Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27383664›Full record

ArticlePharmacogenetics and genomics2016

A systematic analysis and comparison of warfarin initiation strategies.

Benjamin French, Le Wang, Brian F Gage, Richard B Horenstein, Nita A Limdi, Stephen E Kimmel

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacogenetics and genomics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Benjamin FrenchDepartments of aBiostatistics and Epidemiology bMedicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania cDepartment of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri dDepartment of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland eDepartment of Neurology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
Le Wang
Brian F Gage
Richard B Horenstein
Nita A Limdi
Stephen E Kimmel
University of Pennsylvania · USWashington University in St. Louis · USUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · USUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · US

Funding

Predictors of hemorrhage among patients on direct acting oral anticoagulantsR01HL092173 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI LIMDI, NITA A · 2008 to 2023
$10.4M
GENETICS-InFORMATICS TRIAL (GIFT) OF WARFARIN TO PREVENT DVTR01HL097036 · NHLBI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI GAGE, BRIAN F · 2009 to 2015
$5.0M
NHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268200800003CNHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL092173NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL097036
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveRandomized trials have reported inconsistent evidence on the effectiveness of algorithms that use genotypes to initiate warfarin therapy. The Clarification of Optimal Anticoagulation through Genetics (COAG) trial initiated therapy on the basis of predicted maintenance doses, with a pharmacogenetic-guided algorithm in one study group and a clinically guided algorithm in the other. The European Pharmacogenetics of Anticoagulant Therapy (EU-PACT) consortium initiated therapy on the basis of loading doses, with an algorithm-based prediction in one study group and a fixed-dose regimen in the other. To understand the differences between these trials, we compared the initial doses between alternative dosing algorithms (the pharmacogenetic-guided and clinically guided algorithms developed by Gage and colleagues and those developed by the International Warfarin Pharmacogenetics Consortium) and between the COAG and EU-PACT dose-initiation strategies.

methodsThis was a secondary analysis of the COAG trial - a double-blind, randomized-controlled trial (2009-2013) - conducted at 18 clinical centers in the USA, which included 1010 adults initiating warfarin therapy, of whom 719 achieved maintenance dose.

resultsAmong COAG participants, the distribution of initial doses differed between algorithms, but showed similar prediction accuracy for maintenance dose. However, had the COAG trial implemented the EU-PACT strategy, the 3-day initial dose would have been 4.8 mg greater among participants randomized to pharmacogenetic-guided dosing, but only 2.5 mg greater among participants randomized to clinically guided dosing (P<0.001).

conclusionCompared with the COAG trial, the EU-PACT trial used systematically larger loading doses in the pharmacogenetic-guided group and might have inadequately adjusted for clinical variability in warfarin dose requirements in the fixed-dose group.

Indexed as

Pharmacogenomic VariantsAgedAlgorithmsAnticoagulantsClinical Trials as TopicComputer SimulationCytochrome P-450 CYP2C9Drug Dosage CalculationsFemaleHumansInternational Normalized RatioMaleMiddle AgedWarfarinAnticoagulantsCYP2C9 protein, humanCytochrome P-450 CYP2C9Warfarin

Identifiers

PMID27383664
PMCPMC5014593
OpenAlexW2474504489

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.