scholarly journals Andexanet Alfa for Acute Major Bleeding Associated With Factor Xa Inhibitors

2017 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 279-280 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.J. Connolly ◽  
T.J. Milling ◽  
J.W. Eikelboom
Author(s):  
Joseph Friedli

<p>A critical appraisal and clinical application of Connolly SJ, Milling TJ, Eikelboom JW, et al. Andexanet alfa for acute major bleeding associated with factor Xa inhibitors. <em>N Engl J Med</em>. 2016;375(12):1131-1141. doi: <a href="https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1607887">10.1056/NEJMoa1607887</a>.</p>


2016 ◽  
Vol 375 (12) ◽  
pp. 1131-1141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart J. Connolly ◽  
Truman J. Milling ◽  
John W. Eikelboom ◽  
C. Michael Gibson ◽  
John T. Curnutte ◽  
...  

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3681-3681
Author(s):  
Sandip Patel ◽  
Tiffany George ◽  
Tzu-Fei Wang ◽  
Sherry Mori Vogt ◽  
Edmund Folefac ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Background: Some cancer patients with thromboembolism require dual treatment of VEGFR TKIs and factor Xa inhibitors (direct or indirect), which may contribute to increased bleeding risks. However, the safety of such combination treatment has not been well characterized in the literature or national guidelines. Methods: This is a single center retrospective study, where we identified metastatic cancer patients (renal cancer, colorectal cancer, sarcoma, etc) who received concurrent VEGFR TKIs (pazopanib, sunitinib, sorafenib, axitinib, regorafenib, vandetanib, lenvatinib or cabozantinib) and Xa inhibitors (low-molecular weight heparin [LMWH] or direct oral anticoagulants [DOACs] including rivaroxaban or apixaban) at the Ohio State University Medical Center. We assessed bleeding risks of dual therapies vs. factor Xa inhibitors alone, using the same patients as self controls. We reviewed medical charts of all identified patients for clinically significant bleeding events (defined as combined major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major bleeding by the International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria). The Cox proportional hazard model was used to compare the differences of time to first clinically significant bleeding event between the groups of concurrent use and anticoagulant use only. Results: A total of 86 patients (26 females and 60 males) were included: 78 Caucasians, 6 African Americans, and 2 others. 81 patients had concurrent TKI and LMWH treatment; 20 patients had concurrent TKI and DOACs; and 85 patients have had been on factor Xa inhibitor alone (LMWH or DOACs) at some point. Some patients had been on both LMWH and DOACs at different time periods. Overall, there were 29 clinically significant bleeding events (including 8 major bleeding) during concurrent treatment and 17 events (4 major bleeding) during factor Xa inhibitor alone over a median follow up of 63 days (52 days for concurrent treatment and 99 days for Xa inhibitor alone). In this self-control study, concurrent treatment was associated with a statistically higher risk of clinically significant bleeding events (HR, 2.84; 95% CI, 1.43-5.64, P &lt; 0.01), which reached 37% patient population in the first 3 months, while the bleeding associated with factor Xa inhibitor alone seemed spaced out at the entire length of anticoagulation (8% by 6 months). Similar trend was found in the analysis of patient group of concurrent TKI and LMWH vs. LMWH alone (HR, 1.96; 95% CI, 0.95-4.02, P = 0.067), although significance was not reached likely due to insufficient power. Sample size was inadequate for meaningful comparison between concurrent VEGFR TKI and DOAC vs. DOAC alone. Conclusions: Concurrent treatment of VEGFR TKI and factor Xa inhibitors is associated with a significantly increased bleeding risks when compared with factor Xa inhibitors alone in patients with metastatic cancer. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlie J. Nederpelt ◽  
Leon Naar ◽  
Pieta Krijnen ◽  
Saskia le Cessie ◽  
Haytham M. A. Kaafarani ◽  
...  

Stroke ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Syed Daniyal Asad ◽  
Stephanie R Lombardi ◽  
Ilene Staff ◽  
Amre M Nouh ◽  
Mark J Alberts

Background: Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is a devastating condition with high 30- day mortality. Up to a third of patients experience hematoma expansion within the first 24 hours; anticoagulation with factor Xa inhibitors may increase the risk of expansion and poor outcomes. Objective: We assessed our experience using Andexanet alfa (Aα) by evaluating stabilization of the hematoma and ischemic complications. Methods: We conducted a single center prospective observational study on all patients receiving Aα for reversal of anticoagulation in the setting of an ICH and use of Factor Xa inhibitors. The degree of hematoma expansion within 12 hours of drug administration on non-contrast head CT was categorized as 'excellent' (<20% increase in hematoma size), ‘good' ( > 20-<35%), and 'poor' ( > 35%). Secondary outcomes included dosage, median length of stay, mortality, modified Rankin score (mRS), discharge disposition, and ischemic complications. Results: Fifteen patients received Aα (5=lobar, 5=deep, 5= multicompartment). One patient with a presumed deep hemorrhage was excluded because subsequent imaging showed chronic mineralization. The predominant etiologies were hypertension (40%), amyloid angiopathy (26.6%) and trauma (13.3%). The median age was 86 years (IQR 19) and median ICH score on arrival was 2 (IQR 2), and median hematoma size was 14.3 mL (IQR 34.5). Most patients (71.4%) received the low dose formulation. Based on hematoma expansion, 64.3%, 14.3% and 21.4% of patients achieved excellent, good and poor hemostasis, respectively. Reduction in hematoma size was seen in 20% (n=3) while 13.3% (n=2) patients had no expansion. Median ICU and hospital length of stays were 2.0 days (IQR 2.2) and 6.6 days (IQR 9.78) respectively. Mortality was 28.6% and median mRS upon discharge was 4 (IQR 2), with most patients discharged to rehabilitation facilities (60%). There were no ischemic complications. Conclusion: Our experience is consistent with the results of the ANNEXA 4 study with 78.6% of patients showing excellent or good hemostasis. These results led to improved clinical outcomes, with 60% of patients being discharged to rehabilitation. These data support the efficacy of this treatment paradigm in a real-world setting.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document