ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2026
A real-world data-driven approach to optimizing enoxaparin dosing in burn patients.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Optimizing Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Burn Patients Using Enoxaparin Through PBPK Modeling.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimEnoxaparin dosing in burn patients is challenging due to physiological changes affecting absorption, distribution and clearance. The objectives of this study are to develop a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model for enoxaparin in burn patients, evaluate target attainment with current equation-based (EQ) dosing and propose an optimized dosing regimen.
methodsReal-world data from 408 burn patients who received enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis at the University of Utah Burn Center were analysed, comprising 15 517 doses and 1288 antiXa measurements. Only 56% of patients achieved the target antiXa range (0.2-0.4 IU/mL) approximately 4 h after the third dose. A one-compartment PK model with first-order absorption and elimination best fit the data, with estimated apparent clearance (CL/F), volume of distribution (Vc/F) and absorption rate constant at 1.56 L/h, 22.1 L and 1.10 1/h, respectively.
resultsTotal burn surface area (TBSA) and body weight significantly influenced clearance and distribution, while glomerular filtration rate had no notable impact. Simulations showed that EQ dosing failed to achieve target levels after the first dose in ~40% of patients, while the proposed model-based regimen improved target attainment by more than 70%. This study underscores the limitations of EQ dosing, and patients with larger TBSA or higher body weight particularly benefited from the proposed regimen.
conclusionA population PK model of enoxaparin was developed in burn patients using real-world data. Model-informed dosing improved early prophylactic target attainment compared with EQ dosing, providing a practical strategy for optimizing enoxaparin prophylaxis in this high-risk population.
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.