Type 1 VWD classification revisited: novel insights from combined analysis of the LoVIC and WiN studies.

ABSTRACT: There is significant ongoing debate regarding type 1 von Willebrand disease (VWD) defintion. Previous guidelines recommended patients with von Willebrand factor (VWF) levels <30 IU/dL be diagnosed type 1 VWD, whereas patients with significant bleeding and VWF levels from 30 to 50 IU/dL be diagnosed with low VWF. To elucidate the relationship between type 1 VWD and low VWF in the context of age-induced increases in VWF levels, we combined data sets from 2 national cohort studies: 162 patients with low VWF from the Low VWF in Ireland Cohort (LoVIC) and 403 patients with type 1 VWD from the Willebrand in The Netherlands (WiN) studies. In 47% of type 1 VWD participants, VWF levels remained <30 IU/dL despite increasing age. Conversely, VWF levels increased to the low VWF range (30-50 IU/dL) in 30% and normalized (>50 IU/dL) in 23% of type 1 VWD cases. Crucially, absolute VWF antigen (VWF:Ag) levels and increase of VWF:Ag per year overlapped between low VWF and normalized type 1 VWD participants. Moreover, multiple regression analysis demonstrated that VWF:Ag levels in low VWF and normalized type 1 VWD patients would not have been different had they been diagnosed at the same age (ß = 0.00; 95% confidence interval, -0.03 to 0.04). Consistently, no difference was found in the prevalence of VWF sequence variants; factor VIII activity/VWF:Ag or VWF propeptide/VWF:Ag ratios; or desmopressin responses between low VWF and normalized type 1 VWD patients. In conclusion, our findings demonstrate that low VWF does not constitute a discrete clinical or pathological entity. Rather, it is part of an age-dependent type 1 VWD evolving phenotype. Collectively, these data have important implications for future VWD classification criteria.

Peri-operative desmopressin combined with pharmacokinetic-guided factor VIII concentrate in non-severe haemophilia A patients.

INTRODUCTION: Non-severe haemophilia A patient can be treated with desmopressin or factor VIII (FVIII) concentrate. Combining both may reduce factor consumption, but its feasibility and safety has never been investigated. AIM: We assessed the feasibility and safety of combination treatment in nonsevere haemophilia A patients. METHODS: Non-severe, desmopressin responsive, haemophilia A patients were included in one of two studies investigating peri-operative combination treatment. In the single-arm DAVID study intravenous desmopressin (0.3 µg/kg) once-a-day was, after sampling, immediately followed by PK-guided FVIII concentrate, for maximally three consecutive days. The Little DAVID study was a randomized trial in patients undergoing a minor medical procedure, whom received either PK-guided combination treatment (intervention arm) or PK-guided FVIII concentrate only (standard arm) up to 2 days. Dose predictions were considered accurate if the absolute difference between predicted and measured FVIII:C was ≤0.2 IU/mL. RESULTS: In total 32 patients (33 procedures) were included. In the DAVID study (n = 21), of the FVIII:C trough levels 73.7% (14/19) were predicted accurately on day 1 (D1), 76.5% (13/17) on D2. On D0, 61.9% (13/21) of peak FVIII:C levels predictions were accurate. In the Little DAVID study (n = 12), on D0 83.3% (5/6) FVIII:C peak levels for both study arms were predicted accurately. Combination treatment reduced preoperative FVIII concentrate use by 47% versus FVIII monotherapy. Desmopressin side effects were mild and transient. Two bleeds occurred, both despite FVIII:C > 1.00 IU/mL. CONCLUSION: Peri-operative combination treatment with desmopressin and PK-guided FVIII concentrate dosing in nonsevere haemophilia A is feasible, safe and reduces FVIII consumption.

The effect of current antithrombotic therapy on mortality in nursing home residents with COVID-19: a multicentre retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The first wave of COVID led to an alarmingly high mortality rate among nursing home residents (NHRs). In hospitalised patients, the use of anticoagulants may be associated with a favourable prognosis. However, it is unknown whether the use of antithrombotic medication also protected NHRs from COVID-19-related mortality. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of current antithrombotic therapy in NHRs with COVID-19 on 30-day all-cause mortality during the first COVID-19 wave. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study linking electronic health records and pharmacy data in NHRs with COVID-19. A propensity score was used to match NHRs with current use of therapeutic dose anticoagulants to NHRs not using anticoagulant medication. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality, which was evaluated using a logistic regression model. In a secondary analysis, multivariable logistic regression was performed in the complete study group to compare NHRs with current use of therapeutic dose anticoagulants and those with current use of antiplatelet therapy to those without such medication. RESULTS: We included 3521 NHRs with COVID-19 based on a positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 or with a well-defined clinical suspicion of COVID-19. In the matched propensity score analysis, NHRs with current use of therapeutic dose anticoagulants had a significantly lower all-cause mortality (OR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.58-0.92) compared to NHRs who did not use therapeutic anticoagulants. In the secondary analysis, current use of therapeutic dose anticoagulants (OR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.48-0.82) and current use of antiplatelet therapy (OR 0.80; 95% CI: 0.64-0.99) were both associated with decreased mortality. CONCLUSIONS: During the first COVID-19 wave, therapeutic anticoagulation and antiplatelet use were associated with a reduced risk of all-cause mortality in NHRs. Whether these potentially protective effects are maintained in vaccinated patients or patients with other COVID-19 variants, remains unknown.

