Rosuvastatin use increases plasma fibrinolytic potential: a randomised clinical trial.

We conducted a study to assess the effect of rosuvastatin use on fibrinolysis in patients with previous venous thromboembolism (VTE). This was a post hoc analysis within the STAtins Reduce Thrombophilia (START) study (NCT01613794). Plasma fibrinolytic potential, fibrinogen, plasmin inhibitor, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) and thrombin-activatable fibrinolysis inhibitor (TAFI) were measured before and after four weeks of rosuvastatin or no treatment in participants with prior confirmed VTE, after ending anticoagulant therapy. In the non-rosuvastatin group (n = 121), plasma fibrinolytic potential and individual fibrinolysis parameters did not change at the end of the study versus the baseline, whereas in the rosuvastatin group (n = 126), plasma fibrinolytic potential increased: the mean clot lysis time decreased by 8·75 min (95% CI -13·8 to -3·72), and plasmin inhibitor levels and TAFI activity were lower at the end of the study (-0·05 U/ml; 95% CI -0·07 to -0·02 and -4·77%; 95% CI -6·81 to -2·73, respectively). PAI-1 levels did not change and fibrinogen levels were 0·17 g/l (95% CI 0·04-0·29) higher. In participants with prior VTE, rosuvastatin use led to an increased fibrinolytic potential compared with non-statin use. Our findings support the need for further studies on the possible role for statins in the secondary prevention of VTE.

Relative importance of four functional measures as predictors of 15-year mortality in the older Dutch population.

BACKGROUND: Decreased physical function is known to raise mortality risk. Little is known about how different physical function measures compare in predicting mortality risk in older men and women. The objective of this study was to compare four, objective and self-reported, physical function measures in predicting 15-year mortality risk in older men and women. METHODS: Data were used from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA), an ongoing cohort study in a population-based sample of the older Dutch population, sampled from municipal records. The 1995-96 cycle, including 727 men and 778 women aged 65-88 years, was considered as the baseline. Mortality was followed up through September 1, 2011. Physical function measures were: lower-body performance (chair stands test, walk test and tandem stand); handgrip strength (grip strength dynamometer); lung function (peak expiratory flow rate); functional limitations (self-report of difficulties in performing six activities of daily living). Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine the predictive value of each physical function measure for 15-year mortality risk, adjusted for demographic, lifestyle and health variables as potential confounders. RESULTS: 1031 participants (68.5%) had died. After adjustments for confounders, in models assessing single functional measures, peak flow was the strongest predictor of all-cause mortality in men (HR 1.76, CI 1.38-2.26, CI) and lower-body performance in women (HR 1.97,CI 1.40-2.76, CI). In a model including all four functional measures only peak flow was statistically significant in predicting mortality in both genders (men HR 1.54,CI 1.18-2.01 and women HR 1.45,CI 1.08-1.94). In women, lower-body performance (HR 1.66, CI 1.15-2.41) followed by grip strength (HR 1.38, CI 1.02-1.89), and in men, functional limitations (HR 1.43, CI 1.14-1.8) were the other significant predictors of all-cause mortality. CONCLUSION: Both objective and self-reported measures of physical functioning predicted all-cause mortality in a representative sample of the older Dutch population to different extents in men and women. Peak flow contributed important unique predictive value for mortality in both men and women. In women, however, lower-body performance tests had better predictive ability. A second-best predictor in men was self-reported functional limitations. Peak flow, and possibly one of the other measures, may be used in clinical practice for assessment in the context of time constraints.

Rosuvastatin use improves measures of coagulation in patients with venous thrombosis.

