Heart valve disease in primary antiphospholipid syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS)-associated heart valve disease (HVD) is well described. Nonetheless, limited data exist on clinical parameters associated with the course of primary APS (pAPS) patients with HVD. The goal of this study was to assess clinical features and related outcomes in patients with APS associated HVD. METHODS: In this multicentre retrospective study, we identified 33 pAPS patients with HVD (pAPS-HVD group) and compared their clinical course with 128 pAPS patients with normal heart valves on echocardiography (pAPS-control group). RESULTS: pAPS-HVD patients had more cerebrovascular events 56.3% vs 25% (p= 0.005) and livedo reticularis 24.2% vs 7.8% (p= 0.013) than pAPS-controls. Furthermore, catastrophic-APS (CAPS) (12.1% vs 2.4%, p= 0.034), recurrent thrombosis (33.3% vs 4.7%, p< 0.001), and need for advanced therapy (i.e. IVIG, plasmapheresis or rituximab) were more frequent in pAPS-HVD patients. Anti-B2GPI-IgG. [84.8% vs 63.2% (p= 0.034)], anti-cardiolipin IgG [90.9% vs. 64.8% (p= 0.005)] and triple positive aPL [75.8% vs 56.5% (p= 0.047)] were commoner in pAPS-HVD patients vs pAPS-controls. Ten of the 33 patients with pAPS-HVD underwent valve surgery which was associated with male gender, smoking, arterial limb ischaemia and livedo reticularis. CONCLUSION: pAPS-HVD patients had a more severe APS clinical course including CAPS and thrombotic events as well as with specific serology namely IgG isotype aPL antibodies and triple positivity. Our data suggest that pAPS-HVD represents a high-risk subgroup of APS patients.

Heart Valve Surgery in Antiphospholipid Syndrome Patients-Morbidity and Mortality.

OBJECTIVES: To assess valve surgery outcomes in antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). METHODS: A retrospective study assessing complications and mortality rate and possible factors associated with adverse outcomes of APS patients undergoing valve surgery in two tertiary medical centers. RESULTS: Twenty-six APS patients (median age at surgery 47.5 years) who underwent valve surgery were detected, of whom 11 (42.3%) had secondary APS. The mitral valve was most commonly involved (n = 15, 57.7%). A valve replacement was performed in 24 operations (92.3%), 16 of which (66.7%) were mechanical valves. Fourteen (53.8%) patients sustained severe complications, and four of them died. The presence of mitral regurgitation (MR) was associated with severe complications and mortality (odds ratio (95% confidence interval) 12.5 (1.85-84.442), p = 0.008, for complications. All deceased patients had MR (p = 0.033). The presence of Libman-Sacks endocarditis (LSE) (7.333 (1.272-42.294), p = 0.045), low C3 (6.667 (1.047-42.431), p = 0.05) and higher perioperative prednisone doses (15 ± 21.89 vs. 1.36 ± 3.23 mg/day, p = 0.046) were also associated with complications. A lower glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was associated with mortality (30.75 ± 19.47 vs. 70.68 ± 34.44 mL/min, p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Significant morbidity and mortality were observed among APS patients undergoing valve surgery. MR was associated with mortality and complications. LSE, low complement and higher doses of corticosteroids were associated with complications, while a low GFR was associated with mortality.

The third dose of BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine is efficacious and safe for systemic lupus erythematosus patients receiving belimumab.

INTRODUCTION: Over 95% of healthy subjects develop anti-COVID IgG antibodies after receiving two doses of BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine. In comparison, 20%-30% of SLE patients do not seroconvert following 1-2 doses of COVID vaccines, potentially due to immunosuppression. The aim of this study was to assess immunogenicity and safety of BNT vaccine in SLE patients treated with Belimumab and especially the yield of a booster third dose in this population. METHODS: SLE patients treated with Belimumab in the Sheba Medical Center, Israel, were included in this study. All were recommended to receive the BNT vaccine according to national guidelines; and were advised to perform serologic tests after receiving second and third doses. Clinical data included demographics, SLE treatments, adverse effects to vaccines and SLEDAI scores performed 2 weeks before vaccinations and 6-12 weeks after receiving the second or third dose of the vaccine. RESULTS: Our cohort included 17 patients, 14 (82.35%) females, median age 50 ± 14.2 years, and disease duration 12 ± 10.57 years. Belimumab therapy was given for a mean of 6 ± 2.5 years. Of them, 15/17 patients received 3-doses of BNT vaccine. Serologic assessment was performed for 10 patients, 7/10(70%) became seropositive following the second dose, while 2/3 patients seroconverted only after the third dose. Vaccinations were well tolerated with minimal adverse events and no disease flares. SLEDAI scores before and after vaccinations were 4 ± 3.8 and 4 ± 2.7 (p = 0.69), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Immunization with the BNT vaccine is efficacious and safe for SLE patients treated with Belimumab. Following the third dose of vaccine, immunogenicity among SLE patients mounted to 90%, thereby approximating the general healthy population. No SLE disease flares and/or significant adverse events were noted in our cohort. Assessment of seroconversion and consideration of subsequent boosters of COVID-vaccine should be considered in this group of patients.

Late Hypersensitivity Reactions to the BNT162b2 SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Are Linked to Delayed Skin Sensitization and Prior Exposure to Hyaluronic Acid.

Background: Late hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to the BNT162b2-vaccine have raised concerns regarding its safety, particularly as further immunizations are required. The yield of skin testing with the BNT162b2v is unclear, as well as the risk factors and outcomes of re-immunization after late HSRs. Objective: We studied a series of patients with late HSRs to BNT162b2v. Methods: Patients referred to the Sheba medical center from December 2020 to May 2021 with late HSRs to the first dose of BNT162b2 were included. HSRs were defined as late if they appeared or lasted >24 h after inoculation. We compared late HSRs to immediate HSRs that appeared within minutes−2 h after vaccination. Intradermal testing with PEG-containing medication and BNT162b2v was performed. Results: A total of 17 patients that presented with late HSRs (study group) were compared to 34 patients with immediate HSRs (control group). Delayed sensitivity to intradermal testing of the BNT162b2v was observed in 9/17 (53%) of the study group compared to 4/34 (12%) in the control group (p = 0.01). Former exposure to a dermal filler with hyaluronic acid was documented among 7/17 (41%) vs. 2/34 (6%) in the study and control groups, respectively, (p = 0.0038). All patients who presented with late HSRs were advised to receive subsequent doses of the BNT162b2v vaccine with or without concomitant medication, and all were re-immunized successfully. Conclusions: Late HSRs to BNT162b2v were linked with positive responses to intradermal testing with the vaccine and prior exposure to derma fillers with hyaluronic acid. This may elude to an immune mechanism triggered by former exposures. Although further studies are needed, late HSRs to the BNT162b2-vaccine did not prevent patients from receiving subsequent doses of the vaccines.

Assessment of Immediate Allergic Reactions After Immunization With the Pfizer BNT162b2 Vaccine Using Intradermal Skin Testing With the COVID-19 Vaccines.

BACKGROUND: Allergic reactions to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines have raised concerns, particularly as repeated doses are required. Skin tests with the vaccines excipient were found to be of low value, whereas the utility of skin tests with the whole vaccine is yet to be determined. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a panel of skin tests and the outcomes of subsequent doses of immunization among subjects who suffered an immediate allergic reaction to the BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine. METHODS: Between March and December 2021, patients who experienced symptoms consistent with immediate allergic reactions to the BNT162b2 vaccine and were referred to the Sheba Medical Center underwent skin testing with polyethylene glyol (PEG)-containing medicines, Pfizer-BNT162b2, and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine (AZD1222). Further immunization was performed accordingly and under medical observation. RESULTS: A total of 51 patients underwent skin testing for suspected allergy to the COVID vaccines, of which 38 of 51 (74.5%) were nonreactive, 7 of 51(13.7%) had no skin sensitization but suffered a clinical reaction during skin testing (mainly cough), and 6 of 51 (11.7%) exhibited immediate skin sensitization. Both skin sensitization and cough during testing were related to a higher use of adrenaline following immunization (P = .08 and P = .024, respectively). Further immunization with the BNT162b2 vaccine was recommended unless sensitization or severe reaction to previous immunization was evident. The latter were referred to be tested/receive the alternative AZD1222 vaccine. Ten patients underwent skin testing with AZD1222: 2 of 10 (20%) demonstrated skin sensitization to both vaccines; thus, 8 of 10 were immunized with the AZD1222, of which 2 of 8 (25%) had allergic reactions. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines are rare but can be severe and reoccur. Intradermal testing with the whole vaccine may discriminate sensitized subjects, detect cross-sensitization between vaccines, and enable estimation of patients at higher risk.