Anticoagulation for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation and treatment of venous thromboembolism and portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis: guidance from the SSC of the ISTH.

While advanced liver disease was previously considered to be an acquired bleeding disorder, there is increasing recognition of an associated prothrombotic state with patients being at higher risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) and stroke and venous thromboembolism (VTE) including portal vein thrombosis (PVT). We review the available literature on epidemiology, pathophysiology, and risk factors and provide guidance on anticoagulant management of these conditions in adults with cirrhosis. In patients with Child-Pugh A or B cirrhosis and AF, we recommend anticoagulation with standard-dose direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in accordance with cardiology guideline recommendations for patients without liver disease. In those with Child-Pugh C cirrhosis, there is inadequate evidence with respect to the benefit and risk of anticoagulation for stroke prevention in AF. In patients with cirrhosis and acute deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, we recommend anticoagulation and suggest use of either a DOAC or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH)/vitamin K antagonist (VKA) in Child-Pugh A or B cirrhosis and LMWH alone (or as a bridge to VKA in patients with a normal baseline international normalized ratio) in Child-Pugh C cirrhosis. We recommend anticoagulation for patients with cirrhosis and symptomatic PVT. We suggest anticoagulation for those with asymptomatic, progressing PVT and recommend continuing extended anticoagulation for liver transplant candidates with PVT.

Antithrombotic Questionnaire Tool for Evaluation of Combined Antithrombotic Therapy in Community Pharmacies.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to assess the diagnostic value of an antithrombotic questionnaire tool compared with the hospital's medical record information tool. The hypothesis of this study was that the antithrombotic questionnaire tool could identify patients with potentially incorrect antithrombotic therapy. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in eight community pharmacies in the Netherlands. A standardized questionnaire was developed as antithrombotic questionnaire tool. The pharmacist assessed whether the antithrombotic therapy was correct or potentially incorrect based on answers given by patients and based on the medical record. The primary outcome of the study was the sensitivity and specificity of the antithrombotic questionnaire tool to identify patients with potentially incorrect antithrombotic therapy. RESULTS: For 95 patients, the pharmacist assessed that in 81 (85%) the antithrombotic therapy was correct and in 14 (15%) potentially incorrect. Based on the medical record, 86 patients (91%) were assessed as correct and 9 (9%) as potentially incorrect. The sensitivity of the tool was 100% and the specificity 94%. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that the antithrombotic questionnaire tool is a suitable tool to assess whether the patient's antithrombotic therapy is potentially incorrect. It can be applied to identify patients with potentially incorrect antithrombotic therapy.

Adoption of antithrombotic stewardship and utilization of clinical decision support systems-A questionnaire-based survey in Dutch hospitals.

Antithrombotics require careful monitoring to prevent adverse events. Safe use can be promoted through so-called antithrombotic stewardship. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) can be used to monitor safe use of antithrombotics, supporting antithrombotic stewardship efforts. Yet, previous research shows that despite these interventions, antithrombotics continue to cause harm. Insufficient adoption of antithrombotic stewardship and suboptimal use of CDSSs may provide and explanation. However, it is currently unknown to what extent hospitals adopted antithrombotic stewardship and utilize CDSSs to support safe use of antithrombotics. A semi-structured questionnaire-based survey was disseminated to 12 hospital pharmacists from different hospital types and regions in the Netherlands. The primary outcome was the degree of antithrombotic stewardship adoption, expressed as the number of tasks adopted per hospital and the degree of adoption per task. Secondary outcomes included characteristics of CDSS alerts used to monitor safe use of antithrombotics. All 12 hospital pharmacists completed the survey and report to have adopted antithrombotic stewardship in their hospital to a certain degree. The median adoption of tasks was two of five tasks (range 1-3). The tasks with the highest uptake were: drafting and maintenance of protocols (100%) and professional's education (58%), while care transition optimization (25%), medication reviews (8%) and patient counseling (8%) had the lowest uptake. All hospitals used a CDSS to monitor safe use of antithrombotics, mainly via basic alerts and less frequently via advanced alerts. The most frequently employed alerts were: identification of patients using a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) or a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) with one or more other antithrombotics (n = 6) and patients using a VKA to evaluate correct use (n = 6), both reflecting basic CDSS. All participating hospitals adopted antithrombotic stewardship, but the adopted tasks vary. CDSS alerts used are mainly basic in their logic.