Aims: Observational studies indicate that statins reduce the risk of recurrent venous thrombosis (VT). However, trials have not been performed and the mechanism is unknown. We aimed to determine whether statin therapy improves the coagulation profile in patients with prior VT. Methods and results: Randomized clinical trial (NCT01613794). Patients were randomized to rosuvastatin 20 mg/day for 4 weeks or no intervention. Blood was drawn at baseline and at end of study. The primary outcome was factor (F) VIII:C. In total, five coagulation factors were measured: FVIII:C, von Willebrand factor:Ag, FVII:C, FXI:C, and D-dimer. Among 247 randomized participants, mean age was 58 years, 62% were women and 49% had unprovoked VT. For all tested coagulation factors, mean levels were clearly decreased at end of study in rosuvastatin users, whereas they hardly differed in non-statin users. Results were most consistent for FVIII:C where mean FVIII:C levels were 7.2 IU/dL [95% CI (confidence interval) 2.9-11.5] lower in rosuvastatin users, while among non-users, no change in FVIII:C was observed (mean difference -0.1; 95% CI -3.0 to 2.9). The mean age and sex adjusted difference in FVIII:C change was -6.7 IU/dL (95% CI -12.0 to -1.4) in rosuvastatin users vs. non-users. Subgroup analyses revealed that the decrease in coagulation factors by rosuvastatin was more pronounced in participants with unprovoked VT and in those with cardiovascular risk factors. Conclusion: Rosuvastatin 20 mg/day substantially improved the coagulation profile among patients with prior VT. These results suggest that statin therapy might be beneficial in patients at risk of recurrent VT.

Development of a clinical prediction model for an international normalised ratio ≥ 4·5 in hospitalised patients using vitamin K antagonists.

Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) used for the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic disease, increase the risk of bleeding complications. We developed and validated a model to predict the risk of an international normalised ratio (INR) ≥ 4·5 during a hospital stay. Adult patients admitted to a tertiary hospital and treated with VKAs between 2006 and 2010 were analysed. Bleeding risk was operationalised as an INR value ≥4·5. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to assess the association between potential predictors and an INR ≥ 4·5 and validated in an independent cohort of patients from the same hospital between 2011 and 2014. We identified 8996 admissions of patients treated with VKAs, of which 1507 (17%) involved an INR ≥ 4·5. The final model included the following predictors: gender, age, concomitant medication and several biochemical parameters. Temporal validation showed a c statistic of 0·71. We developed and validated a clinical prediction model for an INR ≥ 4·5 in VKA-treated patients admitted to our hospital. The model includes factors that are collected during routine care and are extractable from electronic patient records, enabling easy use of this model to predict an increased bleeding risk in clinical practice.

Clinical effects of antiplatelet drugs and statins on D-dimer levels.

BACKGROUND: Acute pulmonary embolism may be ruled out by combining nonhigh clinical probability and a normal D-dimer level. Both antiplatelet drugs and HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) have been associated with effects on thrombus formation, potentially influencing D-dimer levels in this setting, leading to a higher rate of false-negative tests. Therefore, we determined whether D-dimer levels in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism are affected by concomitant use of antiplatelet drugs and/or statins and evaluated whether the effect of antiplatelet drugs or statins might affect diagnostic accuracy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a posthoc analysis in the YEARS diagnostic study, comparing age- and sex-adjusted D-dimer levels among users of antiplatelet drugs, statins and nonusers. We then reclassified patients within the YEARS algorithm by developing a model in which we adjusted D-dimer cut-offs for statin use and evaluated diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: We included 156 statins users, 147 antiplatelet drugs users and 726 nonusers of either drugs, all with suspected pulmonary embolism. Use of antiplatelet drugs did not have a significant effect, whereas statin use was associated with 15% decrease in D-dimer levels (95% CI, -28% to -0.6%). An algorithm with lower D-dimer thresholds in statin users yielded lower specificity (0.42 compared to 0.33) with no difference in false-negative tests. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that use of statins but not of antiplatelet agents is associated with a modest decrease in D-dimer levels. Adjusting D-dimer cut-offs for statin use did, however, not result in a safer diagnostic strategy in our cohort.

Influence of rosuvastatin on apolipoproteins and coagulation factor levels: Results from the STAtin Reduce Thrombophilia trial.

