Evidence Hub

Hemorrhagic risk of concomitant direct oral anticoagulants and fluoroquinolones: integration of pharmacovigilance and therapeutic drug monitoring

Jiao Xu, Yue-Dong Li, Junping Han, Chun-yan Duan, F. Zhao, Z. Shang, Zhu Zhu, Zhan-hong Hu

Frontiers in Pharmacology, 2026

50 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Background Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and fluoroquinolone antibiotics (FQNs) are often co-prescribed. A pharmacokinetic interaction is plausible, as DOACs are P-glycoprotein (P-gp) substrates and several FQNs can bind to and affect P-gp activity. However, robust clinical evidence characterizing the associated hemorrhagic reporting signal remains limited. Methods We conducted an integrated pharmacoepidemiological and therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) study. Disproportionality analysis was performed using FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) data (2010–2025), calculating adjusted reporting odds ratios (adj. ROR) and Ω shrinkage values. Concurrently, a prospective observational cohort (n = 50) measured trough and peak plasma concentrations of dabigatran with and without levofloxacin or moxifloxacin. Results FAERS analysis identified a significant reporting signal for bleeding for dabigatran coadministered with FQNs (adj. ROR = 4.68, 95% CI: 3.41–6.55), particularly levofloxacin (adj. ROR = 6.12) and ciprofloxacin (adj. ROR = 3.84). No significant signals were found for rivaroxaban, apixaban, or edoxaban. Consistently, TDM showed significantly elevated peak dabigatran concentrations with levofloxacin (133.36 ng/mL, P = 0.008) and moxifloxacin (138.20 ng/mL, P < 0.001) compared to monotherapy (65.34 ng/mL), alongside a numerical trend towards more bleeding events. Conclusion This integrated analysis provides suggestive evidence for a pharmacokinetically plausible…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 50 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free