title: Pharmacokinetics of UH and LMWH are similar with respect to antithrombin activity.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The ability to administer low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) subcutaneously without laboratory monitoring contributes to their popularity for the treatment of thrombotic disorders. Subcutaneous unfractionated heparin, although less expensive, is deemed to require routine laboratory monitoring on the basis of more variability in drug effect compared to LMWH. However, the more predictable pharmacokinetic profiles of low molecular weight heparins are largely based on anti-Xa activity, while antithrombin activity may be at least as important to their mechanisms of action.
  
  
  METHODS
  We performed a clinical pharmacokinetic trial to compare the variability in peak antithrombin effect between subcutaneous unfractionated heparin and various LMWHs, all given in recommended weight-adjusted treatment doses. Sixty-one patients enrolled in a warfarin clinic were randomized to receive one of four different weight-adjusted subcutaneous heparin doses: unfractionated heparin, 250 units/kg (n=15); tinzaparin, 175 units/kg (n=15); dalteparin, 200 units/kg (n=15); or enoxaparin, 1 mg/kg (n=16). The areas under the curves of antithrombin levels during the first 3 h after administration were determined for each patient, and the coefficients of variation (CV) and 95% confidence intervals of the AUCs were compared among the treatment groups.
  
  
  RESULTS
  There was no statistically significant difference in the coefficients of variation of antithrombin effect between unfractionated heparin (52.8, 95% CI: 32.6-72.9) and enoxaparin (56.5, 95% CI: 35.7-77.4) or dalteparin (43.5, 95% CI 25.4-61.6). Tinzaparin had statistically significant decrease in coefficients of variation (21.6, 95% CI: 12.2-30.9) relative to unfractionated heparin, dalteparin and enoxaparin.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  LMWHs, as a class of drugs, are no more predictable in antithrombin effect after subcutaneous injection than unfractionated heparin. There were considerable differences among LMWHs in the observed variability of antithrombin effects, with tinzaparin being somewhat more predictable than the other drugs tested.
authors.affiliation: Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of California, San Diego, 200 West Arbor Drive, San Diego, CA 92103-8380, USA. t1morris@ucsd.edu
authors.forename: Timothy A
authors.initials: TA
authors.lastname: Morris
authors.forename: Alan
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Jacobson
authors.forename: James J
authors.initials: JJ
authors.lastname: Marsh
authors.forename: James R
authors.initials: JR
authors.lastname: Lane
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D019540:Area Under Curve; D001835:Body Weight; D017985:Dalteparin / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000493:pharmacokinetics; D017984:Enoxaparin / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000493:pharmacokinetics; D005260:Female; D006493:Heparin / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000493:pharmacokinetics*; D006495:Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000493:pharmacokinetics*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D012044:Regression Analysis; D013917:Thrombin / Q000037:antagonists & inhibitors*; D000078222:Tinzaparin
chemical_list: D017984:Enoxaparin; D006495:Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; D000078222:Tinzaparin; D006493:Heparin; D013917:Thrombin; D017985:Dalteparin