Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia: The Expanding Role of Factor Xa Inhibitors in Therapy

Heparin products, such as unfractionated heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), are commonly employed as anticoagulants in various clinical settings to prevent blood clots and manage conditions like deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), myocardial infarction, and cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) [1,2,3]. However, using this class of anticoagulants is not without risks, particularly in certain vulnerable populations, such as CAT patients. Concerns have been raised regarding their cost, the requirement for daily parenteral injections, the need for weight-based dose adjustments, reduced adherence, and accumulation in patients with low glomerular filtration rates [4,5]. Moreover, although rare, exposure to heparin products can lead to a serious complication known as heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), which is associated with significant morbidity and mortality [6,7].

Factor Xa inhibitors, a newer class of oral anticoagulants (DOACs), have demonstrated efficacy in several conditions, and their increasing off-label use has shown promising results in treating HIT. Despite the growing utilization of this class of DOACs for HIT, data supporting their efficacy and safety remain limited [7,8].

HIT: Characteristics and Treatment Approaches

HIT is a condition marked by thrombocytopenia, which may occur with thrombosis (HITT) or in isolation (isolated HIT) and develops in a subset of patients following exposure to prophylactic or therapeutic doses of heparin products. If not promptly addressed, HIT can progress to serious thrombotic events, including PE, cerebrovascular accidents, myocardial infarction, limb ischemia, skin necrosis, and even death [9].

The onset of HIT is triggered by the formation of platelet-activating autoantibodies, primarily of the IgG class, which bind to the platelet factor 4 (PF4)-heparin complex. This binding induces the release of procoagulants and activates platelets, resulting in an immune-mediated hypercoagulable state [7].

The standard approach to managing HIT involves the immediate discontinuation of LMWH or unfractionated heparin and the initiation of alternative, non-heparin anticoagulants administered parenterally, such as argatroban, lepirudin and bivalirudin, to prevent and treat HIT-related thrombosis. However, the availability of some of these alternative agents is limited in certain countries, and the requirement for parenteral administration adds to the cost and prolongs the duration of patient hospitalization [7].

Thanks to their distinct structure from heparin and the inability to cross-react with heparin-PF4 antibodies, factor Xa inhibitors, such as apixaban and rivaroxaban, have emerged as promising agents for treating HIT. These DOACs exhibit a rapid onset of action and do not require bridging with other anticoagulants. Additionally, they are widely accessible, relatively cost-effective, and do not necessitate laboratory monitoring. Their convenient oral formulations provide a broad therapeutic window and are effective in treating both arterial and venous thrombosis while also eliminating the risk of intravenous-related complications associated with parenteral anticoagulants [7,10]. Notably, in 2018, the American Society of Hematology (ASH) guidelines provided a low-level evidence recommendation for initiating DOAC therapy in clinically stable HIT patients. Still, they did not specify details regarding the timing or dosage of the treatment [11].

In light of these considerations, a recent systematic literature review was conducted to evaluate the current evidence on the efficacy and safety of factor Xa inhibitors in managing HIT [7].

Factor Xa Inhibitors in HIT Treatment: Evidence from a Systematic Review

The systematic review conducted by Jones et al. serves as a compendium of all published studies involving more than one patient, aiming to address the existing gap in understanding the safety and efficacy of factor Xa inhibitors in HIT patients [7]. The authors stressed the importance of considering various clinical and patient-specific factors when selecting factor Xa inhibitors, including availability, cost, half-life, renal or hepatic impairment, bleeding risk, and overall clinical stability. The ASH also recommends this approach, which generally suggests that DOACs should be reserved for clinically stable patients with an average risk of bleeding [11].

The review highlighted that major bleeding incidents in patients who transitioned to factor Xa inhibitors were particularly evident in those being managed in intensive care unit (ICU) settings, those previously on other antiplatelet agents, or those with underlying malignancies. This emphasizes the increased risk of major bleeding due to underlying conditions and concurrent medications, underscoring the importance for healthcare providers to carefully assess a patient’s bleeding risk when evaluating the risks and benefits of anticoagulation and when selecting the appropriate factor Xa inhibitor and dosage [7].

Specifically, ASH recommends rivaroxaban at a dose of 15 mg twice daily for three weeks, followed by 20 mg once daily for acute HITT. For acute isolated HIT, rivaroxaban is suggested at 15 mg twice daily until platelet count recovery (≥150 × 10^9/L), followed by 20 mg once daily if continued anticoagulation is necessary. Additionally, dosage adjustments may be required for patients with renal or hepatic impairment or those at high risk of bleeding [11].