Background: The STAtins Reduce Thrombophilia trial showed that, in patients with prior venous thrombosis, rosuvastatin decreased various coagulation factor levels. Objectives: Here, we investigated the hypothesis that statins decrease coagulation factor levels through shared mechanisms of synthesis or regulatory pathways with apolipoproteins. Methods: We measured the levels of apolipoprotein (Apo)A-I, A-II, A-IV, (a), B-100, B-total, C-I, C-II, C-III, and E in patients (n = 126) randomized to 28 days of rosuvastatin use. We assessed the association between apolipoproteins and coagulation factors at baseline using linear regression. The mean difference in apolipoprotein levels between baseline and after 28 days of rosuvastatin use was determined through linear regression, adjusting for age, sex, and body mass index. Coagulation factors were added to this model to determine if the lowering of apolipoproteins by rosuvastatin was linked with coagulation factor levels. Results: At baseline, levels of all apolipoproteins, except Apo(a), were positively associated with FVII, FIX, and FXI. Apolipoproteins levels, except for ApoA-I, A-IV, and Apo(a), were decreased after 28 days of rosuvastatin. ApoB-100 showed the largest mean decrease of -0.43 g/L (95% CI = -0.46 to -0.40). The decrease in ApoC-I and C-III levels was associated with a decrease in FVII, whereas the decrease in apoA-II, B-100, and B-total was associated with a decrease in FXI. The decrease in apolipoproteins was neither associated with FVIII or vWF decrease nor with endogenous thrombin potential changes. Conclusions: Rosuvastatin decreases the level of several apolipoproteins, but this decrease was associated only with a decrease in FVII and XI and not with FVIII/vWF.

The Immediate Effect of COVID-19 Vaccination on Anticoagulation Control in Patients Using Vitamin K Antagonists.

BACKGROUND: In January 2021, the Dutch vaccination program against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was started. Clinical studies have shown that systemic reactions occur in up to 50% of vaccine recipients. Therefore, COVID-19 vaccination could affect anticoagulation control, potentially leading to an increased risk of thrombotic events and bleeding complications. AIMS: This article investigates whether the BNT162b2 vaccine affects anticoagulation control in outpatients using vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). METHODS: A case-crossover study was performed in a cohort of outpatient VKA users from four Dutch anticoagulation clinics who received a BNT162b2 vaccine. International normalized ratio (INR) results and VKA dosages before the first vaccination, the reference period, were compared with those after the first and second vaccination. RESULTS: A total of 3,148 outpatient VKA users were included, with a mean age (standard deviation) of 86.7 (8.7) years, of whom 43.8% were male, 67.0% used acenocoumarol, and 33.0% phenprocoumon. We observed a decrease of 8.9% of INRs within range in the standard intensity group (target INR 2.0-3.0). There was both an increased risk of supratherapeutic (odds ratio [OR] = 1.34 [95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.67]) and subtherapeutic levels (OR = 1.40 [95% CI 1.08-1.83]) after first vaccination. In the high-intensity group (target INR 2.5-3.5), the risk of a supratherapeutic INR was 2.3 times higher after first vaccination (OR = 2.29 [95% CI 1.22-4.28]) and 3.3 times higher after second vaccination (OR = 3.25 [95% CI 1.06-9.97]). CONCLUSION: BNT162b2 was associated with an immediate negative effect on anticoagulation control in patients treated with VKAs, so it is advisable to monitor the INR shortly after vaccination, even in stable patients.

Rosuvastatin treatment decreases plasma procoagulant phospholipid activity after a VTE: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent cardiovascular disease with severe complications, including recurrence and death. There is a great need for alternative prophylactic treatment options as anticoagulation is accompanied by increased bleeding risk. Statins are reported to reduce the risk of incident and recurrent VTE, but the mechanisms are elusive. Procoagulant phospholipids (PPL), and phosphatidylserine in particular, are crucial for efficient coagulation activation, but no studies have investigated the effect of statin treatment on plasma PPL activity. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of rosuvastatin treatment on plasma PPL activity and levels of extracellular vesicles (EVs). PATIENTS/METHODS: Patients with a history of VTE (≥18 years) allowed to stop anticoagulant treatment were randomized to either 20 mg/day of rosuvastatin treatment or no treatment for 28 days in the Statins Reduce Thrombophilia (NCT01613794) trial. Plasma samples were collected at baseline and study end. PPL activity was measured in samples from 245 participants using a factor Xa-dependent clotting assay and EV levels by flow cytometry. RESULTS: Rosuvastatin treatment yielded an overall 22% (95% confidence interval [CI] -38.2 to -5.8) reduction in PPL activity, and 37% (95% CI -62.9 to -11.2) reduction in PPL activity in participants with a history of pulmonary embolism. The effect of rosuvastatin on plasma PPL activity was not explained by changes in total cholesterol nor change in levels of total- or platelet-derived EVs. CONCLUSIONS: Rosuvastatin treatment caused a substantial decrease in plasma PPL activity, suggesting that a PPL-dependent attenuation of coagulation activation may contribute to a reduced VTE risk following statin treatment.

