactic reaction. She was treated appropriately with an antihistamine, a corticosteroid, and an anxiolytic agent. After the reaction resolved, the patient was rechallenged with lepirudin, and the anaphylactic reaction recurred.

Antibodies against lepirudin are polyspecific and recognize epitopes on bivalirudin

Bivalirudin is a synthetic antithrombin sharing a sequence of 11 amino acids with the recombinant hirudin lepirudin. We investigated whether antilepirudin antibodies recognize epitopes on bivalirudin. Antilepirudin antibody–positive sera of 43 patients, treated with lepirudin for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, were analyzed. Lepirudin- and bivalirudin-coated microtiter plates were used for antibody testing in an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) system. Of the 43 sera-containing antibodies binding to lepirudin, 22 (51.2%) contained antibodies that also recognized bivalirudin. Binding of these antibodies to bivalirudin was inhibited by more than 70% by preincubation with high doses of bivalirudin. However, if lepirudin-coated microtiter plates were used, high concentrations of bivalirudin inhibited only 2 of the 43 positive sera by more than 30%. Therefore antihirudin antibodies must be polyspecific. The clinical consequences of this cross-reactivity are unknown but bivalirudin, targeted by antibodies of patients treated with lepirudin previously, could potentially boost antibody titers in such patients or even trigger an immune response by itself. Clinically significant antibody formation in response to bivalirudin monotherapy has not been observed, however. Yet, as lepirudin and antilepirudin antibodies have recently been implicated in severe anaphylactic reactions, caution is warranted when using bivalirudin in patients previously treated with lepirudin.

Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism Following Orthopaedic Surgery

Patients undergoing total hip or total knee replacement are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), and are therefore considered to be populations well suited for the evaluation and dose optimisation of new anticoagulants. Deep vein thrombosis may lead to life-threatening pulmonary embolism, disabling morbidity in the form of the post-thrombotic syndrome, and risk of recurrent thrombotic events. There is increasing evidence that anticoagulant treatment for the prevention of VTE should be extended from 1 to at least 4 weeks after surgery. Anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists (such as warfarin), low molecular weight heparin or unfractionated heparin effectively lowers the risk of VTE, but these anticoagulants have limitations such as the need for coagulation monitoring and subsequent dose adjustment (vitamin K antagonists), difficulty of continuing prophylaxis out of hospital because of the requirement for parenteral administration, and risk of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. The development of new anticoagulants has been pursued with the aim of finding more effective, safer and/or more convenient therapies. Thrombin is a central regulator in the coagulation and inflammation process and several direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs) with distinct pharmacological profiles, as well as pharmacological differences from the conventional anticoagulants, are currently in clinical use for certain indications or are under development. Clinical experience with parenterally administered DTIs has accumulated since the mid 1990s, although only desirudin (a recombinant hirudin) is currently approved for use in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery. Two oral DTIs, ximelagatran and dabigatran etexilate, are in clinical development. Dabigatran etexilate has recently been evaluated in phase II clinical trials in patients undergoing total hip replacement. Several large phase III trials have now demonstrated the efficacy and safety of ximelagatran in the prevention of VTE following total hip or knee replacement. Ximelagatran can be used with an oral fixed dose without the need for coagulation monitoring or dose adjustment. Hence, it offers significant potential to facilitate the management of anticoagulation in or out of hospital.

Argatroban therapy does not generate antibodies that alter its anticoagulant activity in patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an immune-mediated syndrome that can lead to limb- and life-threatening thrombosis. Argatroban, a small synthetic molecule (Argatroban; GlaxoSmithKline, Philadelphia, PA), and lepirudin, a protein of non-human origin (Refludan; Aventis, Bridgewater, NJ), are direct thrombin inhibitors that have been used successfully for anticoagulant therapy in HIT patients. It has been reported that between 44-74% of lepirudin-treated HIT patients develop drug-specific antibodies that either enhance or suppress the anticoagulant activity of lepirudin. By contrast, there have been no reported patient experiences suggestive of unexpected loss or enhancement of argatroban's anticoagulant effect in clinical trials, including those in HIT patients, or in postmarketing safety surveillance of over 4,800 patients treated in Japan. To confirm the lack of antibodies in argatroban-treated patients with HIT, we examined plasma for anticoagulant-altering activity and reviewed dosing patterns of re-exposed patients. Paired, pre-therapy and post-therapy (> or =7 days) plasma pools exhibited comparable in vitro anticoagulant responses (aPTT and antithrombin activity) to argatroban supplementation. Argatroban at 5 microg/mL similarly prolonged aPTTs of normal plasma pretreated with IgG isolated from pre-therapy versus post-therapy plasma (P>0.6). In trials, mean argatroban doses during initial therapy versus re-exposure were not different among individuals anticoagulated for the treatment or prophylaxis of thrombosis (P=0.60) or during percutaneous coronary interventions (P=0.79), with no discernable pattern of suppression or enhancement of argatroban anticoagulation. Consistent with the lack of reported patient experiences suggestive of unexpected loss or enhancement of argatroban's anticoagulant effect across clinical trials and post-marketing safety surveillance, these data support the lack of anti-argatroban antibodies that affect drug activity in argatroban-treated HIT patients.

Arthus reaction to lepirudin, a new recombinant hirudin, and delayed-type hypersensitivity to several heparins and heparinoids, with tolerance to its intravenous administration

The pathogenesis of allergic reactions to heparin is poorly understood. Clinically, this phenomenon is relevant because of its increasing incidence and the resulting therapeutic challenges due to various cross-reactions between unfractionated and low-molecular weight heparins as well as between heparins and heparinoids. A 44-year-old female patient had developed a delayed-type hypersensitivity to certoparin-sodium. Diagnostic allergy testing revealed various cross-reactions between different heparins as well as an intolerance to heparinoids. After subcutaneous challenge with the recombinant hirudin lepirudin (Refludan) the patient developed a local Arthus reaction at the injection site. In general, recombinant hirudins do not cross-react with high- or low-molecular weight heparins and heparinoids because of a different molecular structure and are therefore an alternative in case of adverse reactions to heparins and heparinoids. Whereas a local Arthus reaction has already been described twice for low-molecular weight heparins, this is to the best of our knowledge the first observation of a superficial leukocytoclastic vasculitis due to s.c. applied lepirudin. Intravenous administration of heparins and heparinoids in case of hypersensitivity to these drugs following topical application risks a generalized eczematous reaction in patients with delayed-type allergy to both groups of substances. In our patient with delayed-type hypersensitivity to heparins and heparinoids and superficial vasculitis due to lepirudin, the intravenous challenge with heparin and a heparinoid was justified as an ultima ratio measure and proved to be the useful therapeutical alternative.

Management of heparin allergy in pregnancy

Thromboembolic disease during pregnancy has traditionally been treated with heparin. If heparin cannot be used, then treatment options remain limited. Despite the recent availability of new anticoagulation agents, data relating to their use during pregnancy is lacking. Hirudin, a relatively new anti-thrombotic agent, through animal models has been shown to have a very low transplacental transfer, thus making it a candidate drug to be used during pregnancy in case of heparin allergy. This report describes a case of heparin allergy in a pregnant patient with recurrent DVT that was successfully managed with hirudin and coumadin.