Long Term Follow up of Patients With Primary Obstetric Antiphospholipid Syndrome.

Introduction: Primary obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome (OAPS) is defined by specific morbidities and/or losses of pregnancy in the presence of persistent antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). This variant of APS is usually treated during pregnancy and the post-partum period. Data on occurrence of thrombotic event during long term follow-up of OAPS patients is limited. Methods: A multi-centre retrospectively cohort of female patients with primary APS (pAPS) was assembled during 2004-2019. Patients were grouped according to disease presentation as pure OAPS or thrombotic APS (tAPS) for those presenting with thrombosis. Clinical and serological data were compared between groups. Results: Of 219 pAPS female patients 67 (30.6%) were diagnosed with OAPS and 152 (69.4%) with tAPS. During >10 years of follow-up 24/67 (35.8%) OAPS and 71/152 (50%) tAPS suffered a new thrombotic event (p = 0.06), while obstetric morbidity was more likely in the OAPS group (31.3 vs. 10.5%, p < 0.001) respectively. Among patients with OAPS at presentation heart valve disease and the presence of ANA were related to thrombosis following diagnosis (25 vs. 4.7%, p = 0.02; and 45.8 vs. 20.8%, p = 0.04 respectively). Conclusion: Thrombotic event following diagnosis were common among female patients with pAPS regardless of disease presentation. Heart valve disease and ANA positivity may be risk factors for thrombosis during follow-up of patients presenting with pure OAPS.

Patterns of Recurrent Thrombosis in Primary Antiphospholipid Syndrome-Multicenter, Real-Life Long-Term Follow-Up.

Background: Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is an acquired hypercoagulable condition associated with antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) presence. Data on re-thrombosis following APS-diagnosis are limited. Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of new thrombotic events among primary APS (pAPS) patients followed for up to 15 years in three medical centers in Israel. Results: Among 312 primary-APS patients, 143 (46%) had new thrombotic event classified to three patterns: (1) Arterial-associated with heart valve disease (OR 7.24, 95% C.I. 2.26-24.6), hypertension (OR 3, 95% C.I. 1.44-6.25), elevated anti-B2-GPI IgM (OR 1.04, 95% C.I. 0.996-1.08), arterial thrombosis at presentation (OR 1.74 95% C.I. 0.992-3.26), and older age (41 vs. 34 years, p < 0.001). (2) Venous-linked with venous thrombosis at presentation (OR 12.9, 95% C.I. 5.27-31.6, p < 0.001), heart valve disease (OR 9.81 95% C.I. 1.82-52.9, p = 0.018), aGAPSS (OR 1.15 95% C.I. 1.02-1.29), and younger age (31 vs. 36.5 years, p = 0.001); and (3) Combined pattern-associated with heart valve disease (OR 40.5 95% C.I. 7.7-212) and pulmonary embolism (OR 7.47 95% C.I. 1.96-28.5). A 4th variant "the Breakthrough pattern" defined by re-thrombosis despite prophylactic therapy was observed in 100/143 (70%) patients and linked with heart valve disease (OR 8. 95% C.I. 2.43-26.3), venous thrombosis at presentation (OR 2.61 95% C.I. 1.47-4.66), leg ulcers (OR 12.2, 95% C.I. 1.4-107), hypertension (OR 1.99, 95% C.I. 0.92-4.34), and higher aGAPSS (OR 1.08, 95% C.I. 0.99-1.18). Conclusion: In this real-life observation, re-thrombosis was common among pAPS patients including in those recommended to receive prophylactic therapy. Different patterns of recurrence were identified and linked with presenting symptoms, specific serological markers, APS manifestations, and comorbidities. Studies that will address interventions to prevent recurrences of APS-related events are needed.

