↓ Skip to main content

Anticoagulant Therapy with the Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibitors Rivaroxaban, Apixaban and Edoxaban and the Thrombin Inhibitor Dabigatran Etexilate in Patients with Hepatic Impairment

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Pharmacokinetics, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
104 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
149 Mendeley
Title
Anticoagulant Therapy with the Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibitors Rivaroxaban, Apixaban and Edoxaban and the Thrombin Inhibitor Dabigatran Etexilate in Patients with Hepatic Impairment
Published in
Clinical Pharmacokinetics, February 2013
DOI 10.1007/s40262-013-0034-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jochen Graff, Sebastian Harder

Abstract

The direct factor Xa (FXa) inhibitors rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban, and the thrombin inhibitor dabigatran etexilate (dabigatran) have gained approval for use in several indications, most notably for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and for the prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. Hepatic impairment can affect the disposition of these anticoagulants considerably not only because of the hepatic metabolism of the direct FXa inhibitors but also because moderate to severely impaired hepatic function will affect coagulation. This review describes the key pharmacological properties of novel oral anticoagulants with special attention to patients with impaired hepatic function. In subjects with moderately impaired liver function (i.e. Child-Pugh classification B), the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of rivaroxaban (10 mg single dose) is increased by 2.27-fold, which is paralleled by an increase in FXa inhibition. The AUC of apixaban (5 mg single dose) is increased by 1.09-fold, whereas the AUC of edoxaban (15 mg single dose) is decreased by 4.8 % and the AUC of dabigatran (150 mg single dose) is decreased by 5.6 %. Specific labelling restrictions for rivaroxaban, apixaban and dabigatran regarding impaired hepatic function are based on both the Child-Pugh classification and liver-related exclusion criteria applied in pivotal clinical trials. Rivaroxaban is contraindicated in patients with hepatic disease associated with coagulopathy and clinically relevant bleeding risk, including cirrhotic patients classified as Child-Pugh B and C. Apixaban can be used with caution in patients with mild (Child-Pugh A) or moderate (Child-Pugh B) hepatic impairment or in patients with alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase levels >2× upper limit of normal (ULN). Apixaban is not recommended in patients with severe hepatic impairment and is contraindicated in those with hepatic disease associated with coagulopathy and clinically relevant bleeding risk. Dabigatran is not recommended in patients with elevated liver enzymes (>2× ULN). Dabigatran is contraindicated in patients with hepatic impairment or liver disease expected to have any impact on survival. Currently, edoxaban is not available in the US or European markets. However, the Japanese label did not restrict use in hepatic dysfunction but advises care in patients with severe hepatic impairment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Slovenia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 144 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 15%
Student > Master 23 15%
Other 18 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 11%
Student > Postgraduate 13 9%
Other 34 23%
Unknown 21 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 80 54%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 21 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 <1%
Other 5 3%
Unknown 34 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 January 2018.
All research outputs
#14,686,667
of 24,631,014 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Pharmacokinetics
#1,172
of 1,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,771
of 292,799 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Pharmacokinetics
#12
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,631,014 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,583 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 292,799 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.