Racial and ethnic differences in pharmacotherapy to prevent coronary artery disease and thrombotic events.

Awareness of racial/ethnic disparities represents a key challenge for healthcare systems that attempt to provide effective healthcare and to reduce existing inequalities in the use of and adherence to guideline-recommended cardiovascular drugs to improve clinical outcomes for cardiovascular disease (CVD). In this review, we describe important racial/ethnic differences between and within ethnic groups in the prevalence, risk factors, haemostatic factors, anti-inflammatory and endothelial markers, recurrence, and outcomes of CVD. We discuss important differences in the selection, doses, and response [efficacy and adverse drug reactions (ADRs)] in ethnically diverse patients treated with antithrombotics or lipid-lowering drugs. Differences in drug response are mainly related to racial/ethnic differences in the frequency of polymorphisms in genes encoding drug-metabolizing enzymes (DMEs) and drug transporters. These polymorphisms markedly influence the pharmacokinetics, dose requirements, and safety of warfarin, clopidogrel, and statins. This review aims to support a better understanding of the genetic differences between and among populations to identify patients who may experience an ADR or a lack of drug response, thus optimizing therapy and improving outcomes. The greater the understanding of the differences in the genetic variants of DMEs and transporters that determine the differences in the exposure, efficacy, and safety of cardiovascular drugs between races/ethnicities, the greater the probability that personalized medicine will become a reality.

Assessing the safety of continued perioperative antithrombotic therapy in endoscopic airway surgery for laryngotracheal stenosis.

PURPOSE: Given the increasing utilization of endoscopic surgery, particularly for airway stenosis management in the era of COVID-19 due to prolonged intubation, it is important to examine whether continuing antithrombotic therapy perioperatively influences bleeding complications. We examined the impact of perioperative antithrombotic use on postoperative bleeding complications following endoscopic airway surgery for laryngotracheal stenosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective study from January 2016 to December 2021 of cases of patients ≥18 years who underwent endoscopic airway surgery for posterior glottic, subglottic, and tracheal stenosis at a single institution. Cases were excluded if they were an open airway surgery. The primary outcome was the occurrence of postoperative bleeding complications across cases of patients naive to and on baseline antithrombotic therapy, and those with preoperative continuation versus cessation of antithrombotic therapy. RESULTS: 258 cases across 96 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these 258 cases, 43.4 % (n = 112) were performed for patients on baseline antithrombotic therapy and 56.6 % (n = 146) for those not on antithrombotic therapy. Likelihood of perioperative continuation of apixaban was 0.052 (odds ratio, 95 % Confidence Interval: 0.002-0.330, p < 0.001). Likelihood of perioperative continuation of aspirin was 9.87 (odds ratio, 95 % Confidence Interval: 2.32-43.0, p < 0.001). Two instances of postoperative bleeding were found: both in patients who were on aspirin without perioperative cessation for COVID-related coagulopathy. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that perioperative continuation of aspirin is relatively safe in the setting of endoscopic surgery for airway stenosis management. Prospective investigations to increase understanding of perioperative antithrombotics for COVID-related coagulopathy are warranted.

Trial of Endovascular Therapy for Acute Ischemic Stroke with Large Infarct.

