MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3040840390 · doi:10.1182/blood.v130.suppl_1.1104.1104

The Effects of Rivaroxaban Exposure and Clinical Risk Factors on Efficacy and Safety Outcomes in Patients Treated for Venous Thromboembolism

2017· article· en· W3040840390 sur OpenAlexaff
Scott D. Berkowitz, Jeffrey I. Weitz, Stephan Schmidt, Keith A.A. Fox, Dirk Garmann, Dagmar Kubitza, Wolfgang Mueck, Gary Peters, Isabel Reinecke, Alexander Solms, Theodore E. Spiro, Xiaoyu Yan, Liping Zhang, Stefan Willmann

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Établissements canadiensMcMaster University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésRivaroxabanMedicinePulmonary embolismPopulationCmaxPharmacodynamicsInternal medicineClinical trialRegimenSurgeryAnesthesiaPharmacokineticsWarfarinAtrial fibrillation

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: The oral factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban has previously demonstrated a predictable pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic profile, and has been developed for fixed dose administration without the need for routine coagulation or therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). The objectives of this study were to investigate the relationship between rivaroxaban exposure and efficacy/safety outcomes, and to evaluate the relative influence of relevant clinical risk factors in patients receiving rivaroxaban for treatment of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) to assess whether TDM might further improve the benefit-risk profile of rivaroxaban in this population. Methods: An exposure-response analysis was conducted using data from patients receiving rivaroxaban (15 mg twice daily [BID] for 21 days followed by 20 mg once daily [OD] for up to 12 months) in the phase 3 EINSTEIN-DVT (NCT00440193) and EINSTEIN-PE (NCT00439777) trials (BID period, N = 4130; OD period, N = 3953). Due to a lack of measured PK data in the phase 3 trials, individual rivaroxaban exposure metrics (area under the concentration-time curve, maximum concentration [Cmax] and trough concentration [Ctrough]) were estimated using an integrated population PK model based on clinical risk factors, regimen and (where available) PT measurements. Exposure estimates were improved by application of an adjustment function based on a linear relationship between PK and prothrombin time measurements (measured centrally using a rivaroxaban-sensitive thromboplastin reagent) obtained in phase 2/3 rivaroxaban studies. Composite efficacy outcomes were: (1) objectively-documented recurrent DVT, or fatal or non-fatal PE; and (2) recurrent DVT, fatal or non-fatal PE, or death from any cause. Safety outcomes were major bleeding, and a composite of major and non-major clinically relevant (NMCR) bleeding. Relationships between exposure/clinical risk factors and outcomes were evaluated using logistic regression for the 21-day BID dosing period and Cox regression for the subsequent OD dosing period. Results: Of the estimated exposure parameters, Ctrough displayed the strongest associations for efficacy and safety during both dosing periods. The first and second composite efficacy outcomes occurred in 1.0% and 1.1% of patients, respectively, in the BID period, and 1.0% and 1.6% of patients, respectively, in the OD period. Individual predicted Ctrough was significantly associated with the first efficacy outcome in both dosing periods (Table 1), and with recurrent DVT, fatal or non-fatal PE, or death from any cause in the BID period only (Figure 1, Table 1). Patients with reduced creatinine clearance (CrCL; 80 mL/min to develop one of the composite efficacy outcomes during the BID and OD dosing periods (Figure 1, Table 1). Active malignancy at randomization was significant for the second efficacy endpoint in the OD period (hazard ratio 5.31 [95% CI: 2.97-9.51]). Major bleeding and major and NMCR bleeding occurred in 0.4% and 4.3% of patients, respectively, in the BID period and in 0.6% and 6.0% of patients, respectively, in the OD period. None of the investigated exposure metrics was a significant predictor of major bleeding or major and NMCR bleeding in either dosing period. Clinical variables including a history of bleeding, low baseline hemoglobin and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use were, however, significant predictors of bleeding events (Table 2). CrCL was not a significant predictor of bleeding events. Conclusions: Estimated rivaroxaban exposure was significantly associated with efficacy outcomes but not with bleeding outcomes in patients with DVT or PE enrolled in the EINSTEIN-DVT and EINSTEIN-PE trials. Clinical risk factors had a substantial impact on outcomes. Based on these findings, it is unlikely that TDM would further improve the benefit-risk profile of rivaroxaban treatment in patients with venous thromboembolism. Download : Download high-res image (188KB) Download : Download full-size image Disclosures Berkowitz: Bayer US: Employment. Weitz: Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen Biotech, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck & Co., Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria; Ionis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria. Schmidt: Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Fox: AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Janssen Biotech, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria. Garmann: Bayer AG: Employment. Kubitza: Bayer AG: Employment. Mueck: Bayer AG: Employment. Peters: Janssen Research & Development: Employment. Reinecke: Bayer AG: Employment; Bayer AB: Employment. Solms: Bayer AG: Employment. Spiro: Bayer US: Employment. Yan: Janssen Research & Development: Employment. Zhang: Janssen Research & Development: Employment. Willmann: Bayer AG: Employment.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,007
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,035

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,013
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,002
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,031
Tête enseignante GPT0,337
Écart entre enseignants0,306 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→Travaux en français237 207→