Background Preventing thrombosis is an important part of atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment. However, it may increase the risk of bleeding, and bleeding risk assessment tools' predictive value remains unclear. This network meta‐analysis investigated the sensitivity and specificity of HAS‐BLED, and other bleeding risk assessment tools, to predict major bleeding events in AF patients. Methods The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched using keywords, including “AF,” “bleeding,” and “HAS‐BLED,” for results published through 30 November 2018. The predictive sensitivity and specificity of each bleeding risk assessment tool was analyzed by network meta‐analysis. Results Our analysis included 18 studies, recruiting a total of 321 888 people. The bleeding risk assessment tools analyzed in this study included the ABC‐bleeding score, ATRIA, European score, GARFIELD‐AF, HAS‐BLED, HEMORR2HAGES, ORBIT, Shireman, and mOBRI. A comprehensive analysis of sensitivity and specificity, based on an inconsistency model, showed that European score, ABC, and mOBRI have relatively high‐sensitivity but low‐specificity tools, whereas HAS‐BLED and HEMORR2HAGES have balanced sensitivity and specificity. ORBIT, ATRIA, Shireman, and GARFIELD‐AF had relatively high specificity but low sensitivity. A consistency model analysis showed similar results. Conclusions HAS‐BLED is a balanced bleeding risk assessment tool in terms of sensitivity and specificity, whereas the European score, ABC, and mOBRI are high‐sensitivity tools and ORBIT, ATRIA, Shireman, and GARFIELD‐AF are high‐specificity tools.

No abstract

Background: New Oral Anticoagulants (NOACs) are effective and widely used to prevent and treat thromboembolic diseases, but the response to NOACs differs according to ABCB1 genotypes. Objective: We investigated the effects of ABCB1 genotypes on the pharmacokinetics and clinical outcomes of NOACs. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies on ABCB1 genotypes published from the inception of these databases until May 23, 2018. The Weighted Mean Difference (WMD) and Odds Ratio (OR) with 95% Confidence Interval (CI) were calculated for continuous and dichotomous data, respectively. Summary results were calculated using a random effects model. Results: Ten studies involving 2609 individuals were included in the systematic review, and three studies involving 535 individuals were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, four ABCB1 single-nucleotide polymorphisms were identified in the review. Carriers of the ABCB1 rs1045642 CC genotype had lower maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) than those of TT (WMD = −16.99 ng/mL; 95% CI = −33.39 to −0.59; P = 0.04), and carriers of the rs2032582 GG genotype showed lower Cmax than those of the A/T allele (WMD = −19.21 ng/mL; 95% CI = −36.62 to −1.80; P = 0.03). Carriers of the rs1045642 CC genotype showed lower area under the curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0–∞) than those of the T allele (WMD = −78.58 ng·h/mL; 95% CI = −151.14 to −6.01; P = 0.03). ABCB1 rs4148738 genotypes did not affect the risks of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism (OR = 0.88), ischemic events (OR = 0.98), bleeding (OR = 0.94), major bleeding (OR = 1.14), or minor bleeding (OR = 0.94) in patients treated with dabigatran. Conclusion: Cmax was lower in carriers of ABCB1 rs1045642 CC than in those of TT and in carriers of rs2032582 GG than in those of the A/T allele, and AUC0–∞ was lower in carriers of rs1045642 CC than in those of TT. Conversely, ABCB1 rs4148738 genotypes did not affect primary clinical endpoints in dabigatran-administered patients. Future studies should analyze the relationships of ABCB1 genotypes with the pharmacokinetics and clinical outcomes of specific NOACs.