BACKGROUND: The role of endovascular therapy for acute stroke with a large infarction has not been extensively studied in differing populations. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, prospective, open-label, randomized trial in China involving patients with acute large-vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation and an Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score of 3 to 5 (range, 0 to 10, with lower values indicating larger infarction) or an infarct-core volume of 70 to 100 ml. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio within 24 hours from the time they were last known to be well to undergo endovascular therapy and receive medical management or to receive medical management alone. The primary outcome was the score on the modified Rankin scale at 90 days (scores range from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability), and the primary objective was to determine whether a shift in the distribution of the scores on the modified Rankin scale at 90 days had occurred between the two groups. Secondary outcomes included scores of 0 to 2 and 0 to 3 on the modified Rankin scale. The primary safety outcome was symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage within 48 hours after randomization. RESULTS: A total of 456 patients were enrolled; 231 were assigned to the endovascular-therapy group and 225 to the medical-management group. Approximately 28% of the patients in both groups received intravenous thrombolysis. The trial was stopped early owing to the efficacy of endovascular therapy after the second interim analysis. At 90 days, a shift in the distribution of scores on the modified Rankin scale toward better outcomes was observed in favor of endovascular therapy over medical management alone (generalized odds ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.11 to 1.69; P = 0.004). Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage occurred in 14 of 230 patients (6.1%) in the endovascular-therapy group and in 6 of 225 patients (2.7%) in the medical-management group; any intracranial hemorrhage occurred in 113 (49.1%) and 39 (17.3%), respectively. Results for the secondary outcomes generally supported those of the primary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In a trial conducted in China, patients with large cerebral infarctions had better outcomes with endovascular therapy administered within 24 hours than with medical management alone but had more intracranial hemorrhages. (Funded by Covidien Healthcare International Trading [Shanghai] and others; ANGEL-ASPECT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04551664.).

ISTH guidelines for antithrombotic treatment in COVID-19.

Antithrombotic agents reduce risk of thromboembolism in severely ill patients. Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may realize additional benefits from heparins. Optimal dosing and timing of these treatments and benefits of other antithrombotic agents remain unclear. In October 2021, ISTH assembled an international panel of content experts, patient representatives, and a methodologist to develop recommendations on anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents for patients with COVID-19 in different clinical settings. We used the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association methodology to assess level of evidence (LOE) and class of recommendation (COR). Only recommendations with LOE A or B were included. Panelists agreed on 12 recommendations: three for non-hospitalized, five for non-critically ill hospitalized, three for critically ill hospitalized, and one for post-discharge patients. Two recommendations were based on high-quality evidence, the remainder on moderate-quality evidence. Among non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19, the panel gave a strong recommendation (a) for use of prophylactic dose of low molecular weight heparin or unfractionated heparin (LMWH/UFH) (COR 1); (b) for select patients in this group, use of therapeutic dose LMWH/UFH in preference to prophylactic dose (COR 1); but (c) against the addition of an antiplatelet agent (COR 3). Weak recommendations favored (a) sulodexide in non-hospitalized patients, (b) adding an antiplatelet agent to prophylactic LMWH/UFH in select critically ill, and (c) prophylactic rivaroxaban for select patients after discharge (all COR 2b). Recommendations in this guideline are based on high-/moderate-quality evidence available through March 2022. Focused updates will incorporate future evidence supporting changes to these recommendations.

Recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rTPA) management for first onset acute ischemic stroke with covid -19 and non-covid -19 patients.

OBJECTIVES: Cerebrovascular stroke (CVS) is one of the well-known complications of coronavirus-2019 (Covid-19), but less is known about the outcome and safety of thrombolytic therapy in these patients. In this study we compare the efficacy and safety of Tissue plasminogen activator (rTPA) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients with or without Covid-19 infection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comparative prospective study in which all patients who presented with AIS and eligible for rTPA were recruited from the emergency department and classified into 2 groups (AIS with Covid-19 infection and AIS without Covid-19 as controls). Demographic data, symptoms of Covid-19, clinical examination, neuroimaging, and laboratory investigations were obtained in each patient. National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and the Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) were assessed before, immediately after rTPA, and 3 months later. RESULTS: There were 22 patients in the COVID-19 group and 25 control patients. Those with COVID-19 were more likely to have a history of smoking and Diabetes Mellitus than controls. On admission, motor symptoms were more severe in patients with COVID-19. COVID-19 patients were more likely to have symptomatic intra-cerebral hemorrhage and radiological hemorrhagic transformation than controls. Onset to door time (ODT) and onset to successful reperfusion time were significantly longer in Covid-19 patients than controls. Clinical improvement and frequency of re-occlusion and recurrent ischemic stroke at 3 months follow-up did not differ between groups, although there was higher number of deaths (27.3%) in the Covid-19 group than controls (16%). CONCLUSIONS: Using rTPA is safe and effective in patients with AIS with or without COVID-19 infection despite the high frequency of hemorrhagic transformation and high number of deaths.

Data mining methodology for response to hypertension symptomology-application to COVID-19-related pharmacovigilance.

Background: Potential therapy and confounding factors including typical co-administered medications, patient's disease states, disease prevalence, patient demographics, medical histories, and reasons for prescribing a drug often are incomplete, conflicting, missing, or uncharacterized in spontaneous adverse drug event (ADE) reporting systems. These missing or incomplete features can affect and limit the application of quantitative methods in pharmacovigilance for meta-analyses of data during randomized clinical trials. Methods: Data from patients with hypertension were retrieved and integrated from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System; 134 antihypertensive drugs out of 1131 drugs were filtered and then evaluated using the empirical Bayes geometric mean (EBGM) of the posterior distribution to build ADE-drug profiles with an emphasis on the pulmonary ADEs. Afterward, the graphical least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (GLASSO) captured drug associations based on pulmonary ADEs by correcting hidden factors and confounder misclassification. Selected drugs were then compared using the Friedman test in drug classes and clusters obtained from GLASSO. Results: Following multiple filtering stages to exclude insignificant and noise-driven reports, we found that drugs from antihypertensives agents, urologicals, and antithrombotic agents (macitentan, bosentan, epoprostenol, selexipag, sildenafil, tadalafil, and beraprost) form a similar class with a significantly higher incidence of pulmonary ADEs. Macitentan and bosentan were associated with 64% and 56% of pulmonary ADEs, respectively. Because these two medications are prescribed in diseases affecting pulmonary function and may be likely to emerge among the highest reported pulmonary ADEs, in fact, they serve to validate the methods utilized here. Conversely, doxazosin and rilmenidine were found to have the least pulmonary ADEs in selected drugs from hypertension patients. Nifedipine and candesartan were also found by signal detection methods to form a drug cluster, shown by several studies an effective combination of these drugs on lowering blood pressure and appeared an improved side effect profile in comparison with single-agent monotherapy. Conclusions: We consider pulmonary ADE profiles in multiple long-standing groups of therapeutics including antihypertensive agents, antithrombotic agents, beta-blocking agents, calcium channel blockers, or agents acting on the renin-angiotensin system, in patients with hypertension associated with high risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We found that several individual drugs have significant differences between their drug classes and compared to other drug classes. For instance, macitentan and bosentan from endothelin receptor antagonists show major concern while doxazosin and rilmenidine exhibited the least pulmonary ADEs compared to the outcomes of other drugs. Using techniques in this study, we assessed and confirmed the hypothesis that drugs from the same drug class could have very different pulmonary ADE profiles affecting outcomes in acute respiratory illness. Funding: GJW and MJD accepted funding from BioNexus KC for funding on this project, but BioNexus KC had no direct role in this article.

Tenecteplase use in the management of acute ischemic stroke: Literature review and clinical considerations.

PURPOSE: Several research articles have been published within the last decade comparing the use of tenecteplase to alteplase in ischemic stroke management. Prior reporting on the comparative therapeutic efficacy and safety profiles of tenecteplase and alteplase is reviewed. SUMMARY: Tenecteplase is a variant of native tissue-type plasminogen activator, which rapidly promotes thrombolysis by catalyzing formation of the serine protease plasmin. Tenecteplase has theoretical advantages over alteplase as it has greater fibrin specificity and has a longer half-life than alteplase. This allows the administration of a single bolus over 5 to 10 seconds, as opposed to a bolus followed by a 1-hour infusion with alteplase. While currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, tenecteplase has also been studied in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke and has extensive data for this off-label indication. The most comprehensive trials to date evaluating the use of tenecteplase in acute ischemic stroke include the TNK-S2B, Australian TNK, ATTEST, Nor-Test, and EXTEND-IA TNK trials. Findings from these randomized controlled studies suggest that tenecteplase is at least as efficacious as alteplase in terms of neurological outcomes. The majority of these studies also reported a trend toward improved safety profiles with the use of tenecteplase. CONCLUSION: Current clinical evidence shows that tenecteplase is not inferior to alteplase for the treatment of ischemic stroke and suggests that tenecteplase may have a superior safety profile. Furthermore, tenecteplase also has practical advantages in terms of its administration. This can potentially lead to a decrease in medication errors and improvement in door to thrombolytic time.

