Management, control, and decision making in unexpected recurrent venous thromboembolism in COVID-19: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 was spread worldwide, as a pandemic, from December 2019. Venous thromboembolism events can inflict patients with coronavirus disease 2019 during the hospitalization or convalescent period. Therefore, monitoring of these patients, in terms of venous thromboembolism events signs and symptoms, and timely management of antithrombotic agents are of great importance. CASE REPORT: A 45-year-old Iranian man, who is the first author of this case report, was infected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and displayed the typical signs and symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019. Although reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction for coronavirus disease 2019, and specific immunoglobulin M and immunoglobulin G against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, were negative at first, chest computed tomography scan showed the characteristic pattern of lung involvement of a coronavirus disease 2019 infection including bilateral and multilobar ground-glass opacities. At that time, there were no signs or symptoms of deep-vein thrombosis or pulmonary thromboembolism, so these were not investigated. About 30 hours after hospital discharge, the patient presented back to the hospital with acute-onset chest pain. We instantly tested his blood for D-dimer, and sent him to take a Doppler sonography of his lower legs and a chest computed tomography angiography in search of pulmonary thromboembolism and deep-vein thrombosis. Although we could confirm pulmonary thromboembolism with computed tomography angiography in our patient, there were no signs or symptoms of venous thromboembolism in his lower legs, and color Doppler sonography of lower limbs was normal. So, the patient was treated with rivaroxaban as an antithrombotic agent. After some days, he was discharged in good condition. About 1 month later, he was referred to our hospital because of left lower limb edema. Although he was under antithrombotic therapy, color Doppler sonography of lower limbs revealed acute deep-vein thrombosis of the left leg. Hence, we decided to shift antithrombotic therapy from rivaroxaban to warfarin, as it is more potent than rivaroxaban in recurrent venous thromboembolism and when taking new oral anticoagulants. Unlike rivaroxaban, which needs no blood test to monitor its efficacy but has a warning for signs and symptoms of bleeding, warfarin therapy must be monitored carefully by regular blood tests for prothrombin time and international normalized ratio to maintain them in the therapeutic range. The patient was informed about the bleeding cautions, and required regular check of prothrombin time and international normalized ratio to maintain them in the proper and advised range of treatment (international normalized ratio therapeutic range 2-3). CONCLUSION: In the case of unexpected recurrent venous thromboembolism in coronavirus disease 2019, especially when patients are taking rivaroxaban or other new oral anticoagulants, such drugs should be substituted by warfarin, with routine follow-up, to maintain the value of prothrombin time and international normalized ratio within the therapeutic range.

Factor Xa cleaves SARS-CoV-2 spike protein to block viral entry and infection.

Serine proteases (SP), including furin, trypsin, and TMPRSS2 cleave the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein, enabling the virus to enter cells. Here, we show that factor (F) Xa, an SP involved in blood coagulation, is upregulated in COVID-19 patients. In contrast to other SPs, FXa exerts antiviral activity. Mechanistically, FXa cleaves S protein, preventing its binding to ACE2, and thus blocking viral entry and infection. However, FXa is less effective against variants carrying the D614G mutation common in all pandemic variants. The anticoagulant rivaroxaban, a direct FXa inhibitor, inhibits FXa-mediated S protein cleavage and facilitates viral entry, whereas the indirect FXa inhibitor fondaparinux does not. In the lethal SARS-CoV-2 K18-hACE2 model, FXa prolongs survival yet its combination with rivaroxaban but not fondaparinux abrogates that protection. These results identify both a previously unknown function for FXa and an associated antiviral host defense mechanism against SARS-CoV-2 and suggest caution in considering direct FXa inhibitors for preventing or treating thrombotic complications in COVID-19 patients.

[Angiology and hemostasis : what's new in 2022]. / Angiologie et hémostase : ce qui a changé en 2022.

In this article, we have selected four topics that particularly caught our attention during the year 2022, and which are related to anticoagulation, its bleeding complications, and hemophilia. Thus, we discuss the issue of the treatment with rivaroxaban of atrial fibrillation associated with rheumatic valvulopathy, which has been studied in a randomized trial, the intensity of thromboprophylaxis in COVID outpatients and inpatients, and the bleeding risk of anticoagulation in patients with cerebral tumors. Finally, recent data on gene therapy in severe hemophilia A, an upcoming treatment, are discussed.

Dans cet article, nous avons sélectionné 4 sujets qui ont particulièrement retenu notre attention durant l'année 2022, en lien avec l'anticoagulation, ses complications hémorragiques et l'hémophilie. Ainsi, nous abordons le traitement par rivaroxaban de la fibrillation atriale associée à une valvulopathie rhumatismale qui a fait l'objet d'une étude randomisée, l'intensité de la thromboprophylaxie chez les patients hospitalisés ou traités en ambulatoire avec un Covid dont les données se sont bien étoffées, le risque associé à l'anticoagulation chez les patients avec une néoplasie cérébrale et, finalement, la thérapie génique dans l'hémophilie A sévère qui devrait apparaître sur le marché très prochainement.

Novel treatment of recurrent orbital venolymphatic malformation with sirolimus and rivaroxaban.

Orbital venolymphatic malformations are rare vascular malformations that typically appear early in life and harbor acute and chronic threats to vision. Historically, there are four categories of management: observation, medication, sclerotherapy, and surgery. Currently, there is neither a gold standard for treatment nor randomized control trials comparing treatments.The authors present a 20-year-old male who presented with spontaneous hemorrhage of an orbital venolymphatic malformation occurring with increased frequency and involving more of the posterior orbit. Surgery and sclerotherapy were not feasible options due to the extensive intraorbital and intracranial involvement of the venolymