4.5 Review

Warfarin dosing algorithms: A systematic review

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 87, Issue 4, Pages 1717-1729

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.14608

Keywords

clinical factors; demographic factors; dosing algorithms; genetic factors; warfarin

Funding

  1. National Institute for Health Research [16/137/101]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The review examined various warfarin dosing algorithms across different populations, showing that most algorithms are developed for Asians and Whites, with limited external validation and assessment for clinical utility. Recommendations were made to prioritize under-represented populations in algorithm development and assessment to improve reliability and applicability.
Aims Numerous algorithms have been developed to guide warfarin dosing and improve clinical outcomes. We reviewed the algorithms available for various populations and the covariates, performances and risk of bias of these algorithms. Methods We systematically searched MEDLINE up to 20 May 2020 and selected studies describing the development, external validation or clinical utility of a multivariable warfarin dosing algorithm. Two investigators conducted data extraction and quality assessment. Results Of 10 035 screened records, 266 articles were included in the review, describing the development of 433 dosing algorithms, 481 external validations and 52 clinical utility assessments. Most developed algorithms were for dose initiation (86%), developed by multiple linear regression (65%) and mostly applicable to Asians (49%) or Whites (43%). The most common demographic/clinical/environmental covariates were age (included in 401 algorithms), concomitant medications (270 algorithms) and weight (229 algorithms) while CYP2C9 (329 algorithms), VKORC1 (319 algorithms) and CYP4F2 (92 algorithms) variants were the most common genetic covariates. Only 26% and 7% algorithms were externally validated and evaluated for clinical utility, respectively, with Most warfarin dosing algorithms have been developed in Asians and Whites and may not be applicable to under-served populations. Few algorithms have been externally validated, assessed for clinical utility, and/or have a low risk of bias which makes them unreliable for clinical use. Algorithm development and assessment should follow current methodological recommendations to improve reliability and applicability, and under-represented populations should be prioritized.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available