The effect of COVID-19 vaccination on anticoagulation stability in adolescents and young adults using vitamin K antagonists.

INTRODUCTION: The European Medicine Agency has authorized COVID-19 vaccination in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) from 12 years onwards. In elderly vitamin K antagonist (VKA) users, COVID-19 vaccination has been associated with an increased risk of supra- and subtherapeutic INRs. Whether this association is also observed in AYAs using VKA is unknown. Our aim was to describe the stability of anticoagulation after COVID-19 vaccination in AYA VKA users. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A case-crossover study was performed in a cohort of AYAs (12-30 years) using VKAs. The most recent INR results before vaccination, the reference period, were compared with the most recent INR after the first and, if applicable, second vaccination. Several sensitivity analyses were performed in which we restricted our analysis to stable patients and patients without interacting events. RESULTS: 101 AYAs were included, with a median age [IQR] of 25 [7] years, of whom 51.5 % were male and 68.3 % used acenocoumarol. We observed a decrease of 20.8 % in INRs within range after the first vaccination, due to an increase of 16.8 % in supratherapeutic INRs. These results were verified in our sensitivity analyses. No differences were observed after the second vaccination compared to before and after the first vaccination. Complications after vaccination occurred less often than before vaccination (9.0 vs 3.0 bleedings) and were non-severe. CONCLUSIONS: the stability of anticoagulation after COVID-19 vaccination was decreased in AYA VKA users. However, the decrease might not be clinically relevant as no increase of complications nor significant dose adjustments were observed.

Population pharmacokinetics of nadroparin for thromboprophylaxis in COVID-19 intensive care unit patients.

AIMS: Nadroparin is administered to COVID-19 intensive care unit (ICU) patients as thromboprophylaxis. Despite existing population pharmacokinetic (PK) models for nadroparin in literature, the population PK of nadroparin in COVID-19 ICU patients is unknown. Moreover, optimal dosing regimens achieving anti-Xa target levels (0.3-0.7 IU/mL) are unknown. Therefore, a population PK analysis was conducted to investigate different dosing regimens of nadroparin in COVID-19 ICU patients. METHODS: Anti-Xa levels (n = 280) from COVID-19 ICU patients (n = 65) receiving twice daily (BID) 5700 IU of subcutaneous nadroparin were collected to perform a population PK analysis with NONMEM v7.4.1. Using Monte Carlo simulations (n = 1000), predefined dosing regimens were evaluated. RESULTS: A 1-compartment model with an absorption compartment adequately described the measured anti-Xa levels with interindividual variability estimated for clearance (CL). Inflammation parameters C-reactive protein, D-dimer and estimated glomerular filtration rate based on the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation allowed to explain the interindividual variability of CL. Moreover, CL was decreased in patients receiving corticosteroids (22.5%) and vasopressors (25.1%). Monte Carlo simulations demonstrated that 5700 IU BID was the most optimal dosing regimen of the simulated regimens for achieving prespecified steady-state t = 4 h anti-Xa levels with 56.7% on target (0.3-0.7 IU/mL). CONCLUSION: In our study, clearance of nadroparin is associated with an increase in inflammation parameters, use of corticosteroids, vasopression and renal clearance in critically ill patients. Furthermore, of the simulated regimens, targeted anti-Xa levels were most adequately achieved with a dosing regimen of 5700 IU BID. Future studies are needed to elucidate the underlying mechanisms of found covariate relationships.

Caging the dragon: Research approach to COVID-19-related thrombosis.

The incidence of venous thrombosis, mostly pulmonary embolism (PE), ranging from local immunothrombosis to central emboli, but also deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is reported to be remarkably high. The relevance of better understanding, predicting, treating, and preventing COVID-19-associated venous thrombosis meets broad support, as can be concluded from the high number of research, review, and guideline papers that have been published on this topic. The Dutch COVID & Thrombosis Coalition (DCTC) is a multidisciplinary team involving a large number of Dutch experts in the broad area of venous thrombosis and hemostasis research, combined with experts on virology, critically ill patients, pulmonary diseases, and community medicine, across all university hospitals and many community hospitals in the Netherlands. Within the consortium, clinical data of at least 5000 admitted COVID-19-infected individuals are available, including substantial collections of biobanked materials in an estimated 3000 people. In addition to considerable experience in preclinical and clinical thrombosis research, the consortium embeds virology-hemostasis research models within unique biosafety facilities to address fundamental questions on the interaction of virus with epithelial and vascular cells, in relation to the coagulation and inflammatory system. The DCTC has initiated a comprehensive research program to answer many of the current questions on the pathophysiology and best anticoagulant treatment of COVID-19-associated thrombotic complications. The research program was funded by grants of the Netherlands Thrombosis Foundation and the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development. Here, we summarize the design and main aims of the research program.

