Factors affecting the precision of warfarin treatment

Effects of computer-assisted oral anticoagulant therapy

BACKGROUND

Computer-assistance and self-monitoring lower the cost and may improve the quality of anticoagulation therapy. The main purpose of this clinical investigation was to use computer-assisted oral anticoagulant therapy to improve the time to reach and the time spent within the therapeutic target range compared to traditional oral anticoagulant therapy by physicians.

METHODS

54 patients were randomized equally into 3 groups. Patients in two groups used CoaguChek® systems to measure international normalized ratio (INR) values and had dosages of anticoagulation treatment calculated in a computer system by an algorithm specific to each group. The third group received traditional anticoagulation treatment by physicians. The obtained INR values were compared regarding the time to reach, and the time spent within, the therapeutic target range, corresponding to INR values from 2 to 3.

RESULTS

Patients randomized to computer-assisted anticoagulation and the CoaguChek® system reached the therapeutic target range after 8 days compared to 14 days by prescriptions from physicians (p = 0.04). Time spent in the therapeutic target range did not differ between groups. The median INR value measured throughout the study from all patients by CoaguChek® at 2.5 (2.42-2.62) was lower than measured by a hospital-based Clinical and Biochemical Laboratory at 2.6 (2.45-2.76), (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The therapeutic target range was reached faster by the use of computer-assisted anticoagulation treatment than prescribed by physicians, and the total time spent within the therapeutic target range was similar. Thus computer-assisted oral anticoagulant therapy may reduce the cost of anticoagulation therapy without lowering the quality. INR values measured by CoaguChek® were reliable compared to measurements by a clinical and biochemical laboratory.

Single-dose adjustment versus no adjustment of warfarin in stably anticoagulated patients with an occasional international normalized ratio (INR) out of range

BACKGROUND

Well-controlled patients on warfarin may still have occasional International Normalized Ratios (INRs) outside the therapeutic range. It is unclear whether there is any benefit of a single-dose correction in this situation.

AIM

To evaluate whether patients with very stable INR results should continue with the maintenance dose of warfarin without a single-dose correction, even when the result unexpectedly is moderately below or above the therapeutic range.

METHODS

A) We reviewed retrospectively 364 patients with unchanged maintenance dose for at least 6 months and an occasional INR outside the therapeutic range regarding decision on dosing and the effect on the next INR. B) We randomized 160 patients with at least 3 months of unchanged maintenance dose, an occasional INR deviating to a minimum of 1.5 or a maximum of 4.4 and unexplained or temporary, removable cause to a single-dose Change or No change. Follow-up INRs and telephone interviews were obtained after 2 weeks.

RESULTS

A) Retrospectively, the proportion of follow-up INRs outside the therapeutic range was 29.9% after No change, 27.1% after Increased dose and 25.7% after Skipped/reduced dose. However, the decision on No change was mainly taken in case of minimal INR deviations. B) Forty-eight (60%) of the patients randomized to Change were within the therapeutic range at follow-up versus 45 (56%) of those with No change, odds ratio 1.17 (95% confidence interval 0.59-2.30). For baseline INRs deviating down to 1.6 or up to 3.6 (therapeutic range, INR 2.0-3.0) the 2-week INRs did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest only a small or no difference between the two managements of an occasional INR out of range in terms of the 2-week follow-up INR. In stable patients on warfarin with an occasional INR outside the therapeutic range it seems reasonable to continue with the same dose without a single-dose change and perform a repeat test in about 2 weeks. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00814177.).

Main haplotypes and mutational analysis of vitamin K epoxide reductase (VKORC1) in a Swedish population: a retrospective analysis of case records

BACKGROUND

Vitamin K epoxide reductase (VKORC1) is the site of inhibition by coumarins. Several reports have shown that mutations in the gene encoding VKORC1 affect the sensitivity of the enzyme for warfarin. Recently, three main haplotypes of VKORC1; *2, *3 and *4 have been observed, that explain most of the genetic variability in warfarin dose among Caucasians.

OBJECTIVES

We have investigated the main haplotypes of the VKORC1 gene in a Swedish population. Additional objective was to screen the studied population for mutations in the coding region of VKORC1 gene.