Rosuvastatin use reduces thrombin generation potential in patients with venous thromboembolism: a randomized controlled trial.

Essentials The role of statins in hemostasis and venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is not clear. This trial assessed whether rosuvastatin use affects thrombin generation in patients with VTE. Endogenous thrombin potential and peak were decreased by 10% and 5% with rosuvastatin therapy. These results provide basis for trials on the efficacy of statins in reducing recurrent VTE risk. SUMMARY: Background Statin therapy could form an alternative prophylactic treatment for venous thromboembolism (VTE) if statins are proven to downregulate hemostasis and prevent recurrent VTE, without increasing bleeding risk. Objectives The STAtins Reduce Thrombophilia (START) trial investigated whether statin affects coagulation in patients with prior VTE. Patients/methods After anticoagulation withdrawal, patients were randomized to rosuvastatin 20 mg day-1 for 4 weeks or no intervention. Plasma samples taken at baseline and at the end of the study were analyzed employing thrombin generation assay. Results and conclusions The study comprised 126 rosuvastatin users and 119 non-users. Mean age was 58 years, 61% were men, 49% had unprovoked VTE and 75% had cardiovascular (CV) risk factors. Endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) increased from baseline to end of study in non-statin users (mean 97.22 nm*min; 95% CI, 40.92-153.53) and decreased in rosuvastatin users (mean -24.94 nm*min; 95% CI, -71.81 to 21.93). The mean difference in ETP change between treatments was -120.24 nm*min (95% CI, -192.97 to -47.51), yielding a 10.4% ETP reduction by rosuvastatin. The thrombin peak increased in both non-statin (mean 20.69 nm; 95% CI, 9.80-31.58) and rosuvastatin users (mean 8.41 nm; 95% CI -0.86 to 17.69). The mean difference in peak change between treatments was -11.88 nm (95% CI, -26.11 to 2.35), yielding a 5% peak reduction by rosuvastatin. Other thrombin generation parameters did not change substantially. The reduction in ETP and peak by rosuvastatin was more pronounced in the subgroups of participants with CV risk factors and with unprovoked VTE. We conclude that rosuvastatin reduces thrombin generation potential in patients who had VTE.

Clinical outcome of patients with a vitamin K antagonist-associated bleeding treated with prothrombin complex concentrate.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin K antagonists (VKA) are used for the treatment of thromboembolism. Patients with severe VKA-associated bleeding require immediate restoration of haemostasis. Clinical studies on the effect of prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) are heterogeneous with respect to outcome of bleeding. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical outcome of patients treated with PCC for VKA-associated bleeding. METHODS: We performed a cohort study of consecutive patients who received PCC for VKA-related bleeding in five Dutch hospitals. Data were collected by chart review on the bleeding event, international normalized ratio (INR), haemostatic efficacy, thromboembolic (TE) complications, and mortality. The primary outcome was effective haemostasis, assessed by an adaptation of the Sarode criteria with a surrogate outcome for patients with ICH without repeat CT. RESULTS: One hundred patients were included. Mean age was 74 years, 54% were male and 79% received VKA for atrial fibrillation. Most patients presented with ICH (41%) or GI bleeding (36%). Effective haemostasis was achieved in 67/98 (68%) patients using the adapted classification. Surrogate outcomes were applied for 32 patients and data for two patients was missing. Median pre-treatment INR was 3.9 (IQR 2.9-5.8). One hour after PCC infusion, the INR was available for 50 patients and of these, 35 (70%) had an INR ≤1.4. TE complications occurred in five patients and 22 died (60% bleeding-related) within 30 days. CONCLUSION: PCC achieved effective haemostasis in 68% of evaluable patients with VKA-associated bleeding. TE complication rates were low, but mortality rates were high, due to the large number of patients with ICH.

