|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Point/Counterpoint |
1 Department of Medical Sciences, Clinical Pharmacology, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.
aAddress correspondence to the author at: Clinical Pharmacology, Uppsala University Hospital, Entrance 61, 3rd Floor, Uppsala, NA, Sweden SE-75185. Fax +46-18-6113703; e-mail mia.wadelius@medsci.uu.se.
| The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below. |
Warfarin is the most widely used oral anticoagulant for the treatment of thromboembolic disorders and for stroke prophylaxis. Warfarin is a problematic drug because it exhibits large interindividual variation in the required therapeutic dose, has a narrow therapeutic range, and shows multiple food and drug interactions. Its anticoagulant effect is monitored by measuring the international normalized ratio (INR), which is a function of the time required for a patients blood to coagulate relative to the time it takes for a reference blood sample. Although warfarin has been used in humans for more than 50 years, its main side effect—bleeding—is a leading cause of hospital admission and drug-related death(1)(2). This problem has made patients and clinicians yearn for a new efficient and safe oral anticoagulant drug that does not require frequent monitoring. In Europe, a new oral anticoagulant drug (dabigatran) claimed to have these qualities has been licensed for short-term primary prevention of venous thromboembolic events, but its effectiveness in long-term secondary thromboprophylaxis remains to be shown. Furthermore, the daily cost of dabigatran is 5 times that of warfarin therapy including INR tests. To switch all warfarin patients (currently 1% of the population in many Western countries) to dabigatran would boost
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |