Effect of the P-Selectin Inhibitor Crizanlizumab on Survival Free of Organ Support in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has been associated with endothelial injury, resultant microvascular inflammation and thrombosis. Activated endothelial cells release and express P-selectin and von Willebrand factor, both of which are elevated in severe COVID-19 and may be implicated in the disease pathophysiology. We hypothesized that crizanlizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody to P-selectin, would reduce morbidity and death in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. METHODS: An international, adaptive, randomized controlled platform trial, funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, randomly assigned 422 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 with moderate or severe illness to receive either a single infusion of the P-selectin inhibitor crizanlizumab (at a dose of 5 mg/kg) plus standard of care or standard of care alone in an open-label 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale consisting of the number of days alive free of organ support through the first 21 days after trial entry. RESULTS: The study was stopped for futility by the data safety monitoring committee. Among 421 randomized patients with known 21-day outcomes, 163 patients (77%) randomized to the crizanlizumab plus standard-of-care arm did not require any respiratory or cardiovascular organ support compared with 169 (80%) in the standard-of-care-alone arm. The adjusted odds ratio for the effect of crizanlizumab on organ support-free days was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.43-1.16), where an odds ratio >1 indicates treatment benefit, yielding a posterior probability of futility (odds ratio <1.2) of 98% and a posterior probability of inferiority (odds ratio <1.0) of 91%. Overall, there were 37 deaths (17.5%) in the crizanlizumab arm and 27 deaths (12.8%) in the standard-of-care arm (hazard ratio, 1.33 [95% CrI, 0.85-2.21]; [probability of hazard ratio>1] = 0.879). CONCLUSIONS: Crizanlizumab, a P-selectin inhibitor, did not result in improvement in organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT04505774.

Therapeutic Anticoagulation with Heparin in Critically Ill Patients with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Thrombosis and inflammation may contribute to morbidity and mortality among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). We hypothesized that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation would improve outcomes in critically ill patients with Covid-19. METHODS: In an open-label, adaptive, multiplatform, randomized clinical trial, critically ill patients with severe Covid-19 were randomly assigned to a pragmatically defined regimen of either therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin or pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in accordance with local usual care. The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 among patients who survived to hospital discharge. RESULTS: The trial was stopped when the prespecified criterion for futility was met for therapeutic-dose anticoagulation. Data on the primary outcome were available for 1098 patients (534 assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and 564 assigned to usual-care thromboprophylaxis). The median value for organ support-free days was 1 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) among the patients assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and was 4 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) among the patients assigned to usual-care thromboprophylaxis (adjusted proportional odds ratio, 0.83; 95% credible interval, 0.67 to 1.03; posterior probability of futility [defined as an odds ratio <1.2], 99.9%). The percentage of patients who survived to hospital discharge was similar in the two groups (62.7% and 64.5%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 0.84; 95% credible interval, 0.64 to 1.11). Major bleeding occurred in 3.8% of the patients assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and in 2.3% of those assigned to usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients with Covid-19, an initial strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin did not result in a greater probability of survival to hospital discharge or a greater number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support than did usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. (REMAP-CAP, ACTIV-4a, and ATTACC ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02735707, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, and NCT04372589.).

Therapeutic Anticoagulation with Heparin in Noncritically Ill Patients with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Thrombosis and inflammation may contribute to the risk of death and complications among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). We hypothesized that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation may improve outcomes in noncritically ill patients who are hospitalized with Covid-19. METHODS: In this open-label, adaptive, multiplatform, controlled trial, we randomly assigned patients who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and who were not critically ill (which was defined as an absence of critical care-level organ support at enrollment) to receive pragmatically defined regimens of either therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin or usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 among patients who survived to hospital discharge. This outcome was evaluated with the use of a Bayesian statistical model for all patients and according to the baseline d-dimer level. RESULTS: The trial was stopped when prespecified criteria for the superiority of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation were met. Among 2219 patients in the final analysis, the probability that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation increased organ support-free days as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis was 98.6% (adjusted odds ratio, 1.27; 95% credible interval, 1.03 to 1.58). The adjusted absolute between-group difference in survival until hospital discharge without organ support favoring therapeutic-dose anticoagulation was 4.0 percentage points (95% credible interval, 0.5 to 7.2). The final probability of the superiority of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation over usual-care thromboprophylaxis was 97.3% in the high d-dimer cohort, 92.9% in the low d-dimer cohort, and 97.3% in the unknown d-dimer cohort. Major bleeding occurred in 1.9% of the patients receiving therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and in 0.9% of those receiving thromboprophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: In noncritically ill patients with Covid-19, an initial strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin increased the probability of survival to hospital discharge with reduced use of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis. (ATTACC, ACTIV-4a, and REMAP-CAP ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT04372589, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, and NCT02735707.).

