Department of Pharmacotherapy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Ann Pharmacother. 2011 Jun;45(6):701-12. doi: 10.1345/aph.1P593. Epub 2011 Jun 10.
Substitution of generic warfarin for imprint warfarin (Coumadin; DuPont/Bristol-Myers Squibb) has been a controversial issue due to bioavailability and bioequivalence concerns.
To assess the risk of thrombotic and hemorrhagic events following substitution of warfarin formulations in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).
Historical cohort analysis was performed using a commercial insurance claims database. Adults with a diagnosis of AF between January 2003 and December 2007, with 16 or more months of continuous eligibility, a warfarin prescription within 30 days after index AF diagnosis, and at least 3 warfarin prescription fills during the follow-up period were included. Individuals with AF diagnosis or warfarin prescription during the pre-index period were excluded. Cox proportional hazard regression models controlling for sex and baseline comorbidities (Charlson comorbidity index, CCI) were used to evaluate the risks of thrombotic and hemorrhagic events following warfarin formulation switches.
Of 37,756 subjects included in the analysis (mean age 70.96 years, 42.3% females), 12,996 (34.4%) switched warfarin formulations, 20,292 (53.7%) used only 1 generic product, and 4468 (11.8%) used only Coumadin during follow-up. Compared with continued use of Coumadin, switching from that product to the generic formulation was associated with a significantly higher risk of thrombotic events (HR = 1.81; 95% CI 1.42 to 2.31). Similar findings were observed for switching from generic warfarin to Coumadin (HR = 1.76; 95% CI 1.35 to 2.30), and from 1 generic to another generic product (HR = 1.89; 95% CI 1.57 to 2.29). Similarly, switching from Coumadin to generic warfarin (HR = 1.51; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.93), generic warfarin to Coumadin (HR = 1.60; 95% CI 1.23 to 2.1), and from 1 generic to another generic product (HR = 1.74; 95% CI 1.45 to 2.11) were associated with significantly higher risk of hemorrhage than remaining on Coumadin.
Switching warfarin formulations exposed patients with AF to a higher risk of bleeding events compared to remaining on a single product. Maintaining patients on a product with consistent bioavailability may optimize the risk-benefit balance of anticoagulation therapy.
由于生物利用度和生物等效性的问题,华法林通用药物替代商标华法林(Coumadin;杜邦/百时美施贵宝)一直存在争议。
评估房颤(AF)患者华法林制剂替代后发生血栓和出血事件的风险。
使用商业保险理赔数据库进行历史队列分析。纳入 2003 年 1 月至 2007 年 12 月期间有房颤诊断、连续资格 16 个月以上、华法林处方在房颤诊断后 30 天内、随访期间至少有 3 次华法林处方的成年人。排除在基线前有房颤诊断或华法林处方的个体。使用 Cox 比例风险回归模型控制性别和基线合并症(Charlson 合并症指数,CCI),以评估华法林制剂转换后血栓和出血事件的风险。
在分析中纳入了 37756 名受试者(平均年龄 70.96 岁,42.3%为女性),其中 12996 名(34.4%)转换了华法林制剂,20292 名(53.7%)仅使用了 1 种通用产品,4468 名(11.8%)在随访期间仅使用 Coumadin。与继续使用 Coumadin 相比,从该产品转换为通用制剂与血栓事件的风险显著增加相关(HR=1.81;95%CI 1.42 至 2.31)。从通用华法林转换为 Coumadin(HR=1.76;95%CI 1.35 至 2.30)和从一种通用产品转换为另一种通用产品(HR=1.89;95%CI 1.57 至 2.29)也观察到类似的发现。同样,从 Coumadin 转换为通用华法林(HR=1.51;95%CI 1.17 至 1.93)、通用华法林转换为 Coumadin(HR=1.60;95%CI 1.23 至 2.1)以及从一种通用产品转换为另一种通用产品(HR=1.74;95%CI 1.45 至 2.11)与出血风险显著增加相关,而不是继续使用 Coumadin。
与继续使用单一产品相比,转换华法林制剂使房颤患者出血风险增加。使患者保持使用具有一致生物利用度的产品可能会优化抗凝治疗的风险效益平衡。