PATIENTS/METHODS

Warfarin doses and plasma S- and R-warfarin of 98 patients [with a target International Normalized Ratio (INR) of 2.0-3.0] have been correlated to VKORC1 haplotypes. Controls of 180 healthy individuals have also been haplotyped. Furthermore, a retrospective analysis of case records was performed to find any evidence indicating influence of VKORC1 haplotypes on warfarin response in the first 4 weeks (initiation phase) and the latest 12 months of warfarin treatment.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Our result shows that VKORC1*2 is the most important haplotype for warfarin dosage. Patients with VKORC1*2 haplotype had more frequent visits than patients with VKORC1*3 or *4 haplotypes, higher coefficient of variation (CV) of prothrombin time-INR and higher percentage of INR values outside the therapeutic interval (i.e. 2.0-3.0) than patients with VKORC1*3 or *4 haplotypes. Also, there was a statistically significant difference in warfarin dose (P < 0.001) and R-warfarin plasma levels (P < 0.01) between VKORC1*2 and VKORC1*3 or 4 haplotypes. Patients with VKORC1*2 haplotype seem to require much lower warfarin doses than other patients.

Warfarin dose reduction vs watchful waiting for mild elevations in the international normalized ratio

BACKGROUND

Whether clinicians should decrease the warfarin dose in response to a mild, asymptomatic elevation in the international normalized ratio (INR) is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

The study objectives were as follows: (1) to evaluate the safety of an anticoagulation service (ACS) policy advocating that the warfarin dose not be changed for isolated, asymptomatic INRs of < or = 3.4; (2) to compare the dosing strategies of an ACS and primary care providers (PCPs); and (3) to quantify the relationship between reduction of the warfarin dose and the subsequent fall in the INR.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Randomized controlled study of health maintenance organization outpatients who were receiving warfarin.

PATIENTS

We identified 231 patients with a target INR of 2.5 and an isolated, asymptomatic INR between 3.2 and 3.4. Our ACS monitored 103 of the patients; PCPs monitored the remaining 128 patients.

MEASUREMENTS

From all 231 patients, we obtained INRs and warfarin dosing history. From the 103 ACS enrollees, we also recorded adverse events.

RESULTS

One ACS patient had epistaxis in the 30 days after the elevated INR. Twenty-three percent of ACS enrollees and 47% of PCP patients reduced their warfarin dose (p < 0.001). The median follow-up INRs were similar in both cohorts: 2.7 in the ACS enrollees and 2.6 in the PCP patients. However, in a subgroup analysis of 190 patients who presented with an INR of 3.2 or 3.3, ACS enrollees were more likely to have a follow-up INR in the range of 2 to 3 (p = 0.03). The median follow-up INR was 2.7 in 148 patients who maintained their warfarin dose, 2.5 in 77 patients who decreased their dose by 1 to 20%, and 1.7 in 6 patients who decreased their dose by 21 to 43% (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support maintaining the same warfarin dose in asymptomatic patients with an INR of < or = 3.3, and reducing the dose for patients who have a greater INR or an increased risk of hemorrhage. Warfarin dose reductions > 20% should be avoided for mildly elevated INRs.

Management and dosing of warfarin therapy

When initiating warfarin therapy, clinicians should avoid loading doses that can raise the International Normalized Ratio (INR) excessively; instead, warfarin should be initiated with a 5-mg dose (or 2 to 4 mg in the very elderly). With a 5-mg initial dose, the INR will not rise appreciably in the first 24 hours, except in rare patients who will ultimately require a very small daily dose (0.5 to 2.0 mg). Adjusting a steady-state warfarin dose depends on the measured INR values and clinical factors: the dose does not need to be adjusted for a single INR that is slightly out of range, and most changes should alter the total weekly dose by 5% to 20%. The INR should be monitored frequently (eg, 2 to 4 times per week) immediately after initiation of warfarin; subsequently, the interval between INR tests can be lengthened gradually (up to a maximum of 4 to 6 weeks) in patients with stable INR values. Patients who have an elevated INR will need more frequent testing and may also require vitamin K1. For example, a nonbleeding patient with an INR of 9 can be given low-dose vitamin K1 (eg, 2.5 mg phytonadione, by mouth). Patients who have an excessive INR with clinically important bleeding require clotting factors (eg, fresh-frozen plasma) as well as vitamin K1.