D-dimers in omicron versus delta: A retrospective analysis.

Background: Infection with SARS-CoV-2 has shown to cause an increase in D-dimers, which correlate with severity and prognosis for in-hospital mortality. The B.1.617.2 (delta) variant is known to cause a raised D-dimer level, with data on D-dimers in the B.1.1.529 (omicron) variant being scarce. Objectives: To determine the effect of age, gender and SARS-CoV-2 variant on the D-dimer in South Africans admitted to tertiary medical centres from May 2021 to December 2021. Method: The study was performed retrospectively on 16 010 adult patients with a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Age, gender, SARS-CoV-2 PCR and D-dimer levels on admission were collected from two national laboratories. Admissions from 01 May 2021 to 31 October 2021 were classified as B.1.617.2, whereas admissions from 01 November 2021 to 23 December 2021 were classified as B.1.1.529 infections. Results: Omicron infections had a median D-dimer level of 0.54 µg/mL (95% CI: 0.32, 1.08, p < 0.001). Multivariable regression analysis showed that infection with omicron had a 34.30% (95% CI: 28.97, 39.23) reduction in D-dimer values, compared with delta infections. Middle aged, aged and aged over 80 years had D-dimer results greater than the adult baseline (42.6%, 95% CI: 38.0, 47.3, 124.6%, 95% CI: 116.0, 133.7 and 216.1%, 95% CI: 199.5, 233.3). Males on average had a 7.1% (95% CI: 4.6, 9.6) lower D-dimer level than females. Conclusion: Infection with the B.1.1.529 variant, compared with B.1.617.2 variant, had significantly lower D-dimer levels, with age being a more significant predictor of D-dimer levels, than gender and SARS-CoV-2 variant of infection. Contribution: This study provides novel insight into the hypercoagulable impact of various SARS-CoV-2 variants, which can guide the management of patients.

Vascular thrombosis after single dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine in healthcare workers in South Africa: open label, single arm, phase 3B study (Sisonke study).

Objective: To assess the rates of vascular thrombotic adverse events in the first 35 days after one dose of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine (Janssen/Johnson & Johnson) in healthcare workers in South Africa and to compare these rates with those observed in the general population. Design: Open label, single arm, phase 3B study. Setting: Sisonke study, South Africa, 17 February to 15 June 2021. Participants: The Sisonke cohort of 477 234 healthcare workers, aged ≥18 years, who received one dose of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine. Main outcome measures: Observed rates of venous arterial thromboembolism and vaccine induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis in individuals who were vaccinated, compared with expected rates, based on age and sex specific background rates from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD database (database of longitudinal routinely collected electronic health records from UK primary care practices using Vision general practice patient management software). Results: Most of the study participants were women (74.9%) and median age was 42 years (interquartile range 33-51). Twenty nine (30.6 per 100 000 person years, 95% confidence interval 20.5 to 44.0) vascular thrombotic events occurred at a median of 14 days (7-29) after vaccination. Of these 29 participants, 93.1% were women, median age 46 (37-55) years, and 51.7% had comorbidities. The observed to expected ratios for cerebral venous sinus thrombosis with thrombocytopenia and pulmonary embolism with thrombocytopenia were 10.6 (95% confidence interval 0.3 to 58.8) and 1.2 (0.1 to 6.5), respectively. Because of the small number of adverse events and wide confidence intervals, no conclusions were drawn between these estimates and the expected incidence rates in the population. Conclusions: Vaccine induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis after one dose of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine was found in only a few patients in this South African population of healthcare workers. These findings are reassuring if considered in terms of the beneficial effects of vaccination against covid-19 disease. These data support the continued use of this vaccine, but surveillance is recommended to identify other incidences of venous and arterial thromboembolism and to improve confidence in the data estimates. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04838795.