Decompressive surgery in cerebral venous sinus thrombosis due to vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis due to vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (CVST-VITT) is an adverse drug reaction occurring after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination. CVST-VITT patients often present with large intracerebral haemorrhages and a high proportion undergoes decompressive surgery. Clinical characteristics, therapeutic management and outcomes of CVST-VITT patients who underwent decompressive surgery are described and predictors of in-hospital mortality in these patients are explored. METHODS: Data from an ongoing international registry of patients who developed CVST within 28 days of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, reported between 29 March 2021 and 10 May 2022, were used. Definite, probable and possible VITT cases, as defined by Pavord et al. (N Engl J Med 2021; 385: 1680-1689), were included. RESULTS: Decompressive surgery was performed in 34/128 (27%) patients with CVST-VITT. In-hospital mortality was 22/34 (65%) in the surgical and 27/94 (29%) in the non-surgical group (p < 0.001). In all surgical cases, the cause of death was brain herniation. The highest mortality rates were found amongst patients with preoperative coma (17/18, 94% vs. 4/14, 29% in the non-comatose; p < 0.001) and bilaterally absent pupillary reflexes (7/7, 100% vs. 6/9, 67% with unilaterally reactive pupil, and 4/11, 36% with bilaterally reactive pupils; p = 0.023). Postoperative imaging revealed worsening of index haemorrhagic lesion in 19 (70%) patients and new haemorrhagic lesions in 16 (59%) patients. At a median follow-up of 6 months, 8/10 of surgical CVST-VITT who survived admission were functionally independent. CONCLUSIONS: Almost two-thirds of surgical CVST-VITT patients died during hospital admission. Preoperative coma and bilateral absence of pupillary responses were associated with higher mortality rates. Survivors often achieved functional independence.

Lupus anticoagulant associates with thrombosis in patients with COVID‐19 admitted to intensive care units: A retrospective cohort study

Background Thrombosis is a frequent and severe complication in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Lupus anticoagulant (LA) is a strong acquired risk factor for thrombosis in various diseases and is frequently observed in patients with COVID‐19. Whether LA is associated with thrombosis in patients with severe COVID‐19 is currently unclear. Objective To investigate if LA is associated with thrombosis in critically ill patients with COVID‐19. Patients/Methods The presence of LA and other antiphospholipid antibodies was assessed in patients with COVID‐19 admitted to the ICU. LA was determined with dilute Russell's viper venom time (dRVVT) and LA‐sensitive activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) reagents. Results Of 169 patients with COVID‐19, 116 (69%) tested positive for at least one antiphospholipid antibody upon admission to the ICU. Forty (24%) patients tested positive for LA;of whom 29 (17%) tested positive with a dRVVT, 19 (11%) tested positive with an LA‐sensitive aPTT, and 8 (5%) tested positive on both tests. Fifty‐eight (34%) patients developed thrombosis after ICU admission. The odds ratio (OR) for thrombosis in patients with LA based on a dRVVT was 2.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1–5.7), which increased to 4.5 (95% CI, 1.4–14.3) in patients at or below the median age in this study (64 years). LA positivity based on a dRVVT or LA‐sensitive aPTT was only associated with thrombosis in patients aged less than 65 years (OR, 3.8;95% CI, 1.3–11.4) and disappeared after adjustment for C‐reactive protein. Conclusion Lupus anticoagulant on admission is strongly associated with thrombosis in critically ill patients with COVID‐19, especially in patients aged less than 65 years.

Lupus anticoagulant associates with thrombosis in patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care units: A retrospective cohort study.

