Anticoagulants such as unfractionated heparin (UFH), low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs), fondaparinux, and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) targeting thrombin (IIa) or factor Xa (FXa) are widely used in prevention and treatment of thromboembolic disorders. However, anticoagulant-associated bleeding is a concern that demands monitoring and neutralization. Protamine, the UFH antidote, has limitations, while there is no antidote available for certain direct FXa inhibitors. Improved antidotes in development include UHRA (Universal Heparin Reversal Agent) for all heparin anticoagulants; andexanet alfa (andexanet), a recombinant antidote for both direct FXa inhibitors and LMWHs; and ciraparantag (PER977), a small-molecule antidote for UFH, LMWHs, and certain DOACs. The binding affinities of these antidotes for their presumed anticoagulant targets have not been compared. Here, isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC) was used to determine the affinity of each antidote for its putative targets. Clotting and chromogenic FXa assays were used to characterize neutralization activity, and electron microscopy was used to visualize the effect of each antidote on clot morphology in the absence or presence of anticoagulant. ITC confirmed binding of UHRA to all heparins, and binding of andexanet to edoxaban and rivaroxaban, and to the antithrombin-enoxaparin complex. PER977 was found to bind heparins weakly, but not the direct FXa inhibitors studied. For UHRA and andexanet, an affinity at or below the micromolar level was found to correlate with neutralization activity, while no reversal activity was observed for the PER977/anticoagulant systems. Standard metrics of clot structure were found to correlate weakly with PER977's activity. This is the first study comparing 3 antidotes in development, with each exerting activity through a distinct mechanism.
© 2018 by The American Society of Hematology.