D-dimers in omicron versus delta: A retrospective analysis

Background Infection with SARS-CoV-2 has shown to cause an increase in D-dimers, which correlate with severity and prognosis for in-hospital mortality. The B.1.617.2 (delta) variant is known to cause a raised D-dimer level, with data on D-dimers in the B.1.1.529 (omicron) variant being scarce. Objectives To determine the effect of age, gender and SARS-CoV-2 variant on the D-dimer in South Africans admitted to tertiary medical centres from May 2021 to December 2021. Method The study was performed retrospectively on 16 010 adult patients with a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Age, gender, SARS-CoV-2 PCR and D-dimer levels on admission were collected from two national laboratories. Admissions from 01 May 2021 to 31 October 2021 were classified as B.1.617.2, whereas admissions from 01 November 2021 to 23 December 2021 were classified as B.1.1.529 infections. Results Omicron infections had a median D-dimer level of 0.54 µg/mL (95% CI: 0.32, 1.08, p < 0.001). Multivariable regression analysis showed that infection with omicron had a 34.30% (95% CI: 28.97, 39.23) reduction in D-dimer values, compared with delta infections. Middle aged, aged and aged over 80 years had D-dimer results greater than the adult baseline (42.6%, 95% CI: 38.0, 47.3, 124.6%, 95% CI: 116.0, 133.7 and 216.1%, 95% CI: 199.5, 233.3). Males on average had a 7.1% (95% CI: 4.6, 9.6) lower D-dimer level than females. Conclusion Infection with the B.1.1.529 variant, compared with B.1.617.2 variant, had significantly lower D-dimer levels, with age being a more significant predictor of D-dimer levels, than gender and SARS-CoV-2 variant of infection. Contribution This study provides novel insight into the hypercoagulable impact of various SARS-CoV-2 variants, which can guide the management of patients.

Thromboprophylactic low-molecular-weight heparin versus standard of care in unvaccinated, at-risk outpatients with COVID-19 (ETHIC): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3b trial.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is associated with inflammation and an increased risk of thromboembolic complications. Prophylactic doses of low-molecular-weight heparin have been used in hospitalised and non-critically ill patients with COVID-19. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of prophylactic low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin) versus standard of care (no enoxaparin) in at-risk outpatients with COVID-19. METHODS: This open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3b trial (ETHIC) was done at 15 centres in six countries (Belgium, Brazil, India, South Africa, Spain, and the UK). We consecutively enrolled participants aged at least 30 years who had not received a COVID-19 vaccine and had symptomatic, confirmed COVID-19 in the outpatient setting plus at least one risk factor for severe disease. Within 9 days of symptom onset and by use of a web-based random block design (block size either 2 or 4), eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either subcutaneous enoxaparin for 21 days (40 mg once daily if they weighed <100 kg and 40 mg twice daily if they weighed ≥100 kg) or standard of care (without enoxaparin). The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of all-cause hospitalisation and all-cause mortality at 21 days after randomisation and, in our main analysis, was analysed in the intention-to-treat population, which comprised all patients who were randomly assigned. Safety was also analysed in the intention-to-treat population for our main analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04492254, and is complete. FINDINGS: Following the advice of the Data and Safety Monitoring Board, this study was terminated early due to slow enrolment and a lower-than-expected event rate. Between Oct 27, 2020, and Nov 8, 2021, 230 patients with COVID-19 were assessed for eligibility, of whom 219 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive standard of care (n=114) or enoxaparin (n=105). 96 (44%) patients were women, 122 (56%) were men, and one patient had missing sex data. 141 (65%) of 218 participants with data on race and ethnicity were White, 60 (28%) were Asian, and 16 (7%) were Black, mixed race, or Arab or Middle Eastern. Median follow-up in both groups was 21 days (IQR 21-21). There was no difference in the composite of all-cause mortality and hospitalisation at 21 days between the enoxaparin group (12 [11%] of 105 patients) and the standard-of-care group (12 [11%] of 114 patients; unadjusted hazard ratio 1·09 [95% CI 0·49-2·43]; log-rank p=0·83). At 21 days, two (2%) of 105 patients in the enoxaparin group (one minor bleed and one bleed of unknown severity) and one (1%) of 114 patients in the standard-of-care group (major abnormal uterine bleeding) had a bleeding event. 22 (21%) patients in the enoxaparin group and 13 (11%) patients in the standard-of-care group had adverse events. The most common adverse event in both groups was COVID-19-related pneumonia (six [6%] patients in the enoxaparin group and five [4%] patients in the standard-of-care group). One patient in the enoxaparin group died and their cause of death was unknown. INTERPRETATION: The ETHIC trial results suggest that prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin had no benefit for at-risk outpatients with COVID-19. Although the trial was terminated early, our data, combined with data from similar studies, provide further insights to inform international guidelines and influence clinical practice. FUNDING: The Thrombosis Research Institute and Sanofi UK.

