Point-of-care testing for emergency assessment of coagulation in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants including edoxaban

Abstract

Background: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) including edoxaban are increasingly used for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Despite treatment, annual stroke rate in these patients remains 1–2%. Rapid assessment of coagulation would be useful to guide thrombolysis or reversal therapy in this growing population of DOAC/edoxaban-treated stroke patients. Employing the Hemochron™ Signature Elite point-of-care test system (HC-POCT), clinically relevant plasma concentrations of dabigatran and rivaroxaban can be excluded in a blood sample. However, no data exists on the effect of edoxaban on HC-POCT results. We evaluated whether edoxaban plasma concentrations above the current treatment thresholds for thrombolysis or anticoagulation reversal (i.e., 30 and 50 ng/mL) can be ruled out with the HC-POCT. Methods: We prospectively studied patients receiving a first dose of edoxaban. Six blood samples were collected from each patient: before, 0.5, 1, 2, 8, and 24 h after drug intake. HC-POCT-based INR (HC-INR), activated clotting time (HC-ACT+ and HC-ACT-LR), activated partial thromboplastin time (HC-aPTT), and mass spectrometry for edoxaban plasma concentrations were performed at each time-point. We calculated correlations, receiver operating characteristics (ROC) and test-specific cut-offs for ruling out edoxaban concentrations > 30 and > 50 ng/mL in a blood sample. Results: One hundred twenty blood samples from 20 edoxaban-treated patients were analyzed. Edoxaban plasma concentrations ranged from 0 to 512 ng/mL. HC-INR/HC-ACT+/HC-ACT-LR/HC-aPTT ranged from 0.7–8.3/78–310 s/65–215 s/19–93 s, and Pearson’s correlation coefficients showed moderate to very strong correlations with edoxaban concentrations (r = 0.95/0.79/0.70/0.60). With areas under the ROC curve of 0.997 (95% confidence interval: 0.991–0.971) and 0.989 (0.975–1.000), HC-INR most reliably ruled out edoxaban concentrations > 30 and > 50 ng/mL, respectively, and HC-INR results ≤1.5 and ≤ 2.1 provided specificity/sensitivity of 98.6% (91.2–99.9)/98.0% (88.0–99.9) and 96.8% (88.0–99.4)/96.5% (86.8–99.4). Conclusions: Our study represents the first systematic evaluation of the HC-POCT in edoxaban-treated patients. Applying sufficiently low assay-specific cut-offs, the HC-POCT may not only be used to reliably rule out dabigatran and rivaroxaban, but also very low edoxaban concentrations in a blood sample. Because the assay-specific cut-offs were retrospectively defined, further investigation is warranted. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number: NCT02825394, registered on: 07/07/2016, URL