Lack of rivaroxaban influence on a prothrombinase-based assay for the detection of activated C protein resistance: an Italian ex vivo and in vitro study in normal subjects and factor V Leiden carriers

The methods for removal of direct oral anticoagulants and heparins to improve the monitoring of hemostasis: a narrative literature review

The assessment of hemostasis is necessary to make suitable decisions on the management of patients with thrombotic disorders. In some clinical situations, for example, during thrombophilia screening, the presence of anticoagulants in sample makes diagnosis impossible. Various elimination methods may overcome anticoagulant interference. DOAC-Stop, DOAC-Remove and DOAC Filter are available methods to remove direct oral anticoagulants in diagnostic tests, although there are still reports on their incomplete efficacy in several assays. The new antidotes for direct oral anticoagulants - idarucizumab and andexanet alfa - could be potentially useful, but have their drawbacks. The necessity to remove heparins is also arising as heparin contamination from central venous catheter or therapy with heparin disturbs the appropriate hemostasis assessment. Heparinase and polybrene are already present in commercial reagents but a fully-effective neutralizer is still a challenge for researchers, thus promising candidates remain in the research phase.

Evaluation of the DOAC-Stop® Procedure to Overcome the Effect of DOACs on Several Thrombophilia Screening Tests

The impact of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) on laboratory assays used for thrombophilia testing (e.g., antithrombin, protein S, protein C, lupus anticoagulant and activated protein-C resistance) is a well-known issue and may cause false-positive and -negative results. Therefore, the correct interpretation of tests that are performed in patients taking DOACs is mandatory to prevent misclassification and the subsequent clinical consequences. We aimed at evaluating the efficiency of a new and simple procedure (DOAC-Stop®; Haematex Research, Hornsby, Australia) to overcome the effect of all DOACs in real-life settings and to assess the percentage of erroneous results due to the presence of DOACs on thrombophilia screening tests. For this purpose, 135 DOAC-treated patients (38 apixaban, 40 dabigatran, 15 edoxaban, and 42 rivaroxaban) and 20 control patients were enrolled. A significant drop in apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban plasma concentrations following the DOAC-Stop® treatment was observed (74.8–8.2 ng/mL [ p  < 0.0001], 95.9–4.7 ng/mL [ p  < 0.0001], 102.1–8.8 ng/mL [ p  = 0.001], and 111.3–7.0 ng/mL [ p  < 0.0001], respectively). The DOAC-Stop® treatment was mostly effective to overcome the effect of DOACs on PTT-LA, dilute Russell's viper venom time (dRVVT) screen, and dRVVT confirm tests. Using our procedures, false-positive results due to DOACs were observed only with lupus anticoagulant tests (up to 75%) and fell to zero after the DOAC-Stop® procedure, regardless of the DOAC considered. In conclusion, the DOAC-Stop® adsorbent procedure appeared to be an effective and simple way to overcome the interference of DOAC on coagulation tests and should facilitate the interpretation of thrombophilia screening tests in patients taking DOACs.