TY - JOUR
T1 - Genetic warfarin dosing
T2 - Tables versus algorithms
AU - Finkelman, Brian S.
AU - Gage, Brian F.
AU - Johnson, Julie A.
AU - Brensinger, Colleen M.
AU - Kimmel, Stephen E.
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by Medical Scientist Training Program grant T32-GM07170 from the National Institutes of Health , institutional funds from the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine , and grant R01HL066176 from the National Institutes of Health . The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; and preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript. Dr. Gage is funded by the grant R01HL097036 from the National Institutes of Health for warfarin-related research and owns the nonprofit domain name www.warfarindosing.org . Dr. Johnson is an advisory board member for Medco Health Solutions, Inc. Ms. Brensinger has consulted for a law firm representing Pfizer, Inc., unrelated to warfarin. Dr. Kimmel has received research funding from GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer, Inc. ; has served as a consultant to several drug companies, including Bayer AG, Novartis, and Pfizer, Inc., all unrelated to warfarin; has received an honorarium from Ortho-McNeil for a talk on warfarin; and receives funding from the National Institutes of Health and the Aetna Foundation for warfarin-related research. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships to disclose.
PY - 2011/2/1
Y1 - 2011/2/1
N2 - Objectives The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of genetic tables and formal pharmacogenetic algorithms for warfarin dosing. Background Pharmacogenetic algorithms based on regression equations can predict warfarin dose, but they require detailed mathematical calculations. A simpler alternative, recently added to the warfarin label by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, is to use genotype-stratified tables to estimate warfarin dose. This table may potentially increase the use of pharmacogenetic warfarin dosing in clinical practice; however, its accuracy has not been quantified. Methods A retrospective cohort study of 1,378 patients from 3 anticoagulation centers was conducted. Inclusion criteria were stable therapeutic warfarin dose and complete genetic and clinical data. Five dose prediction methods were compared: 2 methods using only clinical information (empiric 5 mg/day dosing and a formal clinical algorithm), 2 genetic tables (the new warfarin label table and a table based on mean dose stratified by genotype), and 1 formal pharmacogenetic algorithm, using both clinical and genetic information. For each method, the proportion of patients whose predicted doses were within 20% of their actual therapeutic doses was determined. Dosing methods were compared using McNemar's chi-square test. Results Warfarin dose prediction was significantly more accurate (all p < 0.001) with the pharmacogenetic algorithm (52%) than with all other methods: empiric dosing (37%; odds ratio [OR]: 2.2), clinical algorithm (39%; OR: 2.2), warfarin label (43%; OR: 1.8), and genotype mean dose table (44%; OR: 1.9). Conclusions Although genetic tables predicted warfarin dose better than empiric dosing, formal pharmacogenetic algorithms were the most accurate.
AB - Objectives The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of genetic tables and formal pharmacogenetic algorithms for warfarin dosing. Background Pharmacogenetic algorithms based on regression equations can predict warfarin dose, but they require detailed mathematical calculations. A simpler alternative, recently added to the warfarin label by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, is to use genotype-stratified tables to estimate warfarin dose. This table may potentially increase the use of pharmacogenetic warfarin dosing in clinical practice; however, its accuracy has not been quantified. Methods A retrospective cohort study of 1,378 patients from 3 anticoagulation centers was conducted. Inclusion criteria were stable therapeutic warfarin dose and complete genetic and clinical data. Five dose prediction methods were compared: 2 methods using only clinical information (empiric 5 mg/day dosing and a formal clinical algorithm), 2 genetic tables (the new warfarin label table and a table based on mean dose stratified by genotype), and 1 formal pharmacogenetic algorithm, using both clinical and genetic information. For each method, the proportion of patients whose predicted doses were within 20% of their actual therapeutic doses was determined. Dosing methods were compared using McNemar's chi-square test. Results Warfarin dose prediction was significantly more accurate (all p < 0.001) with the pharmacogenetic algorithm (52%) than with all other methods: empiric dosing (37%; odds ratio [OR]: 2.2), clinical algorithm (39%; OR: 2.2), warfarin label (43%; OR: 1.8), and genotype mean dose table (44%; OR: 1.9). Conclusions Although genetic tables predicted warfarin dose better than empiric dosing, formal pharmacogenetic algorithms were the most accurate.
KW - FDA label
KW - coumarins
KW - dose prediction
KW - dosing algorithms
KW - genetic tables
KW - pharmacogenetics
KW - warfarin
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79251511257&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.08.643
DO - 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.08.643
M3 - Article
C2 - 21272753
AN - SCOPUS:79251511257
SN - 0735-1097
VL - 57
SP - 612
EP - 618
JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
IS - 5
ER -