Predictors of oral cavity bleeding and clinical outcome after dental procedures in patients on vitamin K antagonists. A cohort study.

Patients on vitamin K antagonists (VKA) often undergo invasive dental procedures. International guidelines consider all dental procedures as low-risk procedures, while bleeding risk may differ between standard low-risk (e. g. extraction 1-3 elements) and extensive high-risk (e. g. extraction of >3 elements) procedures. Therefore current guidelines may need refinement. In this cohort study, we identified predictors of oral cavity bleeding (OCB) and evaluated clinical outcome after low-risk and high-risk dental procedures in patients on VKA. Perioperative management strategy, procedure risk, and 30-day outcomes were assessed for each procedure. We identified 1845 patients undergoing 2004 low-risk and 325 high-risk procedures between 2013 and 2015. OCB occurred after 67/2004 (3.3 %) low-risk and 21/325 (6.5 %) high-risk procedures (p=0.006). In low-risk procedures, VKA continuation with tranexamic acid mouthwash was associated with a lower OCB risk compared to continuation without mouthwash [OR=0.41, 95 %CI 0.23-0.73] or interruption with bridging [OR=0.49, 95 %CI 0.24-1.00], and a similar risk as interruption without bridging [OR=1.44, 95 %CI 0.62-3.64]. In high-risk procedures, VKA continuation was associated with an increased OCB risk compared to interruption [OR=3.08, 95 %CI 1.05-9.04]. Multivariate analyses revealed bridging, antiplatelet therapy, and a supratherapeutic or unobjectified INR before the procedure as strongest predictors of OCB. Non-oral cavity bleeding (NOCB) and thromboembolic event (TE) rates were 2.1 % and 0.2 %. Bridging therapy was associated with a two-fold increased risk of NOCB [OR=1.93, 95 %CI 1.03-3.60], but not with lower TE rates. In conclusion, predictors of OCB were mostly related to perioperative management and differed between low-risk and high-risk procedures. Perioperative management should be differentiated accordingly.

Can we prevent venous thrombosis with statins: an epidemiologic review into mechanism and clinical utility.

INTRODUCTION: Statins may be causally associated with a decreased risk of venous thrombosis. If so, this could be a substantive breakthrough since statins do not increase the risk of bleeding and could therefore be used as a safer antithrombotic drug. However, scepticism exists on the observed reduction of venous thrombosis by statins, as it may have been confounded by healthy user effects or other biases. Areas covered: The main focus of this review will be the biases that may have arisen in clinical studies that investigated the relationship between statin use and risk of venous thrombosis. We also discuss the suggested causal association from a pathophysiological perspective. Furthermore, we integrate the knowledge from clinical and pathophysiological studies into a proposal for new study designs that are needed to sufficiently answer the question whether we can, and should, prevent recurrent venous thrombosis with statins. Expert commentary: A drug to prevent recurrent venous thrombosis in patients at risk of bleeding that does not induce bleeding and in which the number needed to treat for the prevention of venous thrombosis is sufficiently high, is a remedy that we should continue to look for, and for which statin therapy might be a suitable candidate.

Control of anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists: overestimation of median time in therapeutic range when assessed by linear interpolation.