Background: Thrombosis is a frequent and severe complication in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Lupus anticoagulant (LA) is a strong acquired risk factor for thrombosis in various diseases and is frequently observed in patients with COVID-19. Whether LA is associated with thrombosis in patients with severe COVID-19 is currently unclear. Objective: To investigate if LA is associated with thrombosis in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Patients/Methods: The presence of LA and other antiphospholipid antibodies was assessed in patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU. LA was determined with dilute Russell's viper venom time (dRVVT) and LA-sensitive activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) reagents. Results: Of 169 patients with COVID-19, 116 (69%) tested positive for at least one antiphospholipid antibody upon admission to the ICU. Forty (24%) patients tested positive for LA; of whom 29 (17%) tested positive with a dRVVT, 19 (11%) tested positive with an LA-sensitive aPTT, and 8 (5%) tested positive on both tests. Fifty-eight (34%) patients developed thrombosis after ICU admission. The odds ratio (OR) for thrombosis in patients with LA based on a dRVVT was 2.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-5.7), which increased to 4.5 (95% CI, 1.4-14.3) in patients at or below the median age in this study (64 years). LA positivity based on a dRVVT or LA-sensitive aPTT was only associated with thrombosis in patients aged less than 65 years (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.3-11.4) and disappeared after adjustment for C-reactive protein. Conclusion: Lupus anticoagulant on admission is strongly associated with thrombosis in critically ill patients with COVID-19, especially in patients aged less than 65 years.

Estimating incidence of venous thromboembolism in COVID‐19: Methodological considerations

Background Coagulation abnormalities and coagulopathy are recognized as consequences of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and the resulting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Specifically, venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been reported as a frequent complication. By May 27, 2021, at least 93 original studies and 25 meta‐analyses investigating VTE incidence in patients with COVID‐19 had been published, showing large heterogeneity in reported VTE incidence ranging from 0% to 85%. This large variation complicates interpretation of individual study results as well as comparisons across studies, for example, to investigate changes in incidence over time, compare subgroups, and perform meta‐analyses. Objectives This study sets out to provide an overview of sources of heterogeneity in VTE incidence studies in patients with COVID‐19, illustrated using examples. Methods The original studies of three meta‐analyses were screened and a list of sources of heterogeneity that may explain observed heterogeneity across studies was composed. Results The sources of heterogeneity in VTE incidence were classified as clinical sources and methodologic sources. Clinical sources of heterogeneity include differences between studies regarding patient characteristics that affect baseline VTE risk and protocols used for VTE testing. Methodologic sources of heterogeneity include differences in VTE inclusion types, data quality, and the methods used for data analysis. Conclusions To appreciate reported estimates of VTE incidence in patients with COVID‐19 in relation to its etiology, prevention, and treatment, researchers should unambiguously report about possible clinical and methodological sources of heterogeneity in those estimates. This article provides suggestions for that.

Estimating incidence of venous thromboembolism in COVID-19: Methodological considerations.

Background: Coagulation abnormalities and coagulopathy are recognized as consequences of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and the resulting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Specifically, venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been reported as a frequent complication. By May 27, 2021, at least 93 original studies and 25 meta-analyses investigating VTE incidence in patients with COVID-19 had been published, showing large heterogeneity in reported VTE incidence ranging from 0% to 85%. This large variation complicates interpretation of individual study results as well as comparisons across studies, for example, to investigate changes in incidence over time, compare subgroups, and perform meta-analyses. Objectives: This study sets out to provide an overview of sources of heterogeneity in VTE incidence studies in patients with COVID-19, illustrated using examples. Methods: The original studies of three meta-analyses were screened and a list of sources of heterogeneity that may explain observed heterogeneity across studies was composed. Results: The sources of heterogeneity in VTE incidence were classified as clinical sources and methodologic sources. Clinical sources of heterogeneity include differences between studies regarding patient characteristics that affect baseline VTE risk and protocols used for VTE testing. Methodologic sources of heterogeneity include differences in VTE inclusion types, data quality, and the methods used for data analysis. Conclusions: To appreciate reported estimates of VTE incidence in patients with COVID-19 in relation to its etiology, prevention, and treatment, researchers should unambiguously report about possible clinical and methodological sources of heterogeneity in those estimates. This article provides suggestions for that.