Background: The rivaroxaban dose regimen for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is complex in Asia. Given the high interindividual variability and the risk of bleeding caused by rivaroxaban in Asians, the influencing factors and the relationship between outlier biomarkers and bleeding events need exploration.Methods: The integrated pharmacokinetics (PK)/pharmacodynamics (PD) models were characterized based on rich PK/PD data from 304 healthy volunteers and sparse PD [anti-factor Xa activity (anti-Xa) and prothrombin (PT)] data from 223 patients with NVAF. The correlations between PD biomarkers and clinically relevant bleedings in 1 year were explored. The final integrated PK/PD model was used to evaluate the influence of dosage and individual covariates on PD parameters.Results: A two-compartment, linear model with sequential zero-order and first-order absorption was adopted. The dose-specific relative bioavailability (F1), diet status, creatinine clearance, and body mass index (BMI) improved the model fit. The apparent systemic clearance was 7.39 L/h, and the central and peripheral volumes were 10.9 and 50.9 L, respectively. The linear direct-effects model with shape factor plus the additive (and/or proportional) error model described the correlation between anti-Xa/PT and plasma concentration. Bodyweight, total cholesterol (TCHO), and diet status were selected as the covariates of the anti-Xa/PT model. Anti-Xa was more sensitive to the increase in rivaroxaban exposure compared with PT. An elevated bleeding tendency was seen with higher peak anti-Xa and PT. For a typical Chinese patient, the peak anti-Xa value (median (5%–95% PI)) of 20 and 15 mg were 309 ng/ml (139–597 ng/ml) and 296 ng/ml (138–604 ng/ml), both median values were within the expected range. For patients with CrCL 30–49 ml/min, the median peak anti-Xa with recommended 10 mg other than 15 mg were within the expected range.Conclusion: Fixed doses of rivaroxaban could be prescribed for patients with NVAF without adjustment for bodyweight, BMI, and TCHO. Randomized studies should be performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of low-dose rivaroxaban in Chinese patients with NVAF.

Background: The purpose of this study was to identify genetic variations associated with the metabolism of dabigatran in healthy Chinese subjects, with particular focus given to pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD).Methods: Healthy Chinese adults aged 18–65 years with unknown genotypes from a bioequivalence trial were included according to the protocol registered at ClinicalTrial.org (NCT03161496). All subjects received a single dose (150 mg) of dabigatran etexilate. PK (main outcomes: area under the concentration-time, AUC0-t, of total and free dabigatran) and PD (main outcomes: anti-FIIa activity, APTT, and PT) parameters were evaluated. Whole-exome sequencing and genome-wide association analyses were performed. Additionally, candidate gene association analyses related to dabigatran were conducted.Results: A total of 118 healthy Chinese subjects were enrolled in this study. According to the p-value suggestive threshold (1.0 × 10−4), the following three SNPs were found to be associated with the AUC0–t of total dabigatran: SLC4A4 SNP rs138389345 (p = 5.99 × 10−5), FRAS1 SNP rs6835769 (p = 6.88 × 10−5), and SULT1A1 SNP rs9282862 (p = 7.44 × 10−5). Furthermore, these SNPs were also found to have significant influences on the AUC0–t of free dabigatran, maximum plasma concentration, and anti-FIIa activity (p < 0.05). Moreover, we identified 30 new potential SNPs of 13 reported candidate genes (ABCB1, ABCC2, ABCG2, CYP2B6, CYP1A2, CYP2C19, CYP3A5, CES1, SLCO1B1, SLC22A1, UGT1A1, UGT1A9, and UGT2B7) that were associated with drug metabolism.Conclusion: Genetic variations were indeed found to impact dabigatran metabolism in a population of healthy Chinese subjects. Further research is needed to explore the more detailed functions of these SNPs. Additionally, our results should be verified in studies that use larger sample sizes and investigate other ethnicities.

Our result supported the hypothesis that DRD2 affected risperidone treatment. DRD1 had no significant effect on the response to risperidone, whereas DRD3 might be associated with an improvement in negative symptoms. Larger observational studies are warranted to verify these findings and identify other genetic factors involved.

No abstract

This meta-analysis was carried out to explore if a personalized antiplatelet strategy based on genotyping is superior to conventional therapy.Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched from the inception of each database to 5 May 2020. Studies reporting endpoints in genotype-guided treatment group and conventional treatment group were included. The endpoint results were presented as the risk ratio (RR), with 95% confidence interval (CI).Results: A total of 10 561 patients from 16 studies (eight randomized controlled trials [RCT] and eight cohort studies) were included in the meta-analysis. The rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), stent thrombosis and myocardial infarction (MI) were significantly lower in the genotype-guided group than in the conventional treatment group (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.44-0.73, P < .0001; RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.24-0.67, P = .0005; RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.35-0.58, P < .00001, respectively).A significant difference was found between the two groups in major bleeding (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.55-0.98, P = .04), which was not robust after sensitivity analysis. Conclusion:Genotype-guided antiplatelet treatment could decrease the risk of MACE, stent thrombosis and MI in patients with coronary artery disease or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, without increasing the risk of bleeding over a long follow-up period. The decreased risk of efficacy outcomes was more obvious in cohort studies. Well-organized RCTs and clinical trials are required to verify the benefit of genotype-guided therapy.