4.6 Article

Pharmacometric modeling to explore 4F-PCC dosing strategies for VKA reversal in patients with INR below 2

Journal

BLOOD ADVANCES
Volume 4, Issue 17, Pages 4208-4216

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2020002267

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. CSL Behring

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The indicated dose of 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) for urgent vitamin K antagonist (VKA) reversal in patients with an international normalized ratio (INR) of 2 to 4 is 25 IU/kg, but there is no indicated dose for INR <2. We explored 4F-PCC dosing strategies for baseline INR <2. Clinical trial data were used to develop pharmacometric models for Factor X (FX) and FII, accounting for covariates including baseline INR. FX and FII levels over time were simulated for mean baseline INR levels of the clinical trial participants plus baseline INRs 3.1, 1.9, and 1.6. For each INR, 200 virtual male patients were simulated to evaluate 4F-PCC doses of 35, 25, 20, 15, 12.5, and 10 IU/kg. Given an elevated bleeding risk with VKA therapy in Japanese vs Western populations, results were stratified by Japanese and non-Japanese patients. Target levels of FX and FII were >= 50% activity at 30 minutes after dosing in >= 80% of patients. FX- and FII-time models were developed with 1088 FX observations from 193 patients and 1074 FII observations from 192 patients. Model-based simulations indicated that at baseline INR 3.1, >= 80% of patients achieved >= 50% FX and FII activity with 25 IU/kg and 20 IU/kg 4F-PCC, respectively; at baseline INR 1.9, corresponding doses were 20 IU/kg and 15 IU/kg 4F-PCC, and at baseline INR 1.6, corresponding doses were 15 IU/kg, and 10 IU/kg 4F-PCC. Trends in Japanese and non-Japanese patients were similar. In conclusion, low 4F-PCC doses (15-20 IU/kg) may be sufficient to achieve hemostatic levels of FX and FII in Japanese and non-Japanese patients with baseline INR <2.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available