Use of novel antithrombotic agents for COVID-19: Systematic summary of ongoing randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with macro- and micro-thromboses, which are triggered by endothelial cell activation, coagulopathy, and uncontrolled inflammatory response. Conventional antithrombotic agents are under assessment in dozens of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with COVID-19, with preliminary results not demonstrating benefit in several studies. OBJECTIVES: Given the possibility that more novel agents with antithrombotic effects may have a potential utility for management of patients with COVID-19, we assessed ongoing RCTs including these agents with their potential mechanism of action in this population. METHODS: We searched clinicaltrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to identify RCTs of novel antithrombotic agents in patients with COVID-19. RESULTS: Based on a systematic literature search, 27 RCTs with 10 novel antithrombotic agents (including nafamostat, dociparstat, rNAPc2, and defibrotide) were identified. The results from these trials have not been disseminated yet. The studied drugs in the ongoing or completed RCTs include agents affecting the coagulation cascade, drugs affecting endothelial activation, and mixed acting agents. Their postulated antithrombotic mechanisms of action and their potential impact on patient management are summarized. CONCLUSION: Some novel antithrombotic agents have pleiotropic anti-inflammatory and antiviral effects, which may help reduce the viral load or fibrosis, and improve oxygenation. Results from ongoing RCTs will elucidate their actual role in the management of patients with COVID-19.

Safety and Outcomes of Intravenous Thrombolytic Therapy in Ischemic Stroke Patients with COVID-19: CASCADE Initiative.

BACKGROUND: There is little information regarding the safety of intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (IV-tPA) in patients with stroke and COVID-19. METHODS: This multicenter study included consecutive stroke patients with and without COVID-19 treated with IV-tPA between February 18, 2019, to December 31, 2020, at 9 centers participating in the CASCADE initiative. Clinical outcomes included modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at hospital discharge, in-hospital mortality, the rate of hemorrhagic transformation. Using Bayesian multiple regression and after adjusting for variables with significant value in univariable analysis, we reported the posterior adjusted odds ratio (OR, with 95% Credible Intervals [CrI]) of the main outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 545 stroke patients, including 101 patients with COVID-19 were evaluated. Patients with COVID-19 had a more severe stroke at admission. In the study cohort, 85 (15.9%) patients had a hemorrhagic transformation, and 72 (13.1%) died in the hospital. After adjustment for confounding variables, discharge mRS score ≥2 (OR: 0.73, 95% CrI: 0.16, 3.05), in-hospital mortality (OR: 2.06, 95% CrI: 0.76, 5.53), and hemorrhagic transformation (OR: 1.514, 95% CrI: 0.66, 3.31) were similar in COVID-19 and non COVID-19 patients. High-sensitivity C reactive protein level was a predictor of hemorrhagic transformation in all cases (OR:1.01, 95%CI: 1.0026, 1.018), including those with COVID-19 (OR:1.024, 95%CI:1.002, 1.054). CONCLUSION: IV-tPA treatment in patients with acute ischemic stroke and COVID-19 was not associated with an increased risk of disability, mortality, and hemorrhagic transformation compared to those without COVID-19. IV-tPA should continue to be considered as the standard of care in patients with hyper acute stroke and COVID-19.

Tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) treatment for COVID-19 associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS): A case series.

