基于临床实践的依诺肝素治疗的常规和个体化给药策略比较。

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Pharmacology Research & Perspectives Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1002/prp2.70039
Anthony Damiani, Viviane De Menezes Caceres, Greg Roberts, Jessica Coddo, Nicholas Scarfo, Desmond B Willliams, Vinosshini Tharmathurai, Rami Tadros, Stephen Fitzgerald, Alice O'Connell, Amrit Kaur Sandhu, Andrew Vanlint, Arduino A Mangoni, Dirk Hofmann, Hosam Bony, Jeff Faunt, Jir Ping Boey, Nicholas Farinola, Rachel Wells, Stephen Hedger, Udul Hewage, Yogesh Sharma, Zuhair Jabbar, Josephine Thomas, Katerina Flabouris, Toby Gilbert, Campbell Thompson, Patrick Russell
{"title":"基于临床实践的依诺肝素治疗的常规和个体化给药策略比较。","authors":"Anthony Damiani, Viviane De Menezes Caceres, Greg Roberts, Jessica Coddo, Nicholas Scarfo, Desmond B Willliams, Vinosshini Tharmathurai, Rami Tadros, Stephen Fitzgerald, Alice O'Connell, Amrit Kaur Sandhu, Andrew Vanlint, Arduino A Mangoni, Dirk Hofmann, Hosam Bony, Jeff Faunt, Jir Ping Boey, Nicholas Farinola, Rachel Wells, Stephen Hedger, Udul Hewage, Yogesh Sharma, Zuhair Jabbar, Josephine Thomas, Katerina Flabouris, Toby Gilbert, Campbell Thompson, Patrick Russell","doi":"10.1002/prp2.70039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To understand differences in anti-factor-Xa levels produced by two different dosing strategies (conventional and individualized) for therapeutic enoxaparin in a cohort of hospital inpatients. A multicenter, retrospective cohort study over a two- and a half-year period for inpatients with stable renal function and on therapeutic enoxaparin. Anti-factor-Xa levels were taken 3-5 h after enoxaparin administration and a minimum of 48 h of dosing. The final analysis included 278 patients from five hospitals: conventional dosing was used for 141, while 137 were given an unconventional dose, that is, individualized for their renal function and weight. Out-of-range levels were frequent (35% to 40% of all inpatients). After adjustment for age, renal function, and body mass index (BMI), the conventional group was more likely to experience above-range levels (> 1.0 IU/mL; OR 2.50 [95% CI 1.38-4.56], p < 0.003) than the individualized group. Individualized dosing was independently associated with higher odds of a below-range anti-Xa level (< 0.5 IU/mL) compared to conventional dosing (OR 2.27 [95% CI 1.07-4.76], p = 0.03). Within the conventional group, above-range levels were significantly and independently associated with decreasing renal function (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.99, p = 0.004) and with increasing BMI (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.10, p = 0.02). No such associations were seen with an individualized approach. Clinical event rates were low and not different between groups (p > 0.24). Conventional therapeutic dosing of enoxaparin exposed people with obesity or renal impairment to more frequent above-range anti-factor-Xa levels; individualizing the dose could improve this but might expose people to subtherapeutic levels. More research is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":19948,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacology Research & Perspectives","volume":"13 1","pages":"e70039"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11760983/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Clinical Practice-Based Comparison of Conventional and Individualized Dosing Strategies for Therapeutic Enoxaparin.\",\"authors\":\"Anthony Damiani, Viviane De Menezes Caceres, Greg Roberts, Jessica Coddo, Nicholas Scarfo, Desmond B Willliams, Vinosshini Tharmathurai, Rami Tadros, Stephen Fitzgerald, Alice O'Connell, Amrit Kaur Sandhu, Andrew Vanlint, Arduino A Mangoni, Dirk Hofmann, Hosam Bony, Jeff Faunt, Jir Ping Boey, Nicholas Farinola, Rachel Wells, Stephen Hedger, Udul Hewage, Yogesh Sharma, Zuhair Jabbar, Josephine Thomas, Katerina Flabouris, Toby Gilbert, Campbell Thompson, Patrick Russell\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/prp2.70039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>To understand differences in anti-factor-Xa levels produced by two different dosing strategies (conventional and individualized) for therapeutic enoxaparin in a cohort of hospital inpatients. A multicenter, retrospective cohort study over a two- and a half-year period for inpatients with stable renal function and on therapeutic enoxaparin. Anti-factor-Xa levels were taken 3-5 h after enoxaparin administration and a minimum of 48 h of dosing. The final analysis included 278 patients from five hospitals: conventional dosing was used for 141, while 137 were given an unconventional dose, that is, individualized for their renal function and weight. Out-of-range levels were frequent (35% to 40% of all inpatients). After adjustment for age, renal function, and body mass index (BMI), the conventional group was more likely to experience above-range levels (> 1.0 IU/mL; OR 2.50 [95% CI 1.38-4.56], p < 0.003) than the individualized group. Individualized dosing was independently associated with higher odds of a below-range anti-Xa level (< 0.5 IU/mL) compared to conventional dosing (OR 2.27 [95% CI 1.07-4.76], p = 0.03). Within the conventional group, above-range levels were significantly and independently associated with decreasing renal function (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.99, p = 0.004) and with increasing BMI (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.10, p = 0.02). No such associations were seen with an individualized approach. Clinical event rates were low and not different between groups (p > 0.24). Conventional therapeutic dosing of enoxaparin exposed people with obesity or renal impairment to more frequent above-range anti-factor-Xa levels; individualizing the dose could improve this but might expose people to subtherapeutic levels. More research is needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19948,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pharmacology Research & Perspectives\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"e70039\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11760983/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pharmacology Research & Perspectives\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.70039\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacology Research & Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.70039","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

