Hoppensteadt Debra, Walenga Jeanine M, Fareed Jawed, Bick Rodger L
Hemostasis and Thrombosis Research Laboratories, Department of Pathology and Pharmacology, Loyola University Medical Center, 2160 South First Avenue, Maywood, IL 60153, USA. dhoppen.lumc.edu
Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2003 Feb;17(1):313-41. doi: 10.1016/s0889-8588(02)00091-6.
As a result of advanced technology, dramatic developments in the area of new anticoagulant and antithrombotic drugs appear to have made a profound impact on the use of LMWHs. Furthermore, because porcine mucosal heparin is used for the preparation of these agents, it is likely that alternative drugs with comparable pharmacologic and clinical efficacy are sought. Antithrombin drugs such as argatroban and hirudin are already approved for alternative management of heparin-compromised patients. Their efficacy in other indications is less superior. The development of specific anti-Xa drugs is slow. Although these agents may inhibit factor Xa and thrombin generation, none of them are capable of mimicking the polytherapeutic effects of LMWHs and thus can only be given in drug combinations. Synthetic and recombinant protein-derived anti-tissue factor agents have also been developed. These drugs only inhibit the tissue factor-mediated process and are limited in their therapeutic spectrum. Plasma-derived and recombinant serine protease inhibitors (serpins) are also available for the management of thrombotic and inflammatory disorders, but these agents cannot be given subcutaneously. Furthermore, because they are proteins, antibodies to these agents are generated. Nucleic acid derivatives (natural and synthetic aptomers) are developed for intravenous administration, but they are relatively weak antithrombotic agents. Dermatans, heparans, and chondroitin sulfates represent nonheparin GAGs, and, in mono-compositional and polycompositional form, these drugs are mainly used for the intravenous management of DVT prophylaxis. They can be given to patients who are heparin compromised. Synthetic heparinomimetics include heparin consensus-binding oligosaccharides and synthetic oligosaccharides with non-serpin affinity. In addition, binding oligosaccharides are conjugated with antithrombin agents to mimic the anti-Xa/anti-IIa activities of heparin. Biotechnology using bacterial and yeast cultures, aqua cultures for marine products, and plant carbohydrates have been the focus of developing heparin analogues. Development of these agents is in the early phase; however, it is likely that this approach may provide a reasonable alternative to LMWHs. Despite these developments, it is unlikely that any of these drugs will have a profound impact on the use of LMWHs in the near future. Unfractionated heparin and LMWHs collectively represent an important group of polypharmacologic drugs without which the management of thrombosis and vascular disorders would not be possible. The continual development of LMWHs in expanded indications did not comprise the use of unfractionated heparin in surgical and interventional cardiovascular indications. Ever since their introduction in the 1980s, the use of LMWHs has continually increased. This is primarily because of expanded indications and growing awareness among the clinicians. It is likely that once an antidote is developed and additional information is available on the mechanism of action of LMWHs, these drugs may gradualty be used for surgery patients. Despite these developments, it is likely that unfractionated heparin will continue to be used for specific indications. Drug combinations with heparins may necessitate dose adjustments, but it is unclear whether unilateral reduction of heparins will be optimal. The coming years will provide useful clinical and applied data on the improved use of unfractionated heparin. LMWHs, and pentasaccharide in the management of thrombotic and cardiovascular disorders. In addition, use of these drugs will be extended to many conditions, including cancer, inflammation, sepsis, and autoimmune diseases. Polytherapeutic approaches emphasizing LMWHs as primary and secondary drugs will also have an impact on the management of thrombotic and nonthrombotic disorders. Ultra-LMWHs and synthetic heparinomimetics, such as fondaparinux, that exhibit a narrow pharmacologic spectrum will only be useful in specific indications and in combination with other drugs.
由于技术的进步,新型抗凝和抗血栓药物领域的显著发展似乎对低分子肝素的使用产生了深远影响。此外,由于猪黏膜肝素用于制备这些药物,人们很可能在寻找具有相当药理和临床疗效的替代药物。抗凝血酶药物如阿加曲班和水蛭素已被批准用于肝素治疗有问题患者的替代治疗。它们在其他适应症中的疗效并不那么突出。特异性抗Xa药物的研发进展缓慢。尽管这些药物可能抑制Xa因子和凝血酶的生成,但它们都无法模拟低分子肝素的多种治疗效果,因此只能与其他药物联合使用。合成和重组蛋白衍生的抗组织因子药物也已被研发出来。这些药物仅抑制组织因子介导的过程,治疗范围有限。血浆衍生和重组丝氨酸蛋白酶抑制剂(丝氨酸蛋白酶抑制剂)也可用于治疗血栓形成和炎症性疾病,但这些药物不能皮下给药。此外,由于它们是蛋白质,会产生针对这些药物的抗体。核酸衍生物(天然和合成适体)已被研发用于静脉给药,但它们是相对较弱的抗血栓药物。硫酸皮肤素、硫酸乙酰肝素和硫酸软骨素代表非肝素糖胺聚糖,这些药物以单成分和多成分形式主要用于静脉预防深静脉血栓形成。它们可用于肝素治疗有问题的患者。合成肝素类似物包括肝素共识结合寡糖和具有非丝氨酸蛋白酶抑制剂亲和力的合成寡糖。此外,结合寡糖与抗凝血酶药物偶联以模拟肝素的抗Xa/抗IIa活性。利用细菌和酵母培养物、水产品水产养殖和植物碳水化合物的生物技术一直是开发肝素类似物的重点。这些药物的研发尚处于早期阶段;然而,这种方法很可能为低分子肝素提供合理的替代方案。尽管有这些进展,但在不久的将来,这些药物都不太可能对低分子肝素的使用产生深远影响。普通肝素和低分子肝素共同构成了一类重要的多药理药物,没有它们,血栓形成和血管疾病的治疗将无法进行。低分子肝素在扩展适应症方面的持续发展并未影响普通肝素在外科和介入性心血管适应症中的使用。自20世纪80年代引入以来,低分子肝素的使用持续增加。这主要是由于适应症的扩大和临床医生认识的提高。一旦开发出解毒剂并获得更多关于低分子肝素作用机制的信息,这些药物可能会逐渐用于手术患者。尽管有这些进展,但普通肝素可能仍将用于特定适应症。与肝素的联合用药可能需要调整剂量,但尚不清楚单方面减少肝素是否最佳。未来几年将提供关于普通肝素、低分子肝素和五糖在血栓形成和心血管疾病治疗中更好使用的有用临床和应用数据。此外,这些药物的使用将扩展到许多病症,包括癌症、炎症、败血症和自身免疫性疾病。强调低分子肝素作为主要和次要药物的多治疗方法也将对血栓形成和非血栓形成疾病的治疗产生影响。超低分子肝素和合成肝素类似物,如磺达肝癸钠,其药理谱较窄,仅在特定适应症中有用,并需与其他药物联合使用。