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.

Thrombosis pathways in COVID-19 vs. influenza-associated ARDS: A targeted proteomics approach.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary embolism (PE) occurs in one-third of critically-ill COVID-19 patients. Although prior studies identified several pathways contributing to thrombogenicity, it is unknown whether this is COVID-19-specific or also occurs in ARDS patients with another infection. OBJECTIVE: To compare pathway activity among patients having COVID-19 with PE (C19PE+), COVID-19 without PE (C19PE-), and influenza-associated ARDS (IAA) using a targeted proteomics approach. METHODS: We exploited an existing biorepository containing daily plasma samples to carefully match C19PE+ cases to C19PE- and IAA controls on mechanical ventilation duration, PEEP, FiO2, and cardiovascular-SOFA (n = 15 per group). Biomarkers representing various thrombosis pathways were measured using proximity extension- and ELISA-assays. Summed z-scores of individual biomarkers were used to represent total pathway activity. RESULTS: We observed no relevant between-group differences among 22 biomarkers associated with activation of endothelium, platelets, complement, coagulation, fibrinolysis or inflammation, except sIL-1RT2 and sST2, which were lower in C19PE- than IAA (log2-Foldchange -0.67, p = .022 and -1.78, p = .022, respectively). However, total pathway analysis indicated increased activation of endothelium (z-score 0.2 [-0.3-1.03] vs. 0.98 [-2.5--0.3], p = .027), platelets (1.0 [-1.3-3.0] vs. -3.3 [-4.1--0.6], p = .023) and coagulation (0.8 [-0.5-2.0] vs. -1.0 [-1.6-1.0], p = .023) in COVID-19 patients (C19PE+/C19PE- groups combined) compared to IAA. CONCLUSION: We observed only minor differences between matched C19PE+, C19PE-, and IAA patients, which suggests individual biomarkers mostly reflect disease severity. However, analysis of total pathway activity suggested upregulation of some distinct processes in COVID-19 could be etiologically related to increased PE-risk.

Interleukin-6 Receptor Antagonists in Critically Ill Patients with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of interleukin-6 receptor antagonists in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is unclear. METHODS: We evaluated tocilizumab and sarilumab in an ongoing international, multifactorial, adaptive platform trial. Adult patients with Covid-19, within 24 hours after starting organ support in the intensive care unit (ICU), were randomly assigned to receive tocilizumab (8 mg per kilogram of body weight), sarilumab (400 mg), or standard care (control). The primary outcome was respiratory and cardiovascular organ support-free days, on an ordinal scale combining in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and days free of organ support to day 21. The trial uses a Bayesian statistical model with predefined criteria for superiority, efficacy, equivalence, or futility. An odds ratio greater than 1 represented improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both. RESULTS: Both tocilizumab and sarilumab met the predefined criteria for efficacy. At that time, 353 patients had been assigned to tocilizumab, 48 to sarilumab, and 402 to control. The median number of organ support-free days was 10 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) in the tocilizumab group, 11 (interquartile range, 0 to 16) in the sarilumab group, and 0 (interquartile range, -1 to 15) in the control group. The median adjusted cumulative odds ratios were 1.64 (95% credible interval, 1.25 to 2.14) for tocilizumab and 1.76 (95% credible interval, 1.17 to 2.91) for sarilumab as compared with control, yielding posterior probabilities of superiority to control of more than 99.9% and of 99.5%, respectively. An analysis of 90-day survival showed improved survival in the pooled interleukin-6 receptor antagonist groups, yielding a hazard ratio for the comparison with the control group of 1.61 (95% credible interval, 1.25 to 2.08) and a posterior probability of superiority of more than 99.9%. All secondary analyses supported efficacy of these interleukin-6 receptor antagonists. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients with Covid-19 receiving organ support in ICUs, treatment with the interleukin-6 receptor antagonists tocilizumab and sarilumab improved outcomes, including survival. (REMAP-CAP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02735707.).