The first aspect evaluated by the authors was the timing of initiation of factor Xa inhibitors after discontinuation of heparin products, highlighting the considerable variability in anticoagulation strategies used in HIT treatment [7]. Specifically, they reported that in most cases, a parenteral anticoagulant is administered before transitioning to factor Xa inhibitors, with apixaban and rivaroxaban being the most studied (148 cases, 52%) [12,13]. Moreover, the timing of initiating factor Xa inhibitors was inconsistent; in some instances, anticoagulation with these agents began only after complete platelet count recovery due to prior parenteral infusion, while in others, factor Xa inhibitors were administered even if platelet count recovery had not been achieved [14,15,16].

On the other hand, in 48% of the HIT cases examined (137 cases), a factor Xa inhibitor was chosen as the initial anticoagulant immediately following the cessation of heparin products. Importantly, the authors noted that the time to platelet recovery was similar regardless of the anticoagulation strategy or the timing of factor Xa inhibitor initiation, with a mean time to platelet recovery of 7 days, consistent with previous studies [7,17].

In addition to demonstrating efficacy in platelet recovery, factor Xa inhibitors showed a positive safety and efficacy profile in preventing new or progressive HIT-related thrombosis and avoiding major or life-threatening bleeding events. Patients treated primarily with factor Xa inhibitors did not experience worse outcomes than other management strategies. Specifically, HIT thrombosis-related mortality was low (0%) and comparable between those who transitioned to factor Xa inhibitors and those who were primarily treated with them. The rates of recurrent thrombosis and major bleeding were 4.56% (n = 13) and 2.80% (n = 8), respectively [7].

Finally, in addition to the rapid onset of action of factor Xa inhibitors, which positively impacts healthcare costs and resource utilization, these DOACs demonstrated notable cost-effectiveness compared to parenteral anticoagulants. The 5-day in-patient costs were $177.60 for apixaban, $179.29 for rivaroxaban, $3520 for bivalirudin, $4185.62 for argatroban, and $7852.45 for fondaparinux [18].

Conclusions

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a rare but serious complication with significant morbidity and mortality. Emerging data from the literature indicate that factor Xa inhibitors are a safe and effective option for managing HIT, thanks to their rapid onset of action, cost-effectiveness, and the benefits associated with oral administration. However, further prospective or randomized studies are necessary to determine whether transitioning to DOACs is non-inferior or superior to primary treatment with DOACs in this specific patient population.

References

1. Chao BH et al (2011) Clinical Use of the Low-Molecular-Weight Heparins in Cancer Patients: Focus on the Improved Patient Outcomes. Thrombosis. 2011:530183
2. Canonico ME et al (2022) Venous Thromboembolism and Cancer: A Comprehensive Review from Pathophysiology to Novel Treatment. Biomolecules. 12(2):259
3. Lyman GH (2009) Thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin in medical patients with cancer. Cancer. 115(24):5637-50
4. Fabbian F et al (2011) Low molecular weight heparins and glomerular filtration rate: a report to be considered. Curr Vasc Pharmacol. 9(6):693-7
5. Amin A et al (2024) Apixaban versus low molecular weight heparin in patients with cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 86(8):4675-4683
6. Jang IK et al (2005) When Heparins Promote Thrombosis: Review of Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia. Circulation.
7. Jones C (2024) Management of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia with factor xa inhibitors: A systematic review. Thrombosis Update. DOI: 10.1016/j.tru.2024.100185
8. Turpie AGG (2007) Oral, direct factor Xa inhibitors in development for the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic diseases. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 27(6):1238-47
9. Arepally GM (2017) Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Blood. 129(21):2864-2872
10. Walenga JM (2008) Rivaroxaban–an oral, direct Factor Xa inhibitor–has potential for the management of patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Br J Haematol. 143(1):92-9
11. Cuker A et al (2018) American Society of Hematology 2018 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Blood Adv. 2(22):3360-3392
12. Cirbus K et al (2022) Rivaroxaban and apixaban for the treatment of suspected or confirmed heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. J Clin Pharm Ther. 47(1)(2022)
13. Davis K et al (2022) A multicenter retrospective evaluation of direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Am. J. Cardiovasc Drugs. 417–424 (2022).
14. Kunk PR et al (2017) Direct oral anticoagulants in hypercoagulable states. J. Thromb. Thrombolysis. 43 (2017) pp. 79-85
15. Linkins LA et al (2016) Rivaroxaban for treatment of suspected or confirmed heparin-induced thrombocytopenia study. J Thromb Haemost. 13 (2016), pp. 1206-1210
16. Warkentin TE et al (2017) Direct oral anticoagulants for treatment of HIT: update of Hamilton experience and literature review. Blood. 130 (9) (2017), pp. 1104-1113
17. Arepally GM (2010) Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Annu. Rev. Med. 61 (2010), pp. 77-90.
18. Momin J et al (2020) The role of direct oral anticoagulants in the management of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. U.S. Pharm. 45 (2) (2020), pp. 3-10.