ABSTRACT
Introduction Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) is a rare, but severe side effect after vaccination with adenovirus vector-based vaccines (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, AstraZeneca and Ad26.COV2.S, Johnson & Johnson/ Janssen) in which platelet activating anti-platelet factor 4 (PF4) antibodies cause thrombocytopenia and thrombosis at unusual sites. Patients and treating physicians are concerned about whether other vaccinations can also trigger thrombosis in patients with a history of VITT. We showed that VITT patients can safely receive their second and third vaccination against Covid-19 with an mRNA-based vaccine. [1] However, there is limited information on whether other vaccines than against Covid-19 could booster platelet activating anti-PF4 antibodies. Uncertainty increased after a report of VITT caused by human papilloma vaccination. [2] Method In our follow-up study of patients with laboratory confirmed VITT (EUPAS45098), an anti-PF4/heparin IgG enzyme immune assay (EIA) and a PF4-dependent platelet activation assay (PIPA) were performed at regular intervals and after each vaccination reported to us. Results Seventy-one VITT patients (43 female, median age at VITT diagnosis 48, range 18-80) were followed for a median of 56 weeks (range: 13-77 weeks). During the follow-up period, eight vaccinations other than against Covid-19 were reported: Six vaccinations against influenza (three Influvac, two Vaxigrip Tetra, one Influsplit Tetra) and two consecutive vaccinations against tick-borne encephalitis (TBE) in one patient. In six patients who received vaccination against influenza, all patients showed decreasing or stable EIA optical density (OD) levels. None of them showed a reactivation of platelet-activating anti- PF4-antibodies in the PIPA. The patient who was vaccinated against TBE twice showed stable EIA OD levels and remained negative in the PIPA throughout. No new thrombosis or recurrent thrombocytopenia were observed after any vac- cination. Five out of six patients still received therapeutic anticoagulation, one patient did not receive any anticoagulative drug (Fig. 1). Conclusion Similar to observations after consecutive mRNA-vaccinations against Covid-19 in VITT patients, vaccinations against influenza and TBE very unlikely reactivate platelet-activating anti-PF4-antibodies. Further follow up of the VITT patient cohort is performed to detect any new safety signal related to recurrence of VITT. (Table Presented).
ABSTRACT
Introduction Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) is a rare, but severe side effect after Covid-19 and other vaccinations. First cases of VITT-mimicking antibodies in unvaccinated patients with recurrent thrombosis have been described. Differentiation between heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and VITT is difficult in some patients. Widely used enzyme-linked immunoassays (EIA) cannot differentiate between the two, some of them even fail to detect VITT antibodies. So far, differentiation between HIT-like and VITT-like anti-PF4 antibodies can only be performed in specialized laboratories by functional tests using the heparin-induced platelet activation (HIPA) or PF4-induced platelet activation (PIPA) test. We have developed an assay, which can distinguish between HIT and VITT antibodies and can be used in any hospital laboratory. Method Confirming platelet-activation assays (HIPA and PIPA) were performed as described.[1] We defined 3 cohorts: 1) Negative controls (n = 112, including 35 healthy donors from before 2020, 46 clinical patients suspected for HIT but with negative EIA and HIPA and 31 non-thrombotic patients);2) classical HIT-patients with positive EIA and HIPA (n = 121);3) typical VITT patients (n = 63;presenting after vaccination with adenoviral vector-based Covid-19 vaccine and positive EIA and PIPA). Samples were analyzed by an automated coagulation analyzer ACL AcuStar (Werfen / IL Inc., Bedford, MA, USA) using HemosIL AcuStar HIT-IgG(PF4-H) and a prototype of VITT-IgG(PF4) assay according to the manufacturer's protocol. For both assays, raw data was analyzed as relative light units (RLU). Results All VITT samples were positive in the prototype VITT-assay (Fig. 1);only a few (n = 9;14.3 %) also showed weakly positive results in the HIT-assay. On the other hand, most of the HIT samples showed positive results in the HIT-assay (113;93.4 %), 34 of them (30.1 %) also reacted positive in the prototype VITT-assay (12 of them strongly;10.6 %), and three demonstrated an antibody pattern like autoimmune VITT. Negative control samples where all non-reactive in the HITassay and served to adjust the cutoff for the prototype VITT-assay. Conclusion The different reaction pattern of samples of HIT and VITT patients using HemosIL AcuStar HIT-IgG(PF4-H) and a VITT prototype assay was able to distinguish between the two antibody entities for the first time. The combination of assays can facilitate a rapid decision whether heparin may be used for treatment and also identify patients with autoimmune-VITT as a cause of recurrent thrombosis. (Table Presented).
