Intravenous Vipera berus Venom-Specific Fab Fragments and Intramuscular Vipera ammodytes Venom-Specific F(ab’)2 Fragments in Vipera ammodytes-Envenomed Patients

Vipera ammodytes (V. ammodytes) is the most venomous European viper. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy and pharmacokinetic values of intravenous Vipera berus venom-specific (paraspecific) Fab fragments (ViperaTAb) and intramuscular V. ammodytes venom-specific F(ab’)2 fragments (European viper venom antiserum, also called “Zagreb” antivenom) in V.ammodytes-envenomed patients. This was a prospective study of V.ammodytes-envenomed patients that were treated intravenously with ViperaTAb or intramuscularly with European viper venom antiserum that was feasible only due to the unique situation of an antivenom shortage. The highest venom concentration, survival, length of hospital stay and adverse reactions did not differ between the groups. Patients treated with intravenous Fab fragments were sicker, with significantly more rhabdomyolysis and neurotoxicity. The kinetics of Fab fragments after one or more intravenous applications matched better with the venom concentration in the early phase of envenomation compared to F(ab’)2 fragments that were given intramuscularly only on admission. F(ab’)2 fragments given intramuscularly had 25-fold longer apparent total body clearance and 14-fold longer elimination half-time compared to Fab fragments given intravenously (2 weeks vs. 24 h, respectively). In V.ammodytes-envenomed patients, the intramuscular use of specific F(ab’)2 fragments resulted in a slow rise of antivenom serum concentration that demanded their early administration but without the need for additional doses for complete resolution of all clinical signs of envenomation. Intravenous use of paraspecific Fab fragments resulted in the immediate rise of antivenom serum concentration that enabled their use according to the clinical progress, but multiple doses might be needed for efficient therapy of thrombocytopenia due to venom recurrence, while the progression of rhabdomyolysis and neurotoxic effects of the venom could not be prevented.

Comparison of the Pharmacokinetic Profiles of Three Low Molecular Mass Heparins – Dalteparin, Enoxaparin and Nadroparin – Administered Subcutaneously in Healthy Volunteers (Doses for Prevention of Thromboembolism)

SummaryThe present trial was designed to comparatively investigate the pharmacokinetic profile and evaluate the apparent bioavailability pattern of three already marketed low molecular mass heparins (LMMHs): dalteparin (Fragmin®), nadroparin (Fraxiparin®), and enoxaparin (Love- nox®) given by subcutaneous route. The study was carried out in 20 healthy young volunteers given, according to a cross over design, a single subcutaneous injection of the doses recommended for the prophylaxis of deep vein thrombosis (commercial preparations, prefilled syringes): dalteparin 2,500 IU (= 2,500 IU anti-Xa), nadroparin 7,500 ICU (= 3,075 IU anti-Xa), enoxaparin 20 mg (= 2,000 IU anti-Xa) and enoxaparin 40 mg (= 4,000 IU anti-Xa). Of the markers used, activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), thrombin clotting time (TCT), Heptest®, anti-thrombin (aIIa) activity and anti-Xa (aXa) activity, the most pertinent parameter (from a biodynamic viewpoint) is plasma aXa activity. We demonstrated that dalteparin, nadroparin and enoxaparin exhibit statistically significantly different pharmacokinetic and overall disposition patterns. Normalized to the same injected dose (1,000 IU aXa), the relative actual amount of plasma anti-Xa activity generated by enoxaparin is 1.48 times greater (p < 0.001) than that of nadroparin and 2.28 times greater (p < 0.001) than that of dalteparin while the plasma amount induced by nadroparin is 1.54 times greater (p < 0.001) than that of dalteparin. The apparent total body clearance of enoxaparin doses (CL/F = 16.7 ± 5.5 and 13.8 ± 3.2 ml/min) is significantly smaller than those of nadroparin (CL/F = 21.4 ± 7.0 ml/min ; p < 0.01) and dalteparin (CL/F = 33.3 ±11.8 ml/min ; p < 0.001) while dalteparin apparent clearance is about 1.5-fold greater (p < 0.001) than that of nadroparin. These LMMHs also differ by their renal excretion pattern : more fragments exhibiting an anti-Xa activity are recovered in urine following enoxaparin doses (6.4 and 8.7 % of the dose, respectively) than following nadroparin (3.9 %) and dalteparin (3.4 %) injection. These differences in the disposition profiles explain why the apparent elimination half life t1/2 values of the LMMHs compared here are different: dalteparin: 2.8 h; nadroparin: 3.7 h; and enoxaparin: 4.1 h. Whether or not these differences may contribute to explain the different safety/efficacy balance of each of these antithrombotic medications remains to be discussed and needs further studies.