We have located links that may give you full text access.
Exploring the level of agreement among different drug-drug interaction checkers: a comparative study on direct oral anticoagulants.
Expert Opinion on Drug Metabolism & Toxicology 2024 Februrary 23
BACKGROUND: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) may be involved in drug-drug interactions (DDIs) potentially increasing the risk of adverse drug reactions. This study aimed to evaluate the level of agreement among interaction checkers (ICs) and DOACs' summary of product characteristics (SPCs), in listing DDIs and in attributing DDIs' severity.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The level of agreement among five ICs (i.e. INTERCheck WEB, Micromedex, Lexicomp, Epocrates, and drugs.com) in identifying potential DDIs and in attributing severity categories was evaluated using Gwet's AC1 on all five ICs and by comparing groups of 4- and 2-pair sets of ICs.
RESULTS: A total of 486 potentially interacting drugs with dabigatran, 556 for apixaban, 444 for edoxaban, and 561 for rivaroxaban were reported. The level of agreement among the ICs in identifying potential DDIs was poor (range: 0.12-0.16). Similarly, it was low in 4 and 2-sets analyses. The level of agreement among the ICs in classifying the severity of potential DDIs was poor (range: 0.32-0.34), also in 4 and 2-sets analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneity among different ICs and SPCs underscores the need to standardize DDIs datasets and to conduct real-world studies to generate evidence regarding the frequency and clinical relevance of potential DOACs-related DDIs.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The level of agreement among five ICs (i.e. INTERCheck WEB, Micromedex, Lexicomp, Epocrates, and drugs.com) in identifying potential DDIs and in attributing severity categories was evaluated using Gwet's AC1 on all five ICs and by comparing groups of 4- and 2-pair sets of ICs.
RESULTS: A total of 486 potentially interacting drugs with dabigatran, 556 for apixaban, 444 for edoxaban, and 561 for rivaroxaban were reported. The level of agreement among the ICs in identifying potential DDIs was poor (range: 0.12-0.16). Similarly, it was low in 4 and 2-sets analyses. The level of agreement among the ICs in classifying the severity of potential DDIs was poor (range: 0.32-0.34), also in 4 and 2-sets analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneity among different ICs and SPCs underscores the need to standardize DDIs datasets and to conduct real-world studies to generate evidence regarding the frequency and clinical relevance of potential DOACs-related DDIs.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Consensus Statement on Vitamin D Status Assessment and Supplementation: Whys, Whens, and Hows.Endocrine Reviews 2024 April 28
The Tricuspid Valve: A Review of Pathology, Imaging, and Current Treatment Options: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 26
British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma in adults.Gut 2024 April 17
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Ventilator Waveforms May Give Clues to Expiratory Muscle Activity.American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2024 April 25
Systemic lupus erythematosus.Lancet 2024 April 18
Acute Kidney Injury and Electrolyte Imbalances Caused by Dapagliflozin Short-Term Use.Pharmaceuticals 2024 March 27
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app