The fear for adverse bleeding and cardiovascular events in hemophilia patients using (non-)selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: A systematic review reporting on safety.

(Non-)selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used for musculoskeletal related pain. These cheap and easily accessible drugs may be of great value for hemophilia patients in developing countries and countries with a high rate of opioid poisoning, but also in developed countries due to potential joint protective effects. However, fear for adverse bleeding and cardiovascular events during the use of these drugs restrains prescription within this population. To give a complete overview of all publications reporting on safety, a systematic search till March 2021 was performed. All studies were reviewed and critically appraised and this resulted in 19 studies eligible for inclusion. Most studies with (non-)selective NSAIDs showed no evident risk for relevant adverse bleeding or cardiovascular events. However, some studies had a high risk of bias and studies reporting on cardiovascular events were limited. Future studies with longitudinal follow-up in well-defined large patient populations, including older patients, focusing on both adverse bleeding and cardiovascular events are required to confirm the alleged safe use.

Biochemical marker research in hemophilic arthropathy: A systematic review.

Hemophilic arthropathy (HA) causes major morbidity. Breakthrough therapies reduce the bleeding frequency tremendously, but well-defined joint outcome assessments with a focus on early changes and subclinical damage are lacking. Biomarkers reflecting joint tissue turnover/inflammation might be useful to predict invalidating arthropathy. This systematic review summarized and categorized publications on blood/urinary biomarkers in HA to provide leads for implementation. A PubMed/EMBASE search was performed on September 9, 2019. All publications were assessed and allocated to one or several BIPED-categories, based on the utility of biomarkers. Of the initial 1307 publications found, 27 were eligible for inclusion. The majority (81%, n = 32/42) was cross-sectional in design, including relatively small numbers of patients (median 44, interquartile range 35-78). Fourteen percent (n = 6/42) investigated dynamic changes around a bleeding or treatment. Only two studies investigated the prognostic value of biomarkers. Most promising biomarkers were serum Coll2-1, COL-18N, COMP, C1,2C, C2M, CS846, MIF, plasma sVCAM-1 and urinary CTX-II. Comparing performances and pooling data was not possible due to heterogeneity. Currently, biomarker research in HA is still in an explorative stage and not yet sufficient for translation into daily practice. Clearly, larger homogeneous longitudinal studies in well-defined populations should be performed for further development.

Dalteparin and anti-Xa: a complex interplay of therapeutic drug monitoring.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring low-molecular-weight heparins is generally not required. However, guidelines advise to monitor anti-Xa levels in patients with renal insufficiency or a BMI above 50, and in pregnancy. Measuring anti-Xa levels is a complex challenge since sampling should be performed three to five hours after subcutaneous injection and after steady state concentrations have been reached. Strict compliance is pivotal for justified dose adjustments. OBJECTIVES: We questioned compliance to our protocol and performed this study to explore that. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients ≥ 18 years receiving therapeutic dalteparin in a Dutch academic medical centre. Patients with a first anti-Xa level measured between February 23rd and December 30th, 2017 were selected. According to our local guideline, monitoring anti-Xa activity is indicated in patients on therapeutic doses of dalteparin who are pregnant, morbidly obese (BMI > 50), or have renal insufficiency (clearance < 60 ml/min). Accurate sampling was defined as measuring levels after at least three injections (after which a patient may reach steady state) and then four hours after the injection with dalteparin. The frequency of compliance to our protocol was assessed. RESULTS: We included 158 patients with 396 anti-Xa levels, of which 41% (65/158) of all first anti-Xa levels were drawn without appropriate indication. Almost half, 48% (211/396), were sampled incorrectly and 25% of these (53/211) were followed by a dose adjustment. In total, 74% (293/396) of the samples were not indicated or were taken at the wrong time. CONCLUSIONS: Monitoring anti-Xa levels is a complex clinical challenge. This study showed that non-compliance with recommendations for anti-Xa monitoring was high, often resulting in unjustified dose adjustments.