Patients receiving vitamin K-antagonists are monitored by regular assessment of the International Normalized Ratio (INR). There are two popular methods for therapeutic control of anticoagulation in patient groups: 1) Time in Therapeutic Range (TTR) assessed by linear interpolation of successive INR measurements; 2) the cross-sectional proportion (CSP) of all patients' last INRs within range. The purpose of the present study is to compare the two methods using data from 53 Dutch Thrombosis Centres and to develop a semi-quantitative model for TTR based on different types of INR change. Different groups of around 400,000 patients in four consecutive years were evaluated: patients in the induction phase, short-term, long-term, low-target range, high-target range, receiving either acenocoumarol or phenprocoumon, and performing self-management. Each Centre provided TTR and CSP results for each patient group. TTR and CSP were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Separately, we analysed the relationship between consecutive INR results regarding in or out of range and their frequency of occurrence in patients of two different cohorts. Good correlation was observed between TTR and CSP (correlation coefficient 0.694-0.950 in low-target range). In long-term acenocoumarol patients (low-target range) the median TTR was significantly higher than CSP (80.0 % and 78.7 %, respectively; p<0.001). In long-term phenprocoumon patients (low-target range) there was no significant difference between median TTR (83.0 %) and median CSP (82.6 %). In conclusion, the correlation between TTR assessed by linear interpolation and CSP was good. TTR assessed by linear interpolation was higher than CSP in patients on acenocoumarol.

Point-of-care testing and INR within-subject variation in patients receiving a constant dose of vitamin K antagonist.

Many patients treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) determine their INR using point-of-care (POC) whole blood coagulation monitors. The primary aim of the present study was to assess the INR within-subject variation in self-testing patients receiving a constant dose of VKA. The second aim of the study was to derive INR imprecision goals for whole blood coagulation monitors. Analytical performance goals for INR measurement can be derived from the average biological within-subject variation. Fifty-six Thrombosis Centres in the Netherlands were invited to select self-testing patients who were receiving a constant dose of either acenocoumarol or phenprocoumon for at least six consecutive INR measurements. In each patient, the coefficient of variation (CV) of INRs was calculated. One Thrombosis Centre selected regular patients being monitored with a POC device by professional staff. Sixteen Dutch Thrombosis Centres provided results for 322 selected patients, all using the CoaguChek XS. The median within-subject CV in patients receiving acenocoumarol (10.2 %) was significantly higher than the median CV in patients receiving phenprocoumon (8.6 %) (p = 0.001). The median CV in low-target intensity acenocoumarol self-testing patients (10.4 %) was similar to the median CV in regular patients monitored by professional staff (10.2 %). Desirable INR analytical imprecision goals for POC monitoring with CoaguChek XS in patients receiving either low-target intensity acenocoumarol or phenprocoumon were 5.1 % and 4.3 %, respectively. The approximate average value for the imprecision of the CoaguChek XS, i. e. 4 %, is in agreement with these goals.

Agreement between Coaguchek XS and STA-R Evolution (Hepato Quick) INR results depends on the level of INR.

INTRODUCTION: Introducing point-of-care (POC) INR measurement to monitor anticoagulant therapy may be beneficial for both patients and anticoagulation clinics. However, agreement between POC and laboratory INR results is still unclear, especially at sub- and supratherapeutic levels. Therefore we investigated the analytical and clinical agreement between POC INR results of the Coaguchek XS and laboratory INR results of the STA-R Evolution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Paired POC and laboratory INR results were obtained and analyzed in 3257 patients aged 18-104 years between August 2008 and March 2014. RESULTS: Mean difference between POC and laboratory results ranged from -0.18 (95%CI -0.20;-0.16) INR point for POC results 2.0-3.0, up to 1.14 (95%CI 0.87;1.42) INR point for POC results 7.1-8.0. In the therapeutic range (POC INR 2.0-4.0), mean difference between POC and laboratory results was -0.13 (95%CI -0.15;-0.12) INR point. At subtherapeutic (POC INR <2.0) and supratherapeutic (POC INR >4.0) INR levels, mean differences were -0.13 (95%CI -0.15;-0.11) and 0.72 (95%CI 0.63;0.80) INR point, respectively. Clinical agreement regarding therapeutic range was present in 92.0% (POC within range), 67.7% (POC below range) and 87.6% (POC above range) of the paired measurements. We observed ≥15% INR difference between the POC and laboratory result in 14.8% (POC INR 2.0-4.0), 17.0% (POC INR<2.0) and 47.8% (POC INR >4.0) of the paired measurements. CONCLUSIONS: POC and laboratory INR results were strongly correlated within the therapeutic range and differences between results become larger with increasing INR. Clinical disagreement between laboratory and POC results occurs often at both sub- and supratherapeutic INR levels.