ABSTRACT
In this review, we summarise the current knowledge on vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) and new insights into its underlying pathogenesis. VITT is characterised by severe thromboses occurring 5-20 days after vaccination with an adenoviral vector-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (AstraZeneca or Johnson & Johnson). Thromboses typically involve the cerebral sinus and venous system. Routine laboratory analyses show thrombocytopenia and high D-dimer levels. The pathogenesis is based on immunological processes similar to those in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Accordingly, VITT is associated with high-titre immunoglobulin G directed against platelet factor 4 (PF4). Interaction with adenoviral vector-based vaccines leads to modifications of PF4 allowing antibody-producing cells to identify PF4. Anti-PF4 antibodies activate platelets through FcgammaIIa receptors. The detection of platelet-activating anti-PF4 antibodies confirms the diagnosis of VITT. Treatment is based on anticoagulation, which inhibits thrombin itself or thrombin formation, and high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin G, which inhibits cell activation via FcgammaIIa receptors. In severe cases, plasma exchange could also be an option. In some patients, a pre-VITT syndrome precedes VITT. Pre-VITT patients typically present with severe headache before thromboses are manifest. The early identification of a pre-VITT syndrome allows for the prevention of thrombotic complications. The specific dynamics of the immune reaction in VITT correspond to a transient, secondary immune response. Current studies address how PF4 binds to different adenoviral proteins and investigate the functional role of other vaccine components. Some of these factors contribute to the induction of a pro-inflammatory danger signal that triggers the first stage of VITT pathogenesis. In the second stage, high-titre anti-PF4 antibodies activate platelets and granulocytes. In a process called NETosis (neutrophil extracellular traps), activated granulocytes release DNA. Anti-PF4 antibodies then bind to complexes of PF4 and DNA. This enhances further cell activation via Fcgamma receptors and consequently also the formation of thrombin. At the end of the article, we comment on how the current knowledge on VITT may influence global vaccination campaigns against SARS-CoV-2 and we address how anti-PF4 antibodies may be involved in recurrent arterial and venous thromboses not associated with VITT and HIT. Copyright © 2022 Georg Thieme Verlag. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Background: In Germany, 68 patients with laboratory-confirmed vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) are enrolled in a follow-up study of their anti-PF4- antibody response. During contact to the respective patients, it became evident, that beside a great variability of physical sequelae some of them also suffer from psychological distress. Aim(s): We offered psychological support to patients who suffer from mental stress due to their experiences in connection with VITT. A particular challenge was that the patients are located throughout Germany with long distances to Greifswald. Therefore, both diagnostics and therapy were carried out telemedically. Method(s): VITT patients were offered to send in a brief symptom inventory (BSI-18) and provide informed consent, if they wanted to be contacted by specialized psychologists. To assess amount and severity of their symptoms, standardized questionnaires were sent (Table 1). Additionally, contacts between patients were realized as group video calls. Result(s): Of 68 patients enrolled into the follow-up study, 20 sent back the first BSI-18 questionnaire and showed interest to be contacted by a psychologist;14 completed all questionnaires (females n = 10;median age 33.5y, range 23-74 years). After first telephone call, ten patients expressed interest in further psychological treatment (14.7%). Most of these patients were in good mental and physical state before vaccination. Patients showed a wide range in the level of the regained functioning. In the IES-R- 5, six patients described symptoms that signify the likely presence of a post-traumatic stress disorder, especially those with delayed diagnosis due to the novelty of VITT. Nine patients suffered from fatigue, six severely. VITT complications following vaccinations against COVID-19 were associated with great anxiety and sometimes trauma related physical symptoms. Conclusion(s): Clinicians should be aware that psychological disorders can appear after VITT. Patients benefit from psychological support to cope with impairments of daily life, increased fatigue and increased anxiety in regard to decision making for booster vaccinations.