A prothrombotic coagulopathy is commonly found in critically ill COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). A unique feature of COVID-19 respiratory failure is a relatively preserved lung compliance and high Alveolar-arterial oxygen gradient, with pathology reports consistently demonstrating diffuse pulmonary microthrombi on autopsy, all consistent with a vascular occlusive etiology of respiratory failure rather than the more classic findings of low-compliance in ARDS. The COVID-19 pandemic is overwhelming the world's medical care capacity with unprecedented needs for mechanical ventilators and high rates of mortality once patients progress to needing mechanical ventilation, and in many environments including in parts of the United States the medical capacity is being exhausted. Fibrinolytic therapy has previously been used in a Phase 1 clinical trial that led to reduced mortality and marked improvements in oxygenation. Here we report a series of three patients with severe COVID-19 respiratory failure who were treated with tissue plasminogen activator. All three patients had a temporally related improvement in their respiratory status, with one of them being a durable response.

COVID-19 Impact on Acute Ischemic Stroke Treatment at 9 Comprehensive Stroke Centers across Los Angeles.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the impact of COVID-19 on acute cerebrovascular disease care across 9 comprehensive stroke centers throughout Los Angeles County (LAC). METHODS: Volume of emergency stroke code activations, patient characteristics, stroke severity, reperfusion rates, treatment times, and outcomes from February 1 to April 30, 2020, were compared against the same time period in 2019. Demographic data were provided by each participating institution. RESULTS: There was a 17.3% decrease in stroke code activations across LAC in 2020 compared to 2019 (1,786 vs. 2,159, respectively, χ2 goodness of fit test p < 0.0001) across 9 participating comprehensive stroke centers. Patients who did not receive any reperfusion therapy decreased by 16.6% in 2020 (1,527) compared to 2019 (1,832). Patients who received only intravenous thrombolytic (IVT) therapy decreased by 31.8% (107 vs. 157). Patients who received only mechanical thrombectomy (MT) increased by 3% (102 vs. 99). Patients who received both IVT and MT decreased by 31.8% (45 vs. 66). Recanalization treatment times in 2020 were comparable to 2019. CSCs serving a higher proportion of Latinx populations in the eastern parts of LAC experienced a higher incidence of MT in 2020 compared to 2019. Mild increase in stroke severity was seen in 2020 compared to 2019 (8.95 vs. 8.23, p = 0.046). A higher percentage of patients were discharged home in 2020 compared to 2019 (59.5 vs. 56.1%, p = 0.034), a lower percentage of patients were discharged to skilled nursing facility (16.1 vs. 20.7%, p = 0.0004), and a higher percentage of patients expired (8.6 vs. 6.3%, p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: LAC saw a decrease in overall stroke code activations in 2020 compared to 2019. Reperfusion treatment times remained comparable to prepandemic metrics. There has been an increase in severe stroke incidence and higher volume of thrombectomy treatments in Latinx communities within LAC during the pandemic of 2020. More patients were discharged home, less patients discharged to skilled nursing facilities, and more patients expired in 2020, compared to the same time frame in 2019.

Interplay between inflammation and thrombosis in cardiovascular pathology.

Thrombosis is the most feared complication of cardiovascular diseases and a main cause of death worldwide, making it a major health-care challenge. Platelets and the coagulation cascade are effectively targeted by antithrombotic approaches, which carry an inherent risk of bleeding. Moreover, antithrombotics cannot completely prevent thrombotic events, implicating a therapeutic gap due to a third, not yet adequately addressed mechanism, namely inflammation. In this Review, we discuss how the synergy between inflammation and thrombosis drives thrombotic diseases. We focus on the huge potential of anti-inflammatory strategies to target cardiovascular pathologies. Findings in the past decade have uncovered a sophisticated connection between innate immunity, platelet activation and coagulation, termed immunothrombosis. Immunothrombosis is an important host defence mechanism to limit systemic spreading of pathogens through the bloodstream. However, the aberrant activation of immunothrombosis in cardiovascular diseases causes myocardial infarction, stroke and venous thromboembolism. The clinical relevance of aberrant immunothrombosis, referred to as thromboinflammation, is supported by the increased risk of cardiovascular events in patients with inflammatory diseases but also during infections, including in COVID-19. Clinical trials in the past 4 years have confirmed the anti-ischaemic effects of anti-inflammatory strategies, backing the concept of a prothrombotic function of inflammation. Targeting inflammation to prevent thrombosis leaves haemostasis mainly unaffected, circumventing the risk of bleeding associated with current approaches. Considering the growing number of anti-inflammatory therapies, it is crucial to appreciate their potential in covering therapeutic gaps in cardiovascular diseases.