Anticoagulation in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) includes a thromboinflammatory syndrome that may manifest with microvascular and macrovascular thrombosis. Patients with COVID-19 have a higher incidence of venous thromboembolism than other hospitalized patients. Three randomized control trials suggesting benefit of therapeutic heparin in hospitalized noncritically ill patients with COVID-19 have led to conditional guideline recommendations for this treatment. By contrast, prophylactic-dose heparin is recommended for critically ill patients. Unprecedented collaboration and rapidly funded research have improved care of hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Race, rituximab, and relapse in TTP.

Immune-mediated thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (iTTP) is characterized by recurring episodes of thrombotic microangiopathy, causing ischemic organ impairment. Black patients are overrepresented in iTTP cohorts in the United States, but racial disparities in iTTP outcome and response to therapy have not been studied. Using the United States Thrombotic Microangiopathies Consortium iTTP Registry, we evaluated the impact of race on mortality and relapse-free survival (RFS) in confirmed iTTP in the United States from 1995 to 2020. We separately examined the impact of rituximab therapy and presentation with newly diagnosed (de novo) or relapsed iTTP on RFS by race. A total of 645 participants with 1308 iTTP episodes were available for analysis. Acute iTTP mortality did not differ by race. When all episodes of iTTP were included, Black race was associated with shorter RFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.60; 95% CI, 1.16-2.21); the addition of rituximab to corticosteroids improved RFS in White (HR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.18-0.73) but not Black patients (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.71-1.31). In de novo iTTP, rituximab delayed relapse, but Black patients had shorter RFS than White patients, regardless of treatment. In relapsed iTTP, rituximab significantly improved RFS in White but not Black patients. Race affects overall relapse risk and response to rituximab in iTTP. Black patients may require closer monitoring, earlier retreatment, and alternative immunosuppression after rituximab treatment. How race, racism, and social determinants of health contribute to the disparity in relapse risk in iTTP deserves further study.

Executive Summary: The Pediatric Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Anticoagulation CollaborativE (PEACE) Consensus Conference.

OBJECTIVES: To present recommendations and consensus statements with supporting literature for the clinical management of neonates and children supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) from the Pediatric ECMO Anticoagulation CollaborativE (PEACE) consensus conference. DATA SOURCES: Systematic review was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) databases from January 1988 to May 2021, followed by serial meetings of international, interprofessional experts in the management ECMO for critically ill children. STUDY SELECTION: The management of ECMO anticoagulation for critically ill children. DATA EXTRACTION: Within each of eight subgroup, two authors reviewed all citations independently, with a third independent reviewer resolving any conflicts. DATA SYNTHESIS: A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases, from January 1988 to May 2021. Each panel developed evidence-based and, when evidence was insufficient, expert-based statements for the clinical management of anticoagulation for children supported with ECMO. These statements were reviewed and ratified by 48 PEACE experts. Consensus was obtained using the Research and Development/UCLA Appropriateness Method. Results were summarized using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method. We developed 23 recommendations, 52 expert consensus statements, and 16 good practice statements covering the management of ECMO anticoagulation in three broad categories: general care and monitoring; perioperative care; and nonprocedural bleeding or thrombosis. Gaps in knowledge and research priorities were identified, along with three research focused good practice statements. CONCLUSIONS: The 91 statements focused on clinical care will form the basis for standardization and future clinical trials.

The Recipient Epidemiology and Donor Evaluation Study-IV-Pediatric (REDS-IV-P): A research program striving to improve blood donor safety and optimize transfusion outcomes across the lifespan.

BACKGROUND: The Recipient Epidemiology and Donor Evaluation Study-IV-Pediatric (REDS-IV-P) is a new iteration of prior National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) REDS programs that focus on improving transfusion recipient outcomes across the lifespan as well as the safety and availability of the blood supply. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The US program includes blood centers and hospitals (22 including 6 free-standing Children's hospitals) in four geographic regions. The Brazilian program has 5 participating hemocenters. A Center for Transfusion Laboratory Studies (CTLS) and a Data Coordinating Center (DCC) support synergistic studies and activities over the 7-year REDS-IV-P program. RESULTS: The US is building a centralized, vein-to-vein (V2V) database, linking information collected from blood donors, their donations, the resulting manufactured components, and data extracts from hospital electronic medical records of transfused and non-transfused patients. Simultaneously, the Brazilian program is building a donor, donation, and component database. The databases will serve as the backbone for retrospective and prospective observational studies in transfusion epidemiology, transfusion recipient outcomes, blood component quality, and emerging blood safety issues. Special focus will be on preterm infants, patients with sickle cell disease, thalassemia or cancer, and the effect of donor biologic variability and component manufacturing on recipient outcomes. A rapid response capability to emerging safety threats has resulted in timely studies related to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Corona Virus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). CONCLUSIONS: The REDS-IV-P program endeavors to improve donor-recipient-linked research with a focus on children and special populations while also maintaining the flexibility to address emerging blood safety issues.

Heparin Monitoring with an Anti-Xa Protocol Compared to Activated Clotting Time in Patients on Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support.

BACKGROUND: Temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) devices are used for patients with severe cardiac or respiratory failure; however, these patients are at high risk for clotting and bleeding. The best method to monitor heparin in these patients has not been established. OBJECTIVE: To determine the risks for bleeding and clotting while monitoring heparin with either anti-Xa or activated clotting time (ACT) in tMCS patients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on tMCS patients who received heparin adjusted according to an anti-Xa or ACT protocol. The primary outcome was incidence of major bleeding. Pertinent secondary outcomes were individual components of the primary outcome, clotting events, and time to therapeutic range. RESULTS: There were 103 patients included in the study: 53 in the ACT group and 50 in the anti-Xa group. Overall, there were 30 (56.6%) patients with major bleeding in the ACT group, compared with 16 (32%) patients in the anti-Xa group (P = 0.017). An anti-Xa-based protocol was associated with a decreased hazard of major bleeding (hazard ratio = 0.388 [0.215-0.701]; P = 0.002) in the univariate analysis. In the multivariable analysis, an anti-Xa protocol remained associated with a significantly lower hazard of bleeding. Findings were similar when broken down into more discrete subgroups of the entire cohort, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation life support (ECMO), and non-ECMO groups. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Anti-Xa monitoring was associated with a lower hazard of bleeding during tMCS compared to an ACT-based protocol. Further studies should evaluate if anti-Xa monitoring should be preferentially used in tMCS.

Effect of P2Y12 Inhibitors on Survival Free of Organ Support Among Non-Critically Ill Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Platelets represent a potential therapeutic target for improved clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective: To evaluate the benefits and risks of adding a P2Y12 inhibitor to anticoagulant therapy among non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An open-label, bayesian, adaptive randomized clinical trial including 562 non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 was conducted between February 2021 and June 2021 at 60 hospitals in Brazil, Italy, Spain, and the US. The date of final 90-day follow-up was September 15, 2021. Interventions: Patients were randomized to a therapeutic dose of heparin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor (n = 293) or a therapeutic dose of heparin only (usual care) (n = 269) in a 1:1 ratio for 14 days or until hospital discharge, whichever was sooner. Ticagrelor was the preferred P2Y12 inhibitor. Main Outcomes and Measures: The composite primary outcome was organ support-free days evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and, for those who survived to hospital discharge, the number of days free of respiratory or cardiovascular organ support up to day 21 of the index hospitalization (range, -1 to 21 days; higher scores indicate less organ support and better outcomes). The primary safety outcome was major bleeding by 28 days as defined by the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis. Results: Enrollment of non-critically ill patients was discontinued when the prespecified criterion for futility was met. All 562 patients who were randomized (mean age, 52.7 [SD, 13.5] years; 41.5% women) completed the trial and 87% received a therapeutic dose of heparin by the end of study day 1. In the P2Y12 inhibitor group, ticagrelor was used in 63% of patients and clopidogrel in 37%. The median number of organ support-free days was 21 days (IQR, 20-21 days) among patients in the P2Y12 inhibitor group and was 21 days (IQR, 21-21 days) in the usual care group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.83 [95% credible interval, 0.55-1.25]; posterior probability of futility [defined as an odds ratio <1.2], 96%). Major bleeding occurred in 6 patients (2.0%) in the P2Y12 inhibitor group and in 2 patients (0.7%) in the usual care group (adjusted odds ratio, 3.31 [95% CI, 0.64-17.2]; P = .15). Conclusions and Relevance: Among non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19, the use of a P2Y12 inhibitor in addition to a therapeutic dose of heparin, compared with a therapeutic dose of heparin only, did not result in an increased odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days during hospitalization. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04505774.

Red blood cell transfusion does not increase risk of venous or arterial thrombosis during hospitalization.

Previous observational studies suggest associations between red blood cell (RBC) transfusion and risk for arterial or venous thrombosis. We determined the association between thrombosis and RBC transfusion in hospitalized patients using the Recipient Database from the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) Recipient Epidemiology and Donor Evaluation Study-III. A thrombotic event was a hospitalization with an arterial or venous thrombosis ICD-9 code and administration of a therapeutic anticoagulant or antiplatelet agent. Patients with history of thrombosis or a thrombosis within 24 hours of admission were excluded. A proportional hazards regression model with time-dependent covariates was calculated. Estimates were adjusted for age, sex, hospital, smoking, medical comorbidities, and surgical procedures. Of 657 412 inpatient admissions, 67 176 (10.2%) received at least one RBC transfusion. Two percent (12927) of patients experienced a thrombosis. Of these, 2587 developed thrombosis after RBC transfusion. In unadjusted analyses, RBC transfusion was associated with an increased thrombosis risk [HR = 1.3 (95% CI 1.23-1.36)]. After adjustment for surgical procedures, age, sex, hospital, and comorbidities, no association between RBC transfusion on risk of venous and arterial thrombosis was found [HR 1.0 (95% CI: 0.96-1.05)]. Thus, RBC transfusion does not appear to be an important risk factor for thrombosis in most hospitalized patients.

Blocking inhibition of prothrombinase by tissue factor pathway inhibitor alpha: a procoagulant property of heparins.

Unfractionated heparin (UFH) has procoagulant activity in antithrombin/heparin cofactor II (HCII)-depleted plasma. UFH prevents tissue factor pathway inhibitor alpha (TFPIα) from inhibiting the procoagulant enzyme complex, prothrombinase, providing a possible mechanism for its procoagulant activity. The procoagulant potential of UFH and various low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) were characterized for TFPIα dependence, using thrombin generation assays performed with antithrombin/HCII-depleted plasma. UFH, the LMWHs enoxaparin and dalteparin, and the low anticoagulant LMWH 2-O, 3-O desulphated heparin (ODSH) all promoted thrombin generation, but fondaparinux did not, and this activity was blocked by a TFPIα antibody. UFH, enoxaparin, and dalteparin were anticoagulant in reactions containing 1-2% normal plasma. In prothrombinase activity assays, UFH, enoxaparin, dalteparin and ODSH blocked prothrombinase inhibition by TFPIα, while again fondaparinux did not. In both the plasma and purified assays, LMWHs displayed greater procoagulant potential than UFH, even when normalized to saccharide concentration. These biochemical data reveal that UFH and LMWHs, but not fondaparinux, block prothrombinase inhibition by TFPIα, thereby producing their paradoxical procoagulant activity observed in the absence of antithrombin/HCII. The findings may help to understand the complex pathophysiology and treatment of patients that are simultaneously bleeding and clotting, such as those with disseminated intravascular coagulation.

Red cell storage age policy for patients with sickle cell disease: A survey of transfusion service directors in the United States.

In patients with sickle cell disease (SCD), the effects of the red cell storage lesion are not well defined. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of transfusion services that limit red cell units by storage age for patients with SCD. We developed a 22 question survey of transfusion service director opinions and their corresponding blood bank policies. Target subjects were systematically identified on the AABB website. Responses were recorded in SurveyMonkey and summarized using standard statistical techniques. Ninety transfusion service directors responded to the survey. Response rate was 22%. Only 23% of respondents had storage age policies in place for patients with SCD, even though 36% of respondents consider older units to be potentially harmful in this patient population. Of those with a policy, a less-than 15 day storage age requirement was most often used (75%), but practices varied, and most respondents (65%) agreed that evidence-based guidelines regarding storage age are needed for patients with SCD. Policies, practices and opinions about the risks of older units for patients with SCD vary. As patients with SCD may have unique susceptibilities to features of the red cell storage lesion, prospective studies in this population are needed to determine best practice.

Management of anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy in patients with left ventricular assist devices.

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have increased the survival of patients with advanced heart failure fourfold. Despite these advances, significant bleeding and thrombotic complications occur. Hemorrhage requiring surgery has been reported in up to 30% of adults and 50% of children after LVAD placement. LVAD thrombosis and embolic stroke lead to significant long-term morbidity. Adults are treated with antithrombotic therapy to prevent thrombotic complications, but the amount and intensity of treatment differs between institutions. The goal international normalized ratio for warfarin therapy varies from 1.5 to 3.0. Some physicians manage adult LVAD patients without antiplatelet medication, whereas other adults are treated with aspirin as a single agent or combined with dipyridamole. In contrast, physicians typically manage children with LVADs using the Edmonton Anticoagulation and Platelet Inhibition Protocol, a detailed algorithm for anticoagulation and antiplatelet treatment modified based on thromboelastography results. LVAD implantation causes consumption of coagulation proteins, activation of fibrinolysis, and loss of high molecular weight von Willebrand protein multimers. How these changes in the coagulation system influence the risk of hemorrhage and initiation of thrombosis is unknown. Prospective, controlled studies are needed to determine the antithrombotic regimen that most effectively balances bleeding and thrombosis in LVAD patients.

High-risk subgroups were not identified to benefit from thromboprophylaxis after hospitalization for COVID-19.

Background: The Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines-4c (ACTIV-4c) trial investigated prophylactic apixaban for 30 days following hospitalization for COVID-19. The overall incidence of early postdischarge death or thromboembolism was low, and the trial was closed early. Objectives: To identify a high-risk patient population who might benefit from postdischarge thromboprophylaxis through subgroup analyses stratified by age, race/ethnicity, obesity, D-dimer elevation, World Health Organization score, and modified International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism score on 30-day composite outcome of all-cause death, arterial thromboembolism (ATE), and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Methods: Cumulative incidences of all-cause death, ATE, and VTE within 30 days were described for each subgroup. Time to death, ATE, or VTE by 30 days was analyzed using Cox proportional hazard models with interaction testing for each subgroup. Results: Among 1217 patients randomized to apixaban or placebo group, 32% were >60 years old. Modified International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism score was ≥4 in 2% and 2 or 3 with an elevated D-dimer in an additional 9% of participants. The overall incidence of the primary endpoint was 2.13% in the apixaban group and 2.31% in the placebo group. At day 30, similar rates of the primary endpoint occurred within subgroups, except for participants aged >60 years. No benefit of thromboprophylaxis was seen in any subgroup. Conclusion: The combined incidence of 30-day death, ATE, and VTE was low in patients who survived COVID-19 hospitalization, except in patients over age 60 years. Due to the limited number of events, the findings remain inconclusive; nonetheless, the study did not identify a high-risk subgroup that would derive benefits from extended thromboprophylaxis.

Antithrombotic Therapy for VTE Disease: Compendium and Review of CHEST Guidelines 2012-2021.

