Xiaoqi Li1, Jie Yang1, Xuyun Wang1, Qiang Xu1, Yuxiao Zhang1, Tong Yin2. 1. Department of Cardiology, Institute of Geriatric Cardiology, General Hospital of Chinese People's Liberation Army, Beijing 100853, China. 2. Department of Cardiology, Institute of Geriatric Cardiology, General Hospital of Chinese People's Liberation Army, Beijing 100853, China. Electronic address: yintong2000@yahoo.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pharmacogenetic (PG) algorithms were proposed to predict warfarin therapeutic dose more accurately. However, the clinical efficacy of the strategy over the standard treatment was not consistently proven. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis of the published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PG algorithm-based warfarin dosing (PG group) with clinical or standard protocols (STD group). The PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were searched up to June 2014. RESULTS: A total of 10 RCTs were retrieved for the meta-analysis with the inclusion of 2,601 participants. Primary analysis showed both major bleeding (2.65% versus 4.75%; RR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.37- 0.90, P=0.02) and thromboembolic events (0.59% versus 1.88%; RR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.17-0.85, P=0.02) were significantly lower in PG than in STD group. There was a trend towards increased percentage of time in therapeutic range (%TTR) [mean difference (MD): 4.65, 95% CI: 0.01- 9.29, P=0.05] in PG group, but no difference was observed for over-anticoagulation (INR>4). Subgroup analyses showed significant reduction of both major bleeding and thromboembolic events in PG group when the follow-up time was more than 1 month. After stratified by different PG algorithms, significant major bleeding reduction could be found in PG group when warfarin indication or co-medication of amiodarone was integrated in the algorithms. CONCLUSION: PG algorithm-guided warfarin anticoagulation is beneficial for the reduction of both major bleeding and thromboembolic events compared with standard dosing strategy. The benefits may be prominent in patients with longer follow-up time, or guided by refined PG algorithms.
BACKGROUND: Pharmacogenetic (PG) algorithms were proposed to predict warfarin therapeutic dose more accurately. However, the clinical efficacy of the strategy over the standard treatment was not consistently proven. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis of the published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PG algorithm-based warfarin dosing (PG group) with clinical or standard protocols (STD group). The PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were searched up to June 2014. RESULTS: A total of 10 RCTs were retrieved for the meta-analysis with the inclusion of 2,601 participants. Primary analysis showed both major bleeding (2.65% versus 4.75%; RR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.37- 0.90, P=0.02) and thromboembolic events (0.59% versus 1.88%; RR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.17-0.85, P=0.02) were significantly lower in PG than in STD group. There was a trend towards increased percentage of time in therapeutic range (%TTR) [mean difference (MD): 4.65, 95% CI: 0.01- 9.29, P=0.05] in PG group, but no difference was observed for over-anticoagulation (INR>4). Subgroup analyses showed significant reduction of both major bleeding and thromboembolic events in PG group when the follow-up time was more than 1 month. After stratified by different PG algorithms, significant major bleeding reduction could be found in PG group when warfarin indication or co-medication of amiodarone was integrated in the algorithms. CONCLUSION: PG algorithm-guided warfarin anticoagulation is beneficial for the reduction of both major bleeding and thromboembolic events compared with standard dosing strategy. The benefits may be prominent in patients with longer follow-up time, or guided by refined PG algorithms.
Authors: Elisa Danese; Sara Raimondi; Martina Montagnana; Angela Tagetti; Taimour Langaee; Paola Borgiani; Cinzia Ciccacci; Antonio J Carcas; Alberto M Borobia; Hoi Y Tong; Cristina Dávila-Fajardo; Mariana Rodrigues Botton; Stephane Bourgeois; Panos Deloukas; Michael D Caldwell; Jim K Burmester; Richard L Berg; Larisa H Cavallari; Katarzyna Drozda; Min Huang; Li-Zi Zhao; Han-Jing Cen; Rocio Gonzalez-Conejero; Vanessa Roldan; Yusuke Nakamura; Taisei Mushiroda; Inna Y Gong; Richard B Kim; Keita Hirai; Kunihiko Itoh; Carlos Isaza; Leonardo Beltrán; Enrique Jiménez-Varo; Marisa Cañadas-Garre; Alice Giontella; Marianne K Kringen; Kari Bente Foss Haug; Hye Sun Gwak; Kyung Eun Lee; Pietro Minuz; Ming Ta Michael Lee; Steven A Lubitz; Stuart Scott; Cristina Mazzaccara; Lucia Sacchetti; Ece Genç; Mahmut Özer; Anil Pathare; Rajagopal Krishnamoorthy; Andras Paldi; Virginie Siguret; Marie-Anne Loriot; Vijay Kumar Kutala; Guilherme Suarez-Kurtz; Jamila Perini; Josh C Denny; Andrea H Ramirez; Balraj Mittal; Saurabh Singh Rathore; Hersh Sagreiya; Russ Altman; Mohamed Hossam A Shahin; Sherief I Khalifa; Nita A Limdi; Charles Rivers; Aditi Shendre; Chrisly Dillon; Ivet M Suriapranata; Hong-Hao Zhou; Sheng-Lan Tan; Vacis Tatarunas; Vaiva Lesauskaite; Yumao Zhang; Anke H Maitland-van der Zee; Talitha I Verhoef; Anthonius de Boer; Monica Taljaard; Carlo Federico Zambon; Vittorio Pengo; Jieying Eunice Zhang; Munir Pirmohamed; Julie A Johnson; Cristiano Fava Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2019-02-17 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Letícia C Tavares; Nubia E Duarte; Leiliane R Marcatto; Renata A G Soares; Jose E Krieger; Alexandre C Pereira; Paulo Caleb Junior Lima Santos Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2018-07-26 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Nilofar Daneshi; Elizabeth Holliday; Stephen Hancock; Jennifer J Schneider; Rodney J Scott; John Attia; Elizabeth A Milward Journal: Pharmgenomics Pers Med Date: 2017-01-27
Authors: Cristina Lucía Dávila-Fajardo; Xando Díaz-Villamarín; Alba Antúnez-Rodríguez; Ana Estefanía Fernández-Gómez; Paloma García-Navas; Luis Javier Martínez-González; José Augusto Dávila-Fajardo; José Cabeza Barrera Journal: Genes (Basel) Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 4.096