Ethnicity and Antiphospholipid Syndrome in Israel.

OBJECTIVE: Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is an acquired coagulopathy associated with the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies. Whether ethnicity modulates APS clinical course is not known. The aim of our study was to assess the interplay of ethnicity and APS in Israel. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the ethnic distribution of APS patients from 3 medical centers in Israel compared to the general population. Ethnic groups were defined according to the Israeli Bureau of Statistics as Ashkenazi (European), former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), North African, Asian (West Asia, Greece, and Turkey), Israeli Arab individuals, and others. RESULTS: Our cohort included 382 patients. The prevalence of Ashkenazi and Asian ethnicities was more pronounced (33% versus 12.8% and 15.4% versus 7.7%, respectively; P < 0.001), while Israeli Arabs were less represented (5.2% versus 31.1%; P < 0.001) relative to their part in the general population. Arab patients were younger at presentation (mean ± SD 28 ± 10 years versus 34 ± 13 years; P < 0.001) and were more likely to present with venous thrombosis (50% versus 35%; P = 0.037) and to suffer from venous thrombotic recurrence (45% versus 16%; P < 0.001) compared to other ethnicities. Mortality was higher among patients of Asian ethnic origin (8.8% versus 1.1%; P = 0.005); intriguingly, this group experienced cardiovascular risk factors more often (i.e., dyslipidemia and hypertension). CONCLUSION: Ethnicity may affect the prevalence and/or natural course of APS, which is less prevalent and differs clinically in Israeli Arab patients, while mortality was linked with Asian ethnicity.

Prevalence of Allergic Reactions After Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccination Among Adults With High Allergy Risk.

Importance: Allergic reactions among some individuals who received the Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine discourage patients with allergic conditions from receiving this vaccine and physicians from recommending the vaccine. Objective: To describe the assessment and immunization of highly allergic individuals with the BNT162b2 vaccine. Design, Setting, and Participants: In a prospective cohort study from December 27, 2020, to February 22, 2021, 8102 patients with allergies who applied to the COVID 19 vaccine referral center at the Sheba Medical Center underwent risk assessment using an algorithm that included a detailed questionnaire. High-risk patients (n = 429) were considered "highly allergic" and were immunized under medical supervision. Exposures: Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine. Main Outcomes and Measures: Allergic and anaphylactic reactions after the first and second doses of BNT162b2 vaccine among highly allergic patients. Results: Of the 429 individuals who applied to the COVID-19 referral center and were defined as highly allergic, 304 (70.9%) were women and the mean (SD) age was 52 (16) years. This highly allergic group was referred to receive immunization under medical supervision. After the first dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine, 420 patients (97.9%) had no immediate allergic event, 6 (1.4%) developed minor allergic responses, and 3 (0.7%) had anaphylactic reactions. During the study period, 218 highly allergic patients (50.8%) received the second BNT162b2 vaccine dose, of which 214 (98.2%) had no allergic reactions and 4 patients (1.8%) had minor allergic reactions. Other immediate and late reactions were comparable with those seen in the general population, except for delayed itch and skin eruption, which were more common among allergic patients. Conclusions and Relevance: The rate of allergic reactions to BNT162b2 vaccine, is higher among patients with allergies, particularly among a subgroup with a history of high-risk allergies. This study suggests that most patients with a history of allergic diseases and, particularly, highly allergic patients can be safely immunized by using an algorithm that can be implemented in different medical facilities and includes a referral center, a risk assessment questionnaire, and a setting for immunization under medical supervision of highly allergic patients. Further studies are required to define more specific risk factors for allergic reactions to the BNT162b2 vaccine.