The American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST) Antithrombotic Therapy for Venous Thromboembolism Disease evidence-based guidelines are now updated in a more frequent, focused manner. Guidance statements from the most recent full guidelines and two subsequent updates have not been gathered into a single source. An international panel of experts with experience in prior antithrombotic therapy guideline development reviewed the 2012 CHEST antithrombotic therapy guidelines and its two subsequent updates. All guideline statements and their associated patient, intervention, comparator, and outcome questions were assembled. A modified Delphi process was used to select statements considered relevant to current clinical care. The panel further endorsed minor phrasing changes to match the standard language for guidance statements using the modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (ie, GRADE) format endorsed by the CHEST Guidelines Oversight Committee. The panel appended comments after statements deemed as relevant, including suggesting that statements be updated in future guidelines because of interval evidence. We include 58 guidance statements from prior versions of the antithrombotic therapy guidelines, with updated phrasing as needed to adhere to contemporary nomenclature. Statements were classified as strong or weak recommendations based on high-certainty, moderate-certainty, and low-certainty evidence using GRADE methodology. The panel suggested that five statements are no longer relevant to current practice. As CHEST continues to update guidance statements relevant to antithrombotic therapy for VTE disease, this article serves as a unified collection of currenrtly relevant statements from the preceding three guidelines. Suggestions have been made to update specific statements in future publications.

Effect of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors on survival free of organ support in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (ACTIV-4a): a pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, platform trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients hospitalised for COVID-19 are at risk for multiorgan failure and death. Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors provide cardiovascular and kidney protection in patients with cardiometabolic conditions and could provide organ protection during COVID-19. We aimed to investigate whether SGLT2 inhibitors can reduce the need for organ support in patients hospitalised for COVID-19. METHODS: This pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, platform trial was conducted across 63 sites in the USA, Spain, Brazil, Italy, and Mexico. Patients aged at least 18 years hospitalised for COVID-19 (moderate or severe illness) were randomly assigned (1:1), via an interactive voice system or web-response system, to receive locally available SGLT2 inhibitor (administered orally, once daily) plus standard-of-care or standard-of-care for 30 days. The primary outcome was organ support-free days evaluated through 21 days, assessed using intention-to-treat approach. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04505774. FINDINGS: The first patient was randomly assigned to the SGLT2 inhibitor domain on Dec 3, 2021. On March 31, 2023, at the recommendation of the data and safety monitoring board, enrolment in the SGLT2 inhibitor domain for both moderately and severely ill hospitalised patients was stopped prematurely for futility due to a low likelihood of finding a treatment benefit. The final randomised population consisted of 575 patients (mean age 72 years [SD 13], 242 (42%) female and 154 (27%) Hispanic; 504 in the moderate illness group and 71 in the severe illness group). 573 patients had a known 21-day outcome; 215 (75%) of 285 patients in the SGLT2 inhibitor plus standard-of-care group did not require respiratory or cardiovascular organ support versus 231 (80%) of 288 patients in the standard-of-care group. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) for an SGLT2 inhibitor effect on organ support-free days was 0·74 (95% Credible Interval [CrI] 0·48-1·13; where OR higher than 1 indicated treatment benefit, yielding a posterior probability of futility P(OR <1·2) of 99% and a posterior probability of inferiority P(OR<1·0) of 91%). There were 37 deaths (13%) in the SGLT2 inhibitor plus standard-of-care group and 42 deaths (15%) in the standard-of-care group at 90 days (hazard ratio 0·91 [95% CrI 0·58-1·43], probability of hazard ratio <1 of 66%). No safety concerns were observed with SGLT2 inhibitors, including no cases of ketoacidosis. INTERPRETATION: SGLT2 inhibitors did not significantly increase days free of organ support or reduce mortality in patients hospitalised with COVID-19. SGLT2 inhibitors were well tolerated with no observed safety concerns. Overall, these findings do not support the use of SGLT2 inhibitors as standard care in patients hospitalised with COVID-19. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health.

Comparison of Venous Thromboembolism Outcomes after COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccinations.

Background Published data on the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are scarce and inconclusive, leading to an unmet need for further studies. Methods A retrospective, multicentered study of adult patients vaccinated for one of the three approved COVID-19 vaccines in the United States of America and a pre-COVID-19 cohort of patients vaccinated for influenza at two institutions: Mayo Clinic Enterprise sites and the Medical College of Wisconsin, looking at rate of VTE over 90 days. VTE was identified by applying validated natural language processing algorithms to relevant imaging studies. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to evaluate rate of VTE and Cox proportional hazard models for incident VTE after vaccinations. Sensitivity analyses were performed for age, sex, outpatient versus inpatient status, and type of COVID-19 vaccine. Results A total of 911,381 study subjects received COVID-19 vaccine (mean age: 56.8 [standard deviation, SD: 18.3] years, 55.3% females) and 442,612 received influenza vaccine (mean age: 56.5 [SD: 18.3] years, 58.7% females). VTE occurred within 90 days in 1,498 (0.11%) of the total 1,353,993 vaccinations: 882 (0.10%) in the COVID-19 and 616 (0.14%) in the influenza vaccination cohort. After adjusting for confounding variables, there was no difference in VTE event rate after COVID-19 vaccination compared with influenza vaccination (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.95 [95% confidence interval: 0.85-1.05]). No significant difference in VTE rates was observed between the two cohorts on sensitivity analyses. Conclusion In this large cohort of COVID-19-vaccinated patients, risk of VTE at 90 days was low and no different than a pre-COVID-19 cohort of influenza-vaccinated patients.