了解两种不同给药策略(常规和个体化)对住院患者治疗性依诺肝素产生的抗因子xa水平的差异。一项为期两年半的多中心回顾性队列研究,研究对象为肾功能稳定且接受依诺肝素治疗的住院患者。在依诺肝素给药后3-5小时和给药后至少48小时检测抗因子xa水平。最终分析包括来自5家医院的278名患者:141名患者使用常规剂量,137名患者使用非常规剂量,即根据其肾功能和体重进行个体化治疗。超出范围的水平很常见(占所有住院患者的35%至40%)。在调整了年龄、肾功能和体重指数(BMI)后,常规组更有可能出现高于范围的水平(> 1.0 IU/mL;OR 2.50 [95% CI 1.38-4.56], p 0.24)。依诺肝素的常规治疗剂量使肥胖或肾功能损害患者的抗因子xa水平更频繁地高于范围;个体化剂量可以改善这种情况,但可能会使人们暴露于亚治疗水平。需要更多的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Clinical Practice-Based Comparison of Conventional and Individualized Dosing Strategies for Therapeutic Enoxaparin.

To understand differences in anti-factor-Xa levels produced by two different dosing strategies (conventional and individualized) for therapeutic enoxaparin in a cohort of hospital inpatients. A multicenter, retrospective cohort study over a two- and a half-year period for inpatients with stable renal function and on therapeutic enoxaparin. Anti-factor-Xa levels were taken 3-5 h after enoxaparin administration and a minimum of 48 h of dosing. The final analysis included 278 patients from five hospitals: conventional dosing was used for 141, while 137 were given an unconventional dose, that is, individualized for their renal function and weight. Out-of-range levels were frequent (35% to 40% of all inpatients). After adjustment for age, renal function, and body mass index (BMI), the conventional group was more likely to experience above-range levels (> 1.0 IU/mL; OR 2.50 [95% CI 1.38-4.56], p < 0.003) than the individualized group. Individualized dosing was independently associated with higher odds of a below-range anti-Xa level (< 0.5 IU/mL) compared to conventional dosing (OR 2.27 [95% CI 1.07-4.76], p = 0.03). Within the conventional group, above-range levels were significantly and independently associated with decreasing renal function (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.99, p = 0.004) and with increasing BMI (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.10, p = 0.02). No such associations were seen with an individualized approach. Clinical event rates were low and not different between groups (p > 0.24). Conventional therapeutic dosing of enoxaparin exposed people with obesity or renal impairment to more frequent above-range anti-factor-Xa levels; individualizing the dose could improve this but might expose people to subtherapeutic levels. More research is needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pharmacology Research & Perspectives
Pharmacology Research & Perspectives Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-General Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.80%
发文量
120
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: PR&P is jointly published by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics (ASPET), the British Pharmacological Society (BPS), and Wiley. PR&P is a bi-monthly open access journal that publishes a range of article types, including: target validation (preclinical papers that show a hypothesis is incorrect or papers on drugs that have failed in early clinical development); drug discovery reviews (strategy, hypotheses, and data resulting in a successful therapeutic drug); frontiers in translational medicine (drug and target validation for an unmet therapeutic need); pharmacological hypotheses (reviews that are oriented to inform a novel hypothesis); and replication studies (work that refutes key findings [failed replication] and work that validates key findings). PR&P publishes papers submitted directly to the journal and those referred from the journals of ASPET and the BPS
期刊最新文献
Differential Impact of Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Variability on Response to Combination Therapy. Leveraging Administrative Health Data to Capture Rare Adverse Drug Reactions: Identifying Pediatric Patients With Trimethoprim-Sulfamethoxazole Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. Student and Graduate Perceptions of Their Development of the Core Attitudes From the British Pharmacological Society's Undergraduate Pharmacology Curriculum. Promoting Sustainable Prescribing-A Case Study Presenting Experiences From Two Swedish Drug and Therapeutics Committees. Alterations in Abdominal Blood Flows After Drinking Coffee.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1