ArticleJournal of the American College of Cardiology2011
Genetic warfarin dosing: tables versus algorithms.
Article in Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 55 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
Genetics Informatics Trial (GIFT) of Warfarin to Prevent Deep Venous Thrombosis (DVT)
Quantitative Pharmacogenomics of the Anticoagulant Response to Warfarin in Healthy Subjects
Who cites it
55 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Warfarin dosing algorithms: A systematic review.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2021Pooled it
- Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline for Pharmacogenetics-Guided Warfarin Dosing: 2017 Update.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2017Guideline
- Clinical Pharmacogenetic Testing and Application: Laboratory Medicine Clinical Practice Guidelines.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2017Guideline
- Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Guidelines for CYP2C9 and VKORC1 genotypes and warfarin dosing.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2011Guideline
- Application of Loading Dose Warfarin in Postpartum Women with Pulmonary Embolism - a Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Trial
- Genotype-guided versus traditional clinical dosing of warfarin in patients of Asian ancestry: a randomized controlled trial.BMC medicine · 2018Trial
- CYP2C9 and VKORC1 polymorphisms influence warfarin dose variability in patients on long-term anticoagulation.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2013Trial
- Article
- Leveraging Machine Learning to Predict Warfarin Sensitivity in the Puerto Rican Population: A Pharmacogenomic Approach.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Clinical Application of Pharmacogenomics in Stroke Management: Current Evidence and Future Directions.Journal of stroke · 2026Review
- A Prediction Model of Stable Warfarin Doses in Patients After Mechanical Heart Valve Replacement Based on a Machine Learning Algorithm.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Clinical versus fixed warfarin dosing and the impact on quality of anticoagulation (The ClinFix trial).Clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- DNA and RNA Molecules as a Foundation of Therapy Strategies for Treatment of Cardiovascular Diseases.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- 3D Printed Pharmaceutical Systems for Personalized Treatment in Metabolic Syndrome.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- Article
- Ethnic Diversity and Warfarin Pharmacogenomics.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Review
- Profiling of warfarin pharmacokinetics-associated genetic variants: Black Africans portray unique genetic markers important for an African specific warfarin pharmacogenetics-dosing algorithm.Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH · 2021Article
- Development of a system to support warfarin dose decisions using deep neural networks.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Pharmacogenomics in Cardiovascular Diseases.Current protocols · 2021Article
- Practicality of 3D Printed Personalized Medicines in Therapeutics.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of genetic tables and formal pharmacogenetic algorithms for warfarin dosing.
backgroundPharmacogenetic algorithms based on regression equations can predict warfarin dose, but they require detailed mathematical calculations. A simpler alternative, recently added to the warfarin label by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, is to use genotype-stratified tables to estimate warfarin dose. This table may potentially increase the use of pharmacogenetic warfarin dosing in clinical practice; however, its accuracy has not been quantified.
methodsA retrospective cohort study of 1,378 patients from 3 anticoagulation centers was conducted. Inclusion criteria were stable therapeutic warfarin dose and complete genetic and clinical data. Five dose prediction methods were compared: 2 methods using only clinical information (empiric 5 mg/day dosing and a formal clinical algorithm), 2 genetic tables (the new warfarin label table and a table based on mean dose stratified by genotype), and 1 formal pharmacogenetic algorithm, using both clinical and genetic information. For each method, the proportion of patients whose predicted doses were within 20% of their actual therapeutic doses was determined. Dosing methods were compared using McNemar's chi-square test.
resultsWarfarin dose prediction was significantly more accurate (all p < 0.001) with the pharmacogenetic algorithm (52%) than with all other methods: empiric dosing (37%; odds ratio [OR]: 2.2), clinical algorithm (39%; OR: 2.2), warfarin label (43%; OR: 1.8), and genotype mean dose table (44%; OR: 1.9).
conclusionsAlthough genetic tables predicted warfarin dose better than empiric dosing, formal pharmacogenetic algorithms were the most accurate.
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.