Safety, tolerability and clinical pharmacology of dabigatran etexilate in adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) incidence is increasing among children owing to many factors, including improved diagnosis of VTE. There is a need for alternative treatment options. Our objective was to investigate the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of dabigatran etexilate in adolescents with VTE. Adolescents aged 12 to <18 years (n = 9) who successfully completed planned treatment for primary VTE were administered dabigatran etexilate twice daily for three days; initially 1.71 (± 10 %) mg/kg (80 % of a 150 mg/70 kg twice daily adult dose), followed by 2.14 (± 10 %) mg/kg (target adult dose adjusted for patient's weight), if there were no safety concerns. No bleeding events, deaths or drug-related serious adverse events (AEs) were reported; three treatment-emergent AEs, all gastrointestinal-related, occurred in two patients. In these adolescent patients with normal renal function, presumed steady-state trough plasma concentrations of dabigatran were low (geometric mean dose-normalised total dabigatran plasma concentration: 0.493 ng/ml/mg at 72 hours). Total dabigatran concentrations were well predicted by the RE-LY® population PK model (94 % of trough concentrations were within the 80 % prediction interval). The relationship between total dabigatran plasma concentration, diluted thrombin time and ecarin clotting time (ECT) was linear; the relationship with activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) was non-linear. Adult population PK/PD models predicted the adolescent concentration-ECT and -aPTT relationships well. In conclusion, dabigatran etexilate was generally well tolerated, except for occurrence of dyspepsia in two patients, over the three-day treatment period. The dabigatran PK/PD relationship observed in adolescent patients was similar to that in adult patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".