Trial reportClinical pharmacokinetics2003
No influence of mild-to-moderate hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of ximelagatran, an oral direct thrombin inhibitor.
Trial report in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Apixaban Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics in Subjects with Mild or Moderate Hepatic Impairment.Drugs in R&D · 2021Article
- Direct thrombin inhibitors: novel antithrombotics on the horizon in the thromboprophylactic management of atrial fibrillation.Postgraduate medical journal · 2005Review
- Comparative pharmacokinetics of vitamin K antagonists: warfarin, phenprocoumon and acenocoumarol.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2005Review
- New approaches to anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation.Current cardiology reports · 2004Review
- Anticoagulation for non-valvular atrial aibrillation - towards a new beginning with ximelagatran.Current controlled trials in cardiovascular medicine · 2004Article
- Oral direct thrombin inhibition: an effective and novel approach for venous thromboembolism.Drugs · 2004Review
- Review
- Review
- A review of the clinical uses of ximelagatran in thrombosis syndromes.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2003Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe oral direct thrombin inhibitor ximelagatran is a new class of anticoagulant currently in clinical development for the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic disease. After oral administration, ximelagatran is rapidly absorbed and bioconverted to its active form melagatran.
objectiveTo investigate the influence of mild-to-moderate hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of ximelagatran. STUDY
designNonblinded, nonrandomised study.
participantsTwelve volunteers with mild-to-moderate hepatic impairment (classified as Child-Pugh A or B) and 12 age-, weight-, and sex-matched control volunteers with normal hepatic function.
methodsVolunteers received a single oral dose of ximelagatran 24mg. Plasma and urine samples were collected for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses.
resultsThe absorption and bioconversion of ximelagatran to melagatran were rapid in both groups. The maximum plasma concentration of melagatran (Cmax) was achieved 2-3 hours after administration; the mean elimination half-life (t1/2z) was 3.6 hours for hepatically impaired volunteers and 3.1 hours for the control volunteers. The area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) and Cmax of melagatran in volunteers with hepatic impairment were 11 and 25% lower than in control volunteers, respectively. However, after correcting for the higher renal function (i.e. higher calculated creatinine clearance) in the hepatically impaired volunteers, the ratio of melagatran AUC for hepatically impaired/control volunteers was 0.98 (90% CI 0.80, 1.22), suggesting that mild-to-moderate hepatic impairment had no influence on the pharmacokinetics of ximelagatran. Melagatran was the predominant compound in urine, accounting for 13-14% of the ximelagatran dose. Renal clearance of melagatran was 13% higher in hepatically impaired than in control volunteers. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the concentration-response relationship between plasma melagatran concentration and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT). Baseline prothrombin time (PT) was slightly longer in the hepatically impaired patients than in the control volunteers, probably reflecting a slight decrease in the activity of coagulation factors. However, when concentrations of melagatran were at their peak, the increase in PT from baseline values was the same in both groups. Capillary bleeding time was measured in the hepatically impaired patients only, and was not increased by ximelagatran. Ximelagatran was well tolerated in both groups.
conclusionThere were no differences in the pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic properties of melagatran following oral administration of ximelagatran between the hepatically impaired and control volunteers. These findings suggest that dose adjustment for patients with mild-to-moderate impairment of hepatic function is not necessary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.