Altered fibrin network structure and fibrinolysis in intensive care unit patients with COVID-19, not entirely explaining the increased risk of thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection is associated with an increased incidence of thrombosis. OBJECTIVES: By studying the fibrin network structure of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, we aimed to unravel pathophysiological mechanisms that contribute to this increased risk of thrombosis. This may contribute to optimal prevention and treatment of COVID-19 related thrombosis. PATIENTS/METHODS: In this case-control study, we collected plasma samples from intensive care unit (ICU) patients with COVID-19, with and without confirmed thrombosis, between April and December 2020. Additionally, we collected plasma from COVID-19 patients admitted to general wards without thrombosis, from ICU patients with pneumococcal infection, and from healthy controls. Fibrin fiber diameters and fibrin network density were quantified in plasma clots imaged with stimulated emission depletion microscopy and confocal microscopy. Finally, we determined the sensitivity to fibrinolysis. RESULTS: COVID-19 ICU patients (n = 37) and ICU patients with pneumococcal disease (n = 7) showed significantly higher fibrin densities and longer plasma clot lysis times than healthy controls (n = 7). No differences were observed between COVID-19 ICU patients with and without thrombosis, or ICU patients with pneumococcal infection. At a second time point, after diagnosis of thrombosis or at a similar time point in patients without thrombosis, we observed thicker fibers and longer lysis times in COVID-19 ICU patients with thrombosis (n = 19) than in COVID-19 ICU patients without thrombosis (n = 18). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that severe COVID-19 is associated with a changed fibrin network structure and decreased susceptibility to fibrinolysis. Because these changes were not exclusive to COVID-19 patients, they may not explain the increased thrombosis risk.

COVID-19 vaccination in patients with immune thrombocytopenia.

Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is an acquired autoimmune disorder that is characterized by low platelet count and increased bleeding risk. COVID-19 vaccination has been described as a risk factor for de novo ITP, but the effects of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with ITP are unknown. We aimed to investigate the effects of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with ITP on platelet count, bleeding complications, and ITP exacerbation (≥50% decline in platelet count, or nadir platelet count < 30 × 109/L with a >20% decrease from baseline, or use of rescue therapy). Platelet counts in patients with ITP and healthy controls were collected immediately before and 1 and 4 weeks after the first and second vaccinations. Linear mixed-effects modeling was applied to analyze platelet counts over time. We included 218 patients with ITP (50.9% female; mean age, 55 years; and median platelet count, 106 × 109/L) and 200 healthy controls (60.0% female; mean age, 58 years; median platelet count, 256 × 109/L). Platelet counts decreased by 6.3% after vaccination. We did not observe any difference in decrease between the groups. Thirty patients with ITP (13.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9.5-19.1) had an exacerbation and 5 (2.2%; 95% CI, 0.7-5.3) suffered from a bleeding event. Risk factors for ITP exacerbation were platelet count < 50 × 109/L (odds ratio [OR], 5.3; 95% CI, 2.1-13.7), ITP treatment at time of vaccination (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.5-8.0), and age (OR, 0.96 per year; 95% CI, 0.94-0.99). Our study highlights the safety of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with ITP and the importance of the close monitoring of platelet counts in a subgroup of patients with ITP. Patients with ITP with exacerbation responded well on therapy.

The Immediate Effect of COVID-19 Vaccination on Anticoagulation Control in Patients Using Vitamin K Antagonists.

BACKGROUND: In January 2021, the Dutch vaccination program against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was started. Clinical studies have shown that systemic reactions occur in up to 50% of vaccine recipients. Therefore, COVID-19 vaccination could affect anticoagulation control, potentially leading to an increased risk of thrombotic events and bleeding complications. AIMS: This article investigates whether the BNT162b2 vaccine affects anticoagulation control in outpatients using vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). METHODS: A case-crossover study was performed in a cohort of outpatient VKA users from four Dutch anticoagulation clinics who received a BNT162b2 vaccine. International normalized ratio (INR) results and VKA dosages before the first vaccination, the reference period, were compared with those after the first and second vaccination. RESULTS: A total of 3,148 outpatient VKA users were included, with a mean age (standard deviation) of 86.7 (8.7) years, of whom 43.8% were male, 67.0% used acenocoumarol, and 33.0% phenprocoumon. We observed a decrease of 8.9% of INRs within range in the standard intensity group (target INR 2.0-3.0). There was both an increased risk of supratherapeutic (odds ratio [OR] = 1.34 [95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.67]) and subtherapeutic levels (OR = 1.40 [95% CI 1.08-1.83]) after first vaccination. In the high-intensity group (target INR 2.5-3.5), the risk of a supratherapeutic INR was 2.3 times higher after first vaccination (OR = 2.29 [95% CI 1.22-4.28]) and 3.3 times higher after second vaccination (OR = 3.25 [95% CI 1.06-9.97]). CONCLUSION: BNT162b2 was associated with an immediate negative effect on anticoagulation control in patients treated with VKAs, so it is advisable to monitor the INR shortly after vaccination, even in stable patients.