Safety evaluation of the single-dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine among healthcare workers in the Sisonke study in South Africa: A phase 3b implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Real-world evaluation of the safety profile of vaccines after licensure is crucial to accurately characterise safety beyond clinical trials, support continued use, and thereby improve public confidence. The Sisonke study aimed to assess the safety and effectiveness of the Janssen Ad26.COV2.S vaccine among healthcare workers (HCWs) in South Africa. Here, we present the safety data. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In this open-label phase 3b implementation study among all eligible HCWs in South Africa registered in the national Electronic Vaccination Data System (EVDS), we monitored adverse events (AEs) at vaccination sites through self-reporting triggered by text messages after vaccination, healthcare provider reports, and active case finding. The frequency and incidence rate of non-serious and serious AEs were evaluated from the day of first vaccination (17 February 2021) until 28 days after the final vaccination in the study (15 June 2021). COVID-19 breakthrough infections, hospitalisations, and deaths were ascertained via linkage of the electronic vaccination register with existing national databases. Among 477,234 participants, 10,279 AEs were reported, of which 138 (1.3%) were serious AEs (SAEs) or AEs of special interest. Women reported more AEs than men (2.3% versus 1.6%). AE reports decreased with increasing age (3.2% for age 18-30 years, 2.1% for age 31-45 years, 1.8% for age 46-55 years, and 1.5% for age > 55 years). Participants with previous COVID-19 infection reported slightly more AEs (2.6% versus 2.1%). The most common reactogenicity events were headache (n = 4,923) and body aches (n = 4,483), followed by injection site pain (n = 2,767) and fever (n = 2,731), and most occurred within 48 hours of vaccination. Two cases of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome and 4 cases of Guillain-Barré Syndrome were reported post-vaccination. Most SAEs and AEs of special interest (n = 138) occurred at lower than the expected population rates. Vascular (n = 37; 39.1/100,000 person-years) and nervous system disorders (n = 31; 31.7/100,000 person-years), immune system disorders (n = 24; 24.3/100,000 person-years), and infections and infestations (n = 19; 20.1/100,000 person-years) were the most common reported SAE categories. A limitation of the study was the single-arm design, with limited routinely collected morbidity comparator data in the study setting. CONCLUSIONS: We observed similar patterns of AEs as in phase 3 trials. AEs were mostly expected reactogenicity signs and symptoms. Furthermore, most SAEs occurred below expected rates. The single-dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine demonstrated an acceptable safety profile, supporting the continued use of this vaccine in this setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04838795; Pan African Clinical Trials Registry PACTR202102855526180.

Effectiveness of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine in health-care workers in South Africa (the Sisonke study): results from a single-arm, open-label, phase 3B, implementation study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the effectiveness of a single dose of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine (Johnson & Johnson) in health-care workers in South Africa during two waves of the South African COVID-19 epidemic. METHODS: In the single-arm, open-label, phase 3B implementation Sisonke study, health-care workers aged 18 years and older were invited for vaccination at one of 122 vaccination sites nationally. Participants received a single dose of 5 × 1010 viral particles of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine. Vaccinated participants were linked with their person-level data from one of two national medical insurance schemes (scheme A and scheme B) and matched for COVID-19 risk with an unvaccinated member of the general population. The primary outcome was vaccine effectiveness against severe COVID-19, defined as COVID-19-related admission to hospital, hospitalisation requiring critical or intensive care, or death, in health-care workers compared with the general population, ascertained 28 days or more after vaccination or matching, up to data cutoff. This study is registered with the South African National Clinical Trial Registry, DOH-27-022021-6844, ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04838795, and the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, PACTR202102855526180, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Feb 17 and May 17, 2021, 477 102 health-care workers were enrolled and vaccinated, of whom 357 401 (74·9%) were female and 119 701 (25·1%) were male, with a median age of 42·0 years (33·0-51·0). 215 813 vaccinated individuals were matched with 215 813 unvaccinated individuals. As of data cutoff (July 17, 2021), vaccine effectiveness derived from the total matched cohort was 83% (95% CI 75-89) to prevent COVID-19-related deaths, 75% (69-82) to prevent COVID-19-related hospital admissions requiring critical or intensive care, and 67% (62-71) to prevent COVID-19-related hospitalisations. The vaccine effectiveness for all three outcomes were consistent across scheme A and scheme B. The vaccine effectiveness was maintained in older health-care workers and those with comorbidities including HIV infection. During the course of the study, the beta (B.1.351) and then the delta (B.1.617.2) SARS-CoV-2 variants of concerns were dominant, and vaccine effectiveness remained consistent (for scheme A plus B vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related hospital admission during beta wave was 62% [95% CI 42-76] and during delta wave was 67% [62-71], and vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related death during beta wave was 86% [57-100] and during delta wave was 82% [74-89]). INTERPRETATION: The single-dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine shows effectiveness against severe COVID-19 disease and COVID-19-related death after vaccination, and against both beta and delta variants, providing real-world evidence for its use globally. FUNDING: National Treasury of South Africa, the National Department of Health, Solidarity Response Fund NPC, The Michael & Susan Dell Foundation, The Elma Vaccines and Immunization Foundation, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Prevalence and Trajectory of COVID-19-Associated Hypercoagulability Using Serial Thromboelastography in a South African Population.