Damoctocog Alfa Pegol, a PEGylated B-domain Deleted Recombinant Extended Half-life Factor VIII for the Treatment of Hemophilia A: A Product Review.

Damoctocog alfa pegol (BAY 94-9027, Jivi®), is a site-specifically PEGylated, extended half-life recombinant factor VIII (FVIII) that is approved in several European and non-European countries for on-demand treatment and prophylaxis of bleeding in previously treated patients aged ≥ 12 years with hemophilia A. Reliable measurements can be obtained using most one-stage and chromogenic FVIII assays over a wide concentration range. The efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) of damoctocog alfa pegol have been studied extensively in the PROTECT VIII clinical trials, and its long-term safety and effectiveness profile is continuing to build through observational and interventional real-world studies. The PK of damoctocog alfa pegol was shown to be improved as compared with that of sucrose-formulated rFVIII (rFVIII-FS, Kogenate®), and was also demonstrated to be non-inferior to and, for some variables, more favorable than rFVIII-Fc fusion protein, efmoroctocog alfa (Elocta®; NCT03364998), rurioctocog alfa pegol (BAX 855, Adynovate®/Adynovi®; NCT04015492), and antihemophilic factor (recombinant) plasma/albumin-free method (rAHF-PFM, Advate®; NCT02483208). Damoctocog alfa pegol was generally well tolerated and none of the patients in any of the clinical trials, including the PROTECT VIII clinical program, HEM-POWR, or ongoing single-center studies, developed FVIII inhibitors. Efficacy for perioperative hemostasis has been demonstrated. Low bleeding rates were achieved across the studies, with twice weekly, every 5-day and every 7-day prophylaxis offering patients ≥ 12 years and their clinicians the chance to tailor treatment to individual needs and lifestyles, while maintaining long-term protection from bleeds and their consequences.

Predictive performance of pharmacokinetic-guided prophylactic dosing of factor concentrates in hemophilia A and B.

Background: Pharmacokinetic (PK)-guided dosing is used to individualize factor (F)VIII and FIX replacement therapy. Objectives: This study investigates the reliability and feasibility of PK-guided prophylactic dosing of factor concentrates in hemophilia A and B. Methods: In this multicenter, prospective cohort study, people of all ages with hemophilia received prophylactic treatment with factor concentrates based on individual PK parameters. During follow-up, at least 4 measured FVIII/FIX levels per patient were compared with corresponding predicted levels obtained by Bayesian forecasting. Predictive performance was defined as adequate when ≥80% of measured FVIII/FIX levels were within ±25% of prediction (relative error). Additionally, mean absolute error and mean error were calculated. In post hoc analyses, predictive performance was assessed allowing maximum absolute errors of 1 (trough), 5 (mid), and 15 (peak) IU/dL. Five-point scale questionnaires addressed feasibility of PK guidance. Results: We included 50 patients (median age, 19 years; range: 2-72 years). Median follow-up was 36 weeks. Seventy-one percent of levels (58% trough, 83% mid, and 80% peak) were within ±25% of prediction. Mean absolute errors were 0.8 (trough), 2.0 (mid), and 8.6 (peak) IU/dL. In post hoc analyses, 81% (trough), 96% (mid), and 82% (peak) of levels were within set limits. Patients reported low burden and high satisfaction. Conclusion: PK-guided dosing was reliable according to post hoc analyses, based on low absolute errors that were regarded as clinically irrelevant in most cases. The predefined predictive performance was achieved in mid and peak factor levels but not in trough factor levels due to measurement inaccuracy. PK guidance also seemed feasible.

Smaller nadroparin dose reductions required for patients with renal impairment: A multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines advise 50 % and 25 % dose reduction of the therapeutic nadroparin dose (86 IU/kg) in patients with eGFR 15-29 and 30-60 ml/min respectively. For monitoring, peak anti-Xa levels are suggested. Data lack whether this results in therapeutic anti-Xa levels or in anti-Xa levels that are comparable to those of patients without renal impairment. AIMS: To determine dose ranges in patients with renal impairment that result in therapeutic anti-Xa levels and to determine the percentage of the 86 IU/kg dose that results in anti-Xa levels normally occurring in patients without renal impairment. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in five hospitals. Patients ≥18 years of age, with an eGFR ≥ 15 ml/min were included. The first correctly sampled peak (i.e. 3-5 h after ≥ third administration, regardless of dose per patient) was included. Simulated prediction models were developed using multiple linear regression. RESULTS: 770 patients were included. eGFR and hospital affected the association between dose and anti-Xa level. The doses for peak anti-Xa levels of 0.75 IU/ml differed substantially between hospitals and ranged from 55 to 91, 65-359 and 68-168 IU/kg in eGFR 15-29, 30-60 and > 60 ml/min/1.73m2, respectively. In eGFR 15-29 and 30-60 ml/min/1.73m2, doses of 75 % and 91 % of 86 IU/kg respectively, were needed for anti-Xa levels normally occurring in patients with eGFR > 60 ml/min. CONCLUSION: We advise against anti-Xa based dose-adjustments as long as anti-Xa assays between laboratories are not harmonized and an anti-Xa target range is not validated. A better approach might be to target levels similar to eGFR > 60 ml/min/1.73m2, which are achieved by smaller dose reductions.

Targeted exome analysis in patients with rare bleeding disorders: data from the Rare Bleeding Disorders in the Netherlands study.

Background: Rare coagulation factor deficiencies and disorders of fibrinolysis (defined as rare bleeding disorders [RBDs]) present with a heterogeneous bleeding phenotype, and bleeding severity is difficult to predict. Objectives: Describe underlying rare genetic variants in the Dutch RBD population and investigate the relationship between genotype, laboratory phenotype, and clinical phenotype. Methods: The Rare Bleeding Disorders in the Netherlands is a cross-sectional, nationwide study conducted between October 1, 2017, and November 30, 2019. Bleeding scores and blood samples were collected during a single study visit. Coagulation factor levels were measured centrally, and targeted exome analysis was performed on 156 genes involved in thrombosis and hemostasis. Pathogenicity was assigned according to the Association for Clinical Genetic Science guidelines. Results: Rare genetic variants specific to the diagnosed RBD were found in 132 of 156 patients (85%). Of the 214 rare genetic variants identified, 57% (n = 123) were clearly pathogenic, 19% (n = 40) were likely pathogenic, and 24% (n = 51) were variants of unknown significance. No explanatory genetic variants were found in patients with plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 deficiency or hyperfibrinolysis. A correlation existed between factor activity levels and the presence of a genetic variant in the corresponding gene in patients with rare coagulation factor deficiencies and alpha-2-antiplasmin deficiency. Co-occurrence of multiple genetic variants was present in a quarter of patients, but effect on phenotype remains unclear. Conclusion: Targeted exome analysis may offer advantages over single-gene analysis, emphasized by a number of combined deficiencies in this study. Further studies are required to determine the role of co-occurring hemostasis gene variants on the bleeding phenotype in RBDs.

Tailored anticoagulant treatment after a first venous thromboembolism: protocol of the Leiden Thrombosis Recurrence Risk Prevention (L-TRRiP) study - cohort-based randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with a first venous thromboembolism (VTE) are at risk of recurrence. Recurrent VTE (rVTE) can be prevented by extended anticoagulant therapy, but this comes at the cost of an increased risk of bleeding. It is still uncertain whether patients with an intermediate recurrence risk or with a high recurrence and high bleeding risk will benefit from extended anticoagulant treatment, and whether a strategy where anticoagulant duration is tailored on the predicted risks of rVTE and bleeding can improve outcomes. The aim of the Leiden Thrombosis Recurrence Risk Prevention (L-TRRiP) study is to evaluate the outcomes of tailored duration of long-term anticoagulant treatment based on individualised assessment of rVTE and major bleeding risks. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The L-TRRiP study is a multicentre, open-label, cohort-based, randomised controlled trial, including patients with a first VTE. We classify the risk of rVTE and major bleeding using the L-TRRiP and VTE-BLEED scores, respectively. After 3 months of anticoagulant therapy, patients with a low rVTE risk will discontinue anticoagulant treatment, patients with a high rVTE and low bleeding risk will continue anticoagulant treatment, whereas all other patients will be randomised to continue or discontinue anticoagulant treatment. All patients will be followed up for at least 2 years. Inclusion will continue until the randomised group consists of 608 patients; we estimate to include 1600 patients in total. The primary outcome is the combined incidence of rVTE and major bleeding in the randomised group after 2 years of follow-up. Secondary outcomes include the incidence of rVTE and major bleeding, functional outcomes, quality of life and cost-effectiveness in all patients. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol was approved by the Medical Research Ethics Committee Leiden-Den Haag-Delft. Results are expected in 2028 and will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and during (inter)national conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06087952.