ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2012
Validation of pharmacogenetic algorithms and warfarin dosing table in Egyptian patients.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Warfarin dosing algorithms: A systematic review.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2021Pooled it
- Prospective validation of the International Warfarin Pharmacogenetics Consortium algorithm in high-risk elderly people (VIALE study).The pharmacogenomics journal · 2020Trial
- Article
- Evaluation of supervised machine learning algorithms in predicting the poor anticoagulation control and stable weekly doses of warfarin.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2023Article
- Comparison of Two Different Techniques Of Warfarin Dosing Determination - A Chemometrics Study.Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR · 2019Article
- Evaluation ofFuture science OA · 2018Article
- Factors influencing warfarin response in hospitalized patients.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2015Article
- Validation of a proposed warfarin dosing algorithm based on the genetic make-up of Egyptian patients.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2013Article
- Validation and comparison between two warfarin dosing clinical algorithms and warfarin fixed dosing in specialized heart center: cross-sectional study.Pharmacy practiceArticle
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWarfarin remains a difficult drug to use due to the large variability in dose response. Clear understanding of the accuracy of warfarin pharmacogenetic dosing methods might lead to appropriate control of anticoagulation.
objectiveThis study aims to evaluate the accuracy of warfarin dosing table and two pharmacogenetic algorithms, namely the algorithms of Gage et al. (Clin Pharmacol Ther 84:326-331, 2008), and the International Warfarin Pharmacogenetics Consortium algorithm (IWPC) in a real Egyptian clinical setting. Additionally, three non-pharmacogenetic dosing methods (the Gage, IWPC clinical algorithms and the empiric 5 mg/day dosing) were evaluated.
settingSixty-three Egyptian patients on a stable therapeutic warfarin dose were included. Patients were recruited from the outpatient clinic of the critical care medicine department.
methodsCYP2C9 and VKORC1 polymorphisms were genotyped by real time PCR system. Predicted doses by all dosing methods were calculated and compared with the actual therapeutic warfarin doses.
resultsThe Gage algorithm (adjusted R(2) = 0.421, and mean absolute error (MAE) = 3.3), and IWPC algorithm (adjusted R(2) = 0.419, MAE = 3.2) produced better accuracy than did the warfarin dosing table (adjusted R(2) = 0.246, MAE = 3.5), the two clinical algorithms (R(2) = 0.24, MAE = 3.7) and the fixed dose approach (MAE = 3.9). However, all dosing models produced comparable clinical accuracy with respect to proportion of patients within 1 mg/day of actual dose (ideal dose). Non-pharmacogenetic methods severely over-predicted dose (defined as ≥2 mg/day more than actual dose) compared to the three pharmacogenetic models. In comparison to non-pharmacogenetic methods, the three pharmacogenetic models performed better regarding the low dose group in terms of percentage of patients within ideal dose. In the high dose group, none of the dosing models predicted warfarin doses within ideal dose.
conclusionOur study showed that genotype-based dosing improved prediction of warfarin therapeutic dose beyond that available with the fixed-dose approach or the clinical algorithms, especially in the low-dose group. However, the two pharmacogenetic algorithms were the most accurate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22851439What 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.