INTRODUCTION: The coagulation abnormalities resulting from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been attributed to inflammation and subsequent cytokine storm. Thromboelastography (TEG) is a point-of-care test used to assess clot formation and degradation in whole blood and is an indicator of the overall real-time coagulopathic state of the patient. METHODS: A single-centre, prospective, observational cohort study was conducted in South Africa, analysing the coagulation patterns of 41 patients with hypoxia related to SARS-CoV-2 using serial thromboelastography (TEG) on admission, after 48 hours, and at resolution of hypoxia/day 10. Results: Two-thirds (n = 26) were women. The median age was 61 (IQR 50-67), and the majority (88%) were Black patients. Almost half (22) of the patients were critically ill and ventilated, with median SOFA and SAPS2 scores of 3 and 22 (IQR2-4 and 18-30), respectively. The prevalence of hypercoagulability was 0.54 (95% CI 0.46-0.62), whilst 29/41 (0.71, CI 0.64-0.78)) met the definition of hypofibrinolysis. Differences between the hypercoagulable (HC) and non-hypercoagulable groups remained apparent at 48 hours after anticoagulation. At this time point, the K time was significantly lower (p ˂ 0,01), and the α-angle (p ˂ 0,01) and maximum amplitude (MA) (p ˂ 0,01) were significantly higher in the HC cohort. At resolution of hypoxia, or day 10, only MA was significantly higher in the hypercoagulable group compared to the non-hypercoagulable group (p = 0.01). The initial impairment in fibrinolysis (Ly30), α angle, and MA were significantly associated with mortality, with p values of 0.006, 0.031, and 0.04, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this South African population, hypercoagulability was a highly prevalent phenomenon in COVID-19 disease. It was typified by hypofibrinolysis and a persistently elevated MA, despite anticoagulation therapy.

Allergic reactions to the Ad26.COV2.S Vaccine in South Africa

Background The Janssen-Ad26.COV2.S vaccine is authorised for use in several countries with over 30 million doses administered. Mild and severe allergic adverse events following immunisation(AEFI) have been reported. The aim of this report is to detail allergic reactions reported during the Sisonke phase 3B study in South Africa. Methods A single-dose of the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine was administered to 477234 South African Healthcare Workers between 17 February and 17 May 2021. Monitoring of adverse events used a combination of passive reporting and active case finding. Telephonic contact was attempted for all adverse events reported as “allergy”. Anaphylaxis adjudication was performed using the Brighton Collaboration (BCC) and NIAID case definitions. Results Only 251(0.052%) patients reported any allergic-type reaction(less than 1 in 2000), with four cases of adjudicated anaphylaxis (BCC level 1, n=3)(prevalence of 8.4 per million doses). All anaphylaxis cases had a prior history of drug or vaccine-associated anaphylaxis. Cutaneous allergic reactions were the commonest non-anaphylatic reactions and included: self-limiting, transient/localised rashes requiring no healthcare contact(n=92);or isolated urticaria and/or angioedema[n=70 median onset 48(IQR 11.5-120) hours post vaccination] that necessitated healthcare contact(81%), antihistamine(63%), and/or systemic/topical corticosteroid(16%). All immediate (including adjudicated anaphylaxis) and the majority of delayed AEFI(65/69) cases resolved completely. Conclusions Allergic AEFI are rare following a single-dose of Ad26.COV with complete resolution in all cases of anaphylaxis. Though rare, isolated, delayed onset urticaria and/or angioedema was the commonest allergic AEFI requiring treatment, with nearly half occurring in participants without known atopic disease.