Trial reportAmerican heart journal2013
Rationale and design of the Clarification of Optimal Anticoagulation through Genetics trial.
Trial report in American heart journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT00839657 (A Randomized, Multi-Center, Double-Blind Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Use of Clinical Plus Genetic Information to Guide Warfarin Therapy Initiation and Improve Anticoagulation Control for Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 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.
A Randomized, Multi-Center, Double-Blind Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Use of Clinical Plus Genetic Information to Guide Warfarin Therapy Initiation and Improve Anticoagulation Control for Patients
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Warfarin Dosing Algorithms and the Need for Human Intervention.The American journal of medicine · 2016Trial
- The Impact of Inpatient Versus Outpatient Initiation on Early Warfarin Dosing.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2015Trial
- Rationale and design of VENTURE-AF: a randomized, open-label, active-controlled multicenter study to evaluate the safety of rivaroxaban and vitamin K antagonists in subjects undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2014Trial
- A pharmacogenetic versus a clinical algorithm for warfarin dosing.The New England journal of medicine · 2013Trial
- Warfarin: The End or the End of One Size Fits All Therapy?Journal of personalized medicine · 2018Review
- A systematic analysis and comparison of warfarin initiation strategies.Pharmacogenetics and genomics · 2016Article
- Pharmacogenomic knowledge gaps and educational resource needs among physicians in selected specialties.Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine · 2014Article
- Characteristics associated with informed consent for genetic studies in the ACCORD trial.Contemporary clinical trials · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedDosage error in article text
Authors and funding
19 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCurrent dosing practices for warfarin are empiric and result in the need for frequent dose changes as the international normalized ratio gets too high or too low. As a result, patients are put at increased risk for thromboembolism, bleeding, and premature discontinuation of anticoagulation therapy. Prior research has identified clinical and genetic factors that can alter warfarin dose requirements, but few randomized clinical trials have examined the utility of using clinical and genetic information to improve anticoagulation control or clinical outcomes among a large, diverse group of patients initiating warfarin.
methodsThe COAG trial is a multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial comparing 2 approaches to guiding warfarin therapy initiation: initiation of warfarin therapy based on algorithms using clinical information plus an individual's genotype using genes known to influence warfarin response ("genotype-guided dosing") versus only clinical information ("clinical-guided dosing") (www.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00839657).
resultsThe COAG trial design is described. The study hypothesis is that, among 1,022 enrolled patients, genotype-guided dosing relative to clinical-guided dosing during the initial dosing period will increase the percentage of time that patients spend in the therapeutic international normalized ratio range in the first 4 weeks of therapy.
conclusionThe COAG will determine if genetic information provides added benefit above and beyond clinical information alone.
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.