Four low-molecular-weight-heparin (LMWH) preparations have recently become available for clinical usage. Some ten preparations are currently under preclinical development. The safety/efficacy profile of each of these LMWHs is now known to be quite distinct from one and other. In order to minimize the variations in the pharmacologic responses and to cross-reference different products on a common scale, the WHO has recently introduced a LMWH standard. This standard is a nitrous-acid-depolymerized product provided by KabiVitrum (Stockholm, Sweden) with a specific physiochemical and biological profile. Although the in vitro characteristics of this standard are comparable to other LMWH, the in vivo behavior of this reference and the parent product, Fragmin®, are quite different in comparison to other products. In a well-defined uniform biochemical and pharmacologic screening, seven LMWH were compared at WHO reference-adjusted potency using pharmacologically valid dose-response curves. Cross-referencing of various LMWHs against the WHO standard in terms of anti-Xa activity resulted in a marked elevation of the anti-IIa component of some of the LMWHs. Establishment of this WHO standard stipulated that the clinical performance of cross-referenced LMWHs would be equivalent to one another and variation in potency could be minimized. Our data suggest that utilizing the WHO, standard individual potency (anti-Xa)-adjusted LMWHs exhibit distinct safety/efficacy profiles which were not related in their observed in vitro potency. Each LMWH has distinct multiparametric molecular and biochemical characteristics which determine the pharmacologic activities of individual agents. Thus cross-referencing of LMWHs by one in vitro assay is of questionable value as it may result in serious dosimetric errors, resulting in serious thrombotic and bleeding complications.
Different low-molecular-weight (LMW) heparins are produced by fractionation, enzymatic and chemical methods. Although the manufacturer’s assigned molecular weights of these agents are similar (around 5,000 daltons), they exhibit considerable molecular structural heterogeneity due to the variations in the manufacturing process. In vitro standardization of these LMW heparins produces highly variable results due to the variability of assay specificity. In a comparative study with seven LMW heparins, differences were found in molecular weight distribution, antifactor Xa activity, antifactor Πa activity, Heptest® activity, USP potency, platelet interactions, protamine and platelet factor 4 neutralization and charge density ratios. Relative antithrombotic actions varied between the seven agents and the ratio of the intravenous:subcutaneous effects were inconsistent with expected results based on in vitro properties or observed ex vivo effects. These products were not bioequivalent in equigravimetric or equipharmacopeial dosages (antifactor Xa, USP). Although the intravenous bioavailability was proportional to the potency for an individual agent, the subcutaneous bioavailability of the same agent showed differences from that of the intravenous regimen. In addition, significant differences between the bleeding profiles of these agents were noted in both intravenous and subcutaneous routes. The bleeding profiles did not correlate well with the relative proportion of the antifactor Xa component. However, some relationship to the bleeding effect was observed with the antifactor Xa and activated-partial-thromboplastin-time activities. These LMW heparins produced different effects on platelets as studied in the heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and platelet activation systems. These observations suggest that the individual composition of each LMW heparin determines its in vivo behavior which may account for the different safety/efficacy ratios observed in clinical trials.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.