warfarin and napsagatran

The effect of oral warfarin on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the synthetic direct thrombin inhibitor napsagatran was investigated.. In an open, randomised, two-way crossover study, 12 healthy male volunteers were infused napsagatran (80 micrograms/min) for 48 h. Each subject was administered 25 mg warfarin (Coumadin) at the start of the infusion in either the first or second treatment period. Sampling was performed regularly over the treatment period and 24 h thereafter for measurement of plasma levels of napsagatran, activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and prothrombin time (PT).. The pharmacokinetic parameters of napsagatran were not significantly influenced by co-administration of warfarin. Napsagatran administration was followed by increases in APTT and PT. Co-administration of warfarin increased the AUEC (area under the effect curve) calculated for the period 0-48 h (corrected for baseline) for APTT by 45% (95% CI: 28-65%) and for PT by 438% (95% CI: 272-678%) compared to the treatment with napsagatran alone.. Warfarin has no effect on the pharmacokinetics of napsagatran, but has a marked influence on the pharmacodynamic parameters (APTT, PT) of napsagatran. In clinical practice, this interaction between the two compounds should be taken into account. The PT cannot be used to monitor the effect of oral anticoagulants during the switch from this group of direct thrombin inhibitors to full oral anticoagulant therapy.

Topics: Adult; Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Area Under Curve; Cross-Over Studies; Humans; Male; Models, Biological; Naphthalenes; Partial Thromboplastin Time; Piperidines; Prothrombin Time; Warfarin

During studies on warfarin, heparin and various anticoagulants with novel mechanisms of action, the activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) and the (apparent) international normalized ratio (INR) from a bedside monitor (Coagucheck Plus(R)) were compared with laboratory assay results. Data were compared using the Bland and Altman method of comparison where systematic differences result in significant slopes of the regression line. During heparin treatment, the bedside monitor largely underestimated the aPTT (slope = -0.80). During treatment with the direct thrombin inhibitor napsagatran (slope = 0.99), the pentasaccharides Org31540/SR90107A (slope = 0.77) and SanOrg34006 (slope = 0.35), and warfarin (slope = 0.60), the bedside monitor underestimated the aPTT at lower aPTT levels, while at higher aPTT levels it overestimated the laboratory values. The bedside monitor slightly overestimated the INR during treatment with warfarin (slope = 0.33). Apparent INR was largely overestimated during treatment with Org31540/SR90107A (slope = 1.38), SanOrg34006 (slope = 0.97), Napsagatran (slope = 1.23), and recombinant tissue factor pathway inhibitor (slope = 1.48, P < 0.001 for all regression lines). These results indicate that a substantial disagreement in aPTT or (apparent) INR exists between the bedside monitor and laboratory assay during treatment with the studied 'classic' and novel anticoagulants. The amount of disagreement depended on the anticoagulant given.

Topics: Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Drug Monitoring; False Negative Reactions; False Positive Reactions; Fibrinolytic Agents; Heparin; Humans; Laboratories; Naphthalenes; Oligosaccharides; Partial Thromboplastin Time; Piperidines; Point-of-Care Systems; Reproducibility of Results; Warfarin