ArticleScientific reports2016
A novel, rapid method to compare the therapeutic windows of oral anticoagulants using the Hill coefficient.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A New Model of Hemoglobin Oxygenation.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Drug Interactions Affecting Oral Anticoagulant Use.Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology · 2022Review
- Applications in Awake Animal Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Review
- Tissue-Specific Analysis of Pharmacological Pathways.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2018Article
- Quantification of the Synergism Between HER-Targeted Drugs with Human Blood Serum and EGF.Acta naturaeArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A central challenge in designing and administering effective anticoagulants is achieving the proper therapeutic window and dosage for each patient. The Hill coefficient, nH, which measures the steepness of a dose-response relationship, may be a useful gauge of this therapeutic window. We sought to measure the Hill coefficient of available anticoagulants to gain insight into their therapeutic windows. We used a simple fluorometric in vitro assay to determine clotting activity in platelet poor plasma after exposure to various concentrations of anticoagulants. The Hill coefficient for argatroban was the lowest, at 1.7 ± 0.2 (95% confidence interval, CI), and the Hill coefficient for fondaparinux was the highest, at 4.5 ± 1.3 (95% CI). Thus, doubling the dose of fondaparinux from its IC50 would decrease coagulation activity by nearly a half, whereas doubling the dose of argatroban from its IC50 would decrease coagulation activity by merely one quarter. These results show a significant variation among the Hill coefficients, suggesting a similar variation in therapeutic windows among anticoagulants in our assay.
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.