Sulodexide in the Treatment of Patients with Early Stages of COVID-19: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) may induce several vascular endothelial-dependent systemic complications, and sulodexide has pleiotropic actions on the vascular endothelium, which may prove beneficial. We aimed to assess the effect of sulodexide when used within 3 days of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) clinical onset. We conducted a randomized placebo-controlled outpatient trial. To be included, patients must have been at high risk for severe clinical progression. Participants received sulodexide (oral 1,000 LRU/d) or placebo for 21 days. The primary endpoint was the need for hospital care. Also assessed were patients' need for supplemental oxygen as well as D-dimer and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, thromboembolic events, major bleeding, and mortality. A total of 243 patients were included in the per-protocol analysis from June 5 to August 30, 2020. Of these, 124 received sulodexide and 119 received a placebo. Only 17.7% of the patients in the sulodexide group required hospitalization, compared with 29.4% in the placebo group (p = 0.03). This benefit persisted in the intention-to-treat analysis (15% in sulodexide group vs. 24% with placebo [p = 0.04]). With sulodexide, fewer patients required supplemental oxygen (30 vs. 42% [p = 0.05]). After 2 weeks, fewer patients had D-dimer levels >500 ng/dL (22 vs. 47% [p < 0.01]), and patients also had lower mean CRP levels (12.5 vs. 17.8 mg/dL [p < 0.01]). There were no between-group differences in thromboembolic events, major bleeding, or mortality. Treatment of COVID-19 patients with sulodexide, when provided within 3 days of clinical onset, improved their clinical outcomes. Although the results should be confirmed, sulodexide could be valuable in an outpatient setting.

Pharmacologic Thromboprophylaxis and Thrombosis in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: A Pooled Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) increases thrombosis in hospitalized patients prompting adoption of different thromboprophylaxis strategies. Safety and efficacy of escalated-dose pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis are not established. OBJECTIVES: To determine the pooled incidence of thrombosis/bleeding in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 for standard-dose, intermediate-dose, therapeutic anticoagulation, and no pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched up to August 29, 2020 for studies reporting pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis and thrombosis or bleeding. Pooled event rates were calculated using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Thirty-five observational studies were included. The pooled incidence rates of total venous thromboembolism (N = 4,685) were: no prophylaxis 41.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 28.1-57.2, I 2 = 76%), standard-dose prophylaxis 19.8% (95% CI: 13.2-28.6, I 2 = 95%), intermediate-dose prophylaxis 11.9% (95% CI: 4.3-28.6, I 2 = 91%), and therapeutic-dose anticoagulants 10.5% (95% CI: 4.2-23.8, I 2 = 82%, p = 0.003). The pooled incidence rates of arterial thrombosis (N = 1,464) were: no prophylaxis 11.3% (95% CI: 5.2-23.0, I 2 = 0%), standard-dose prophylaxis 2.5% (95% CI: 1.4-4.3, I 2 = 45%), intermediate-dose prophylaxis 2.1% (95% CI: 0.5-7.7, I 2 = 45%), and therapeutic-dose anticoagulants 1.3% (95% CI: 0.2-8.8, I 2 = 0, p = 0.009). The pooled bleeding event rates (N = 6,393) were nonsignificantly higher in therapeutic-dose anticoagulants compared with standard-dose prophylaxis, (6.3 vs. 1.7%, p = 0.083). CONCLUSION: Thrombosis rates were lower in hospitalized COVID-19 patients who received pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. Thrombosis and bleeding rates for patients receiving intermediate-dose thromboprophylaxis or therapeutic anticoagulation were similar to those who received standard-dose pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis.