Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
Semin Thromb Hemost ; 2022 Sep 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2240014
2.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 10946, 2022 06 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1908278

ABSTRACT

Severe adverse events (AEs) after COVID-19 vaccination are not well studied in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) due to rarity and short follow-up. To monitor the safety of COVID-19 vaccines ("Pfizer" vaccine dose 1 and 2, "Moderna" vaccine dose 1 and 2, and "Janssen" vaccine single dose) in the U.S., especially regarding severe AEs, we compare the relative rankings of these vaccines using both RCT and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) data. The risks of local and systemic AEs were assessed from the three pivotal COVID-19 vaccine trials and also calculated in the VAERS cohort consisting of 559,717 reports between December 14, 2020 and September 17, 2021. AE rankings of the five vaccine groups calculated separately by RCT and VAERS were consistent, especially for systemic AEs. For severe AEs reported in VAERS, the reported risks of thrombosis and GBS after Janssen vaccine were highest. The reported risk of shingles after the first dose of Moderna vaccine was highest, followed by the second dose of the Moderna vaccine. The reported risk of myocarditis was higher after the second dose of Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. The reported risk of anaphylaxis was higher after the first dose of Pfizer vaccine. Limitations of this study are the inherent biases of the spontaneous reporting system data, and only including three pivotal RCTs and no comparison with other active vaccine safety surveillance systems.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , Vaccination , Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , United States/epidemiology , Vaccination/adverse effects
3.
Blood Adv ; 6(17): 4915-4923, 2022 09 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1820127

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19-related acute illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). OBJECTIVE: These evidence-based guidelines from the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in making decisions about the use of anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that included patient representatives and applied strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process and performed systematic evidence reviews (through November 2021). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. This is an update to guidelines published in February 2021 as part of the living phase of these guidelines. RESULTS: The panel made one additional recommendation. The panel issued a conditional recommendation in favor of therapeutic-intensity over prophylactic-intensity anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19-related acute illness who do not have suspected or confirmed VTE. The panel emphasized the need for an individualized assessment of risk of thrombosis and bleeding. The panel also noted that heparin (unfractionated or low molecular weight) may be preferred because of a preponderance of evidence with this class of anticoagulants. CONCLUSION: This conditional recommendation was based on very low certainty in the evidence, underscoring the need for additional, high-quality, randomized controlled trials comparing different intensities of anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19-related acute illness.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hematology , Venous Thromboembolism , Acute Disease , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Humans , United States , Venous Thromboembolism/drug therapy , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control
4.
Blood ; 139(10): 1564-1574, 2022 03 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1736325

ABSTRACT

Cases of de novo immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), including a fatality, following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in previously healthy recipients led to studying its impact in preexisting ITP. In this study, 4 data sources were analyzed: the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) for cases of de novo ITP; a 10-center retrospective study of adults with preexisting ITP receiving SARS-CoV-2 vaccination; and surveys distributed by the Platelet Disorder Support Association (PDSA) and the United Kingdom (UK) ITP Support Association. Seventy-seven de novo ITP cases were identified in VAERS, presenting with median platelet count of 3 [1-9] ×109/L approximately 1 week postvaccination. Of 28 patients with available data, 26 responded to treatment with corticosteroids and/or intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), and/or platelet transfusions. Among 117 patients with preexisting ITP who received a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, 19 experienced an ITP exacerbation (any of: ≥50% decline in platelet count, nadir platelet count <30 × 109/L with >20% decrease from baseline, and/or use of rescue therapy) following the first dose and 14 of 70 after a second dose. Splenectomized persons and those who received 5 or more prior lines of therapy were at highest risk of ITP exacerbation. Fifteen patients received and responded to rescue treatment. In surveys of both 57 PDSA and 43 UK patients with ITP, prior splenectomy was associated with worsened thrombocytopenia. ITP may worsen in preexisting ITP or be identified de novo post-SARS-CoV2 vaccination; both situations responded well to treatment. Proactive monitoring of patients with known ITP, especially those postsplenectomy and with more refractory disease, is indicated.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Purpura, Thrombocytopenic, Idiopathic , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Blood Platelets/immunology , Blood Platelets/metabolism , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Purpura, Thrombocytopenic, Idiopathic/blood , Purpura, Thrombocytopenic, Idiopathic/chemically induced , Purpura, Thrombocytopenic, Idiopathic/epidemiology , Purpura, Thrombocytopenic, Idiopathic/immunology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/metabolism , Splenectomy , United Kingdom/epidemiology
5.
Blood Adv ; 6(2): 664-671, 2022 01 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1648275

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19-related acute illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). OBJECTIVE: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in decisions about the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19 who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE. METHODS: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel, including 3 patient representatives, and applied strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including performing systematic evidence reviews (up to March 2021). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 1 additional recommendation. The panel issued a conditional recommendation against the use of outpatient anticoagulant prophylaxis in patients with COVID-19 who are discharged from the hospital and who do not have suspected or confirmed VTE or another indication for anticoagulation. CONCLUSIONS: This recommendation was based on very low certainty in the evidence, underscoring the need for high-quality randomized controlled trials assessing the role of postdischarge thromboprophylaxis. Other key research priorities include better evidence on assessing risk of thrombosis and bleeding outcomes in patients with COVID-19 after hospital discharge.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hematology , Venous Thromboembolism , Aftercare , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Evidence-Based Medicine , Humans , Patient Discharge , SARS-CoV-2 , United States , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control
7.
Blood Adv ; 5(20): 3951-3959, 2021 10 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1388719

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19-related critical illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). OBJECTIVE: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in making decisions about the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19-related critical illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE. METHODS: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that included 3 patient representatives and applied strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Centre supported the guideline development process by performing systematic evidence reviews (up to 5 March 2021). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the GRADE approach to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. This is an update on guidelines published in February 2021. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 1 additional recommendation. The panel issued a conditional recommendation in favor of prophylactic-intensity over intermediate-intensity anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19-related critical illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE. CONCLUSIONS: This recommendation was based on low certainty in the evidence, which underscores the need for additional high-quality, randomized, controlled trials comparing different intensities of anticoagulation in critically ill patients. Other key research priorities include better evidence regarding predictors of thrombosis and bleeding risk in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and the impact of nonanticoagulant therapies (eg, antiviral agents, corticosteroids) on thrombotic risk.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hematology , Venous Thromboembolism , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Critical Illness , Evidence-Based Medicine , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , United States , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control
8.
J Thromb Haemost ; 19(6): 1533-1545, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1153569

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Studies report hypercoagulability in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), leading many institutions to escalate anticoagulation intensity for thrombosis prophylaxis. OBJECTIVE: To determine the bleeding risk with various intensities of anticoagulation in critically ill patients with COVID-19 compared with other respiratory viral illnesses (ORVI). PATIENTS/METHODS: This retrospective cohort study compared the incidence of major bleeding in patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) within a single health system with COVID-19 versus ORVI. In the COVID-19 cohort, we assessed the effect of anticoagulation intensity received on ICU admission on bleeding risk. We performed a secondary analysis with anticoagulation intensity as a time-varying covariate to reflect dose changes after ICU admission. RESULTS: Four hundred and forty-three and 387 patients were included in the COVID-19 and ORVI cohorts, respectively. The hazard ratio of major bleeding for the COVID-19 cohort relative to the ORVI cohort was 1.26 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.86-1.86). In COVID-19 patients, an inverse-probability treatment weighted model found therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation on ICU admission had an adjusted hazard ratio of bleeding of 1.55 (95% CI: 0.88-2.73) compared with standard prophylactic-intensity anticoagulation. However, when anticoagulation was assessed as a time-varying covariate and adjusted for other risk factors for bleeding, the adjusted hazard ratio for bleeding on therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation compared with standard thromboprophylaxis was 2.59 (95% CI: 1.20-5.57). CONCLUSIONS: Critically ill patients with COVID-19 had a similar bleeding risk as ORVI patients. When accounting for changes in anticoagulation that occurred in COVID-19 patients, therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation was associated with a greater risk of major bleeding compared with standard thromboprophylaxis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Venous Thromboembolism , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Critical Illness , Humans , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Blood Adv ; 5(3): 872-888, 2021 02 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1072924

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related critical illness and acute illness are associated with a risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). OBJECTIVE: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in decisions about the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis for patients with COVID-19-related critical illness and acute illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE. METHODS: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel and applied strict management strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The panel included 3 patient representatives. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline-development process, including performing systematic evidence reviews (up to 19 August 2020). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, including GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks, to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 2 recommendations. The panel issued conditional recommendations in favor of prophylactic-intensity anticoagulation over intermediate-intensity or therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation for patients with COVID-19-related critical illness or acute illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations were based on very low certainty in the evidence, underscoring the need for high-quality, randomized controlled trials comparing different intensities of anticoagulation. They will be updated using a living recommendation approach as new evidence becomes available.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , COVID-19/pathology , Venous Thromboembolism/drug therapy , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/virology , Enoxaparin/therapeutic use , Evidence-Based Medicine , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Societies, Medical , Venous Thromboembolism/complications
10.
J Thromb Thrombolysis ; 50(1): 72-81, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-327320

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a viral infection that can, in severe cases, result in cytokine storm, systemic inflammatory response and coagulopathy that is prognostic of poor outcomes. While some, but not all, laboratory findings appear similar to sepsis-associated disseminated intravascular coagulopathy (DIC), COVID-19- induced coagulopathy (CIC) appears to be more prothrombotic than hemorrhagic. It has been postulated that CIC may be an uncontrolled immunothrombotic response to COVID-19, and there is growing evidence of venous and arterial thromboembolic events in these critically ill patients. Clinicians around the globe are challenged with rapidly identifying reasonable diagnostic, monitoring and anticoagulant strategies to safely and effectively manage these patients. Thoughtful use of proven, evidence-based approaches must be carefully balanced with integration of rapidly emerging evidence and growing experience. The goal of this document is to provide guidance from the Anticoagulation Forum, a North American organization of anticoagulation providers, regarding use of anticoagulant therapies in patients with COVID-19. We discuss in-hospital and post-discharge venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention, treatment of suspected but unconfirmed VTE, laboratory monitoring of COVID-19, associated anticoagulant therapies, and essential elements for optimized transitions of care specific to patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Heparin/therapeutic use , Humans , Pandemics , Patient Discharge , Patient Transfer , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Thrombolytic Therapy , Venous Thromboembolism/virology , Warfarin
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL