Click to hear Dr Baglin's perspective on the role of the laboratory in treatment with new oral anticoagulants Summary One of the key benefits of the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is that they do not require routine laboratory monitoring. Nevertheless, assessment of DOAC exposure and anticoagulant effects may become useful in various clinical scenarios. The five approved DOACs (apixaban, betrixaban, dabigatran etexilate, edoxaban and rivaroxaban) have different characteristics impacting assay selection and the interpretation of results. This article provides an updated overview on (i) which test to use (and their advantages and limitations), (ii) when to assay DOAC levels, (iii) how to interpret the results relating to bleeding risk, emergency situations and perioperative management, and (iv) what is the impact of DOACs on routine and specialized coagulation assays. Assays for anti‐Xa or anti‐IIa activity are the preferred methods when quantitative information is useful, although the situations in which to test for DOAC levels are still debated. Different reagent sensitivities and variabilities in laboratory calibrations impact assay results. International calibration standards for all specific tests for each DOAC are needed to reduce the inter‐laboratory variability and allow inter‐study comparisons. The impact of the DOACs on hemostasis testing may cause false‐positive or false‐negative results; however, these can be minimized by using specific assays and collecting blood samples at trough concentrations. Finally, prospective clinical trials are needed to validate the safety and efficacy of proposed laboratory thresholds in relation to clinical decisions. We offer recommendations on the tests to use for measuring DOACs and practical guidance on laboratory testing to help patient management and avoid diagnostic errors.

This guidance document was prepared on behalf of the International Council for Standardization in Haematology (ICSH) for providing haemostasis-related guidance documents for clinical laboratories. This inaugural coagulation ICSH document was developed by an ad hoc committee, comprised of international clinical and laboratory direct acting oral anticoagulant (DOAC) experts. The committee developed consensus recommendations for laboratory measurement of DOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban), which would be germane for laboratories assessing DOAC anticoagulation. This guidance document addresses all phases of laboratory DOAC measurements, including pre-analytical (e.g. preferred time sample collection, preferred sample type, sample stability), analytical (gold standard method, screening and quantifying methods) and post analytical (e.g. reporting units, quality assurance). The committee addressed the use and limitations of screening tests such as prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time as well as viscoelastic measurements of clotting blood and point of care methods. Additionally, the committee provided recommendations for the proper validation or verification of performance of laboratory assays prior to implementation for clinical use, and external quality assurance to provide continuous assessment of testing and reporting method.

Summary: Due to low bioavailability and high inter-individual variability, monitoring of dabigatran may be required in specific situations to prevent the risk of bleedings or thrombosis. The aim of the study was to determine which coagulation assay(s) could be used to assess the impact of dabig-atran on secondary haemostasis. Dabigatran was spiked at concentrations ranging from 4.7 ng/ml to 943.0 ng/ml in pooled citrated human platelet-poor plasma. The following clotting assays were performed: prothrombin time (PT); activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT); thrombin time (TT); ecarin clotting time (ECT); ecarin chromo-genic assay (ECA); prothrombinase-induced clotting time (PiCT); activated clotting time (ACT); Hemoclot Thrombin Inhibitor (HTI) and thrombin generation assay (TGA). A concentration-dependent prolongation of PT, dPT, and aPTT was observed with aPTT being the more sensitive test. The results varied mostly due to the clotting reagent. HTI, ECT and TGA were the most sensitive tests but are not available 24 hours a day. In addition, HTI showed a linear correlation with a good reproduci-bility. Dabigatran induced a concentration-dependent delay and inhibition of tissue factor-induced TGA. Cut-offs related with higher risk of bleedings or thrombosis were defined for each reagent of aPTT and HTI. In conclusion, aPTT could be used for the monitoring of dabigatran and as screening test for the risk of overdose. However, because of its higher sensitivity, good reproducibility, excellent linear correlation at all doses, its simplicity of use, and possibilities of automation, HTI should be considered as the gold-standard.

In 2018, the International Council for Standardization in Haematology (ICSH) published a consensus document providing guidance for laboratories on measuring direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Since that publication, several significant changes related to DOACs have occurred, including the approval of a new DOAC by the Food and Drug Administration, betrixaban, and a specific DOAC reversal agent intended for use when the reversal of anticoagulation with apixaban or rivaroxaban is needed due to life-threatening or uncontrolled bleeding, andexanet alfa. In addition, this ICSH Working Party recognized areas where additional information was warranted, including patient population considerations and updates in point-of-care testing. The information in this manuscript supplements our previous ICSH DOAC laboratory guidance document. The recommendations provided are based on (1) information from peer-reviewed publications about laboratory measurement of DOACs, (2) contributing author's personal experience/expert opinion and (3) good laboratory practice.

Research from JAMA Oncology — Association Between BCR-ABL Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors for Chronic Myeloid Leukemia and Cardiovascular Events, Major Molecular Response, and Overall Survival — A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis