Testing for dabigatran and rivaroxaban by clinical laboratories

Abstract

Rivaroxaban and dabigatran are among the newest anticoagulants, and measuring their concentration in patients is a new challenge for clinical laboratories. We analyzed data from the ECAT proficiency program to determine how well the assays are performing in clinical laboratories internationally. Most laboratories received a passing grade (Z score <3) for the results of their dabigatran and rivaroxaban testing. Failing Z scores were not associated with any particular method. With dabigatran, some homemade calibrators gave higher results than the commercially available calibrators. There were no significant differences among the instruments or the 5 reagents in use, but results showed inter-laboratory variability that could have clinical significance. The 3 reagents with the lowest number of users had poor inter-laboratory precision. Ten different anti-Xa reagents were in use for rivaroxaban testing. One reagent gave lower results than other reagents at 100 ng/mL but not at 300 ng/mL. There were no significant differences among the different rivaroxaban calibrators or instruments. In conclusion, inter-laboratory precision could be improved for both dabigatran and rivaroxaban assays. Homemade dabigatran calibrators differed from commercially available calibrators, and there was a statistically significant difference between some of the rivaroxaban reagents. About 10% of results received failing Z scores or passed but fell in a range that require the laboratory to investigate for bias or other inaccuracy in their method. Am. J. Hematol. 91:E464-E467, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

2021 Update of the International Council for Standardization in Haematology Recommendations for Laboratory Measurement of Direct Oral Anticoagulants

“…Most international external quality control (EQA) programmes now have established EQA exercises for DOACs and demonstrate a wide implementation of specific DOAC testing in certain regions of the world. [111][112][113][114][115][116][117][118] Nevertheless, in regions where the regulatory authorities have refused the approval of these specific kits, access to drug measurements may be limited to specialized laboratories. In addition, only few undertake the in-house validation of these techniques refraining the clinicians to ask for these specific drug measurements.…”

How to Optimize Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (APTT) Testing: Solutions to Establishing and Verifying Normal Reference Intervals and Assessing APTT Reagents for Sensitivity to Heparin, Lupus Anticoagulant, and Clotting Factors

“…The test patterns may also help identify the potential DOAC, be it dabigatran, apixaban, rivaroxaban, or edoxaban. [35][36][37][38] Knowledge of clinical data is also pivotal. If the patient is bleeding, a significant factor deficiency or factor inhibitor may be present, and performance of factor assays initiated.…”

Interlaboratory Performance in Measurement of Dabigatran and Rivaroxaban

“…Owing to the higher number of participants, they were able to evaluate the data per reagent group if more than 10 participants were present in the survey from 2017. 24 Another ECAT international dabigatran and rivaroxaban survey with a large number of international participants and a small percentage of North American laboratories (11 of 123) assessed the interlaboratory variation by using the same definition 14 and showed similar findings 25 : intermediate CV for the 2 most commonly used dabigatran assays (dTT, Hemoclot; and anti-IIa assay, Biophen DTI). Owing to the large number of participants, they were able to sort the data by reagents and calibrators.…”