PURPOSE: The aim was to determine the metabolic fingerprint that predicts warfarin response based on the international normalized ratio (INR) in patients who are already receiving warfarin (phase I: identification) and to ascertain the metabolic fingerprint that discriminates stable from unstable INR in patients starting treatment with warfarin (phase II: validation).
EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: A total of 94 blood samples were collected for phase I: 44 patients with stable INR and 50 with unstable INR. Meanwhile, 23 samples were collected for phase II: nine patients with stable INR and 14 with unstable INR. Data analysis was performed using multivariate analysis including principal component analysis and partial least square-discriminate analysis (PLS-DA), followed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression (MVLR) to develop a model to identify unstable INR biomarkers.
KEY RESULTS: For phase I, the PLS-DA model showed the following results: sensitivity 93.18%, specificity 91.49% and accuracy 92.31%. In the MVLR analysis of phase I, ten regions were associated with unstable INR. For phase II, the PLS-DA model showed the following results: sensitivity 66.67%, specificity 61.54% and accuracy 63.64%.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: We have shown that the pharmacometabonomics technique was able to differentiate between unstable and stable INR with good accuracy. NMR-based pharmacometabonomics has the potential to identify novel biomarkers in plasma, which can be useful in individualizing treatment and controlling warfarin side effects, thus, minimizing undesirable effects in the future.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate regular (4-hourly prior to each oral misoprostol dose with amniotomy when feasible) compared with restricted (only if indicated) vaginal assessments during labor induction with oral misoprostol in term nulliparous women MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a randomized trial between November 2016 and September 2017 in a university hospital in Malaysia. Our oral misoprostol labor induction regimen comprised 50 μg of misoprostol administered 4 hourly for up to 3 doses in the first 24 hours. Participants assigned to regular assessment had vaginal examinations before each 4-hourly misoprostol dose with a view to amniotomy as soon as it was feasible. Participants in the restricted arm had vaginal examinations only if indicated. Primary outcomes were patient satisfaction with the birth process (using an 11-point visual numerical rating scale), induction to vaginal delivery interval, and vaginal delivery rate at 24 hours.
RESULTS: Data from 204 participants (101 regular, 103 restricted) were analyzed. The patient satisfaction score with the birth process was as follows (median [interquartile range]): 7 [6-9] vs 8 [6-10], P = .15. The interval of induction to vaginal delivery (mean ± standard deviation) was 24.3 ± 12.8 vs 31.1 ± 15.0 hours (P = .013). The vaginal delivery rate at 24 hours was 27.7% vs 20.4%; (relative risk [RR], 1.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8-2.3; P = .14) for the regular vs restricted arms, respectively. The cesarean delivery rate was 50% vs 43% (RR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.5; P = .36). When assessed after delivery, participants' fidelity to their assigned vaginal examination schedule in a future labor induction was 45% vs 88% (RR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.4-0.7; P < .001), and they would recommend their assigned schedule to a friend (47% vs 87%; RR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.7; P < .001) in the regular compared with the restricted arms, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Despite a shorter induction to vaginal delivery interval with regular vaginal examination and a similar vaginal delivery rate at 24 hours and birth process satisfaction score, women expressed a higher preference for the restricted examination schedule and were more likely to recommend such a schedule to a friend.