Primary Care Clinicians' Prescribing Patterns of Reduced-Dose Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Extended-Phase Venous Thromboembolism Treatment.

The direct anticoagulants (DOACs), apixaban and rivaroxaban, are used for extended-phase treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and have labeling for dose reduction for this indication. The objective of this study was to better understand primary care clinician prescribing patterns of apixaban and rivaroxaban for extended-phase anticoagulation. We conducted a 21-question survey targeting members of the American College of Physicians and United States Veterans Administration anticoagulation management services. Survey questions covered prescribing behaviors for dose reduction of apixaban and rivaroxaban for extended VTE treatment, as well as questions related to the respondent's practice setting. We used logistic regression to assess associations between demographics and prescribing behaviors. We used k-means clustering to identify distinct groups of prescribing patterns. Among 227 respondents, most were attending physicians (60%) and one-third (34%) practiced in internal medicine or primary care. Most (59%) indicated they dose-reduced DOACs. Hospitalists (no outpatient care) were least likely to dose-reduce (OR 0.09 [95% CI 0.03-0.22]), as well as early-career clinicians (0.53 [0.30-0.91]). Pharmacists and clinicians who treat over 500 VTE patients annually were most likely to dose reduce (6.4 [2.9-16.3]), (2.9 [1.5-6.0]), respectively. We identified five clusters of dosing behaviors and characterized clinician makeup. Clusters were primarily differentiated by frequency of dose reduction, DOAC preference, and temporary re-escalation of doses. We identified clinician characteristics that are associated with dose-reduction prescribing behaviors; these analyses provide insight into where targeted interventions, such as protocolization and education, would be most beneficial.

Antithrombotic management of patients with deep vein thrombosis and venous stents: an international registry.

BACKGROUND: In patients with acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT) treated with catheter-based thrombolysis and venous stenting, poststenting anticoagulant management is uncertain. OBJECTIVES: To determine the type and duration of antithrombotic therapy used in patients who have received venous stents for treatment of acute lower extremity DVT. METHODS: We created an international registry of patients with leg DVT from 2005 to 2019 who received venous stents as part of their acute management. We collected data on baseline clinical characteristics and pre-venous and post-venous stent antithrombotic therapy. RESULTS: We studied 173 patients with venous stents: 101 (58%) were aged ≤50 years, 105 (61%) were female, and 128 (74%) had risk factors for thrombotic disease. DVT was iliofemoral in 150 (87%) patients, and catheter-based treatment was given within 7 days of diagnosis in 92 (53%) patients. After venous stenting, 109 (63%) patients received anticoagulant-only therapy with a direct oral anticoagulant (29%), warfarin (22%), or low-molecular-weight heparin (10%), and 59 (34%) received anticoagulant-antiplatelet therapy. In patients taking anticoagulant-only therapy, 29% received indefinite treatment; in patients on anticoagulant-antiplatelet therapy, 19% received indefinite treatment. Factors associated with combined anticoagulant-antiplatelet therapy vs anticoagulant-only therapy were use of thrombolytic, thrombectomy, and aspiration interventions (odds ratio [OR], 5.11; 95% CI, 1.45-18.05); use of balloon angioplasty (OR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.20-5.76); and immediate stent restenosis (OR, 7.2; 95% CI, 1.45-5.89). CONCLUSION: Anticoagulant therapy without concomitant antiplatelet therapy appears to be the most common antithrombotic strategy in patients with DVT and venous stenting. More research is needed to determine outcomes of venous stenting in relation to antithrombotic therapy.