BACKGROUND: Warfarin is commonly prescribed for prophylaxis and treatment of thromboembolism after orthopedic surgery. During warfarin initiation, out-of-range International Normalized Ratio (INR) values and adverse events are common. METHODS: In orthopedic patients beginning warfarin therapy, we developed and prospectively validated pharmacogenetic and clinical dose refinement algorithms to revise the estimated therapeutic dose after 4 days of therapy. RESULTS: The pharmacogenetic algorithm used the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C9 genotype, smoking status, peri-operative blood loss, liver disease, INR values and dose history to predict the therapeutic dose. The R(2) was 82% in a derivation cohort (n = 86) and 70% when used prospectively (n = 146). The R(2) of the clinical algorithm that used INR values and dose history to predict the therapeutic dose was 57% in a derivation cohort (n = 178) and 48% in a prospective validation cohort (n = 146). In 1 month of prospective follow-up, the percent time spent in the therapeutic range was 7% higher (95% CI: 2.7-11.7) in the pharmacogenetic cohort. The risk of a laboratory or clinical adverse event was also significantly reduced in the pharmacogenetic cohort (Hazard Ratio 0.54; 95% CI: 0.30-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Warfarin dose adjustments that incorporate genotype and clinical variables available after four warfarin doses are accurate. In this non-randomized, prospective study, pharmacogenetic dose refinements were associated with more time spent in the therapeutic range and fewer laboratory or clinical adverse events. To facilitate gene-guided warfarin dosing we created a non-profit website, http://www.WarfarinDosing.org.
BACKGROUND:Warfarin is commonly prescribed for prophylaxis and treatment of thromboembolism after orthopedic surgery. During warfarin initiation, out-of-range International Normalized Ratio (INR) values and adverse events are common. METHODS: In orthopedic patients beginning warfarin therapy, we developed and prospectively validated pharmacogenetic and clinical dose refinement algorithms to revise the estimated therapeutic dose after 4 days of therapy. RESULTS: The pharmacogenetic algorithm used the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C9 genotype, smoking status, peri-operative blood loss, liver disease, INR values and dose history to predict the therapeutic dose. The R(2) was 82% in a derivation cohort (n = 86) and 70% when used prospectively (n = 146). The R(2) of the clinical algorithm that used INR values and dose history to predict the therapeutic dose was 57% in a derivation cohort (n = 178) and 48% in a prospective validation cohort (n = 146). In 1 month of prospective follow-up, the percent time spent in the therapeutic range was 7% higher (95% CI: 2.7-11.7) in the pharmacogenetic cohort. The risk of a laboratory or clinical adverse event was also significantly reduced in the pharmacogenetic cohort (Hazard Ratio 0.54; 95% CI: 0.30-0.97). CONCLUSIONS:Warfarin dose adjustments that incorporate genotype and clinical variables available after four warfarin doses are accurate. In this non-randomized, prospective study, pharmacogenetic dose refinements were associated with more time spent in the therapeutic range and fewer laboratory or clinical adverse events. To facilitate gene-guided warfarin dosing we created a non-profit website, http://www.WarfarinDosing.org.
Authors: M Wadelius; L Y Chen; K Downes; J Ghori; S Hunt; N Eriksson; O Wallerman; H Melhus; C Wadelius; D Bentley; P Deloukas Journal: Pharmacogenomics J Date: 2005 Impact factor: 3.550
Authors: Mark J Rieder; Alexander P Reiner; Brian F Gage; Deborah A Nickerson; Charles S Eby; Howard L McLeod; David K Blough; Kenneth E Thummel; David L Veenstra; Allan E Rettie Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-06-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Elizabeth A Sconce; Tayyaba I Khan; Hilary A Wynne; Peter Avery; Louise Monkhouse; Barry P King; Peter Wood; Patrick Kesteven; Ann K Daly; Farhad Kamali Journal: Blood Date: 2005-06-09 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Brian F Gage; Charles Eby; Paul E Milligan; Gerald A Banet; Jill R Duncan; Howard L McLeod Journal: Thromb Haemost Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 5.249
Authors: Brian S Finkelman; Brian F Gage; Julie A Johnson; Colleen M Brensinger; Stephen E Kimmel Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-02-01 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: P Lenzini; M Wadelius; S Kimmel; J L Anderson; A L Jorgensen; M Pirmohamed; M D Caldwell; N Limdi; J K Burmester; M B Dowd; P Angchaisuksiri; A R Bass; J Chen; N Eriksson; A Rane; J D Lindh; J F Carlquist; B D Horne; G Grice; P E Milligan; C Eby; J Shin; H Kim; D Kurnik; C M Stein; G McMillin; R C Pendleton; R L Berg; P Deloukas; B F Gage Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2010-04-07 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Denis Nam; Anita Sadhu; Jeffrey Hirsh; James A Keeney; Ryan M Nunley; Robert L Barrack Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2014-09-06 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: G Hyun; J Li; A R Bass; A Mohapatra; S C Woller; H Lin; C Eby; G A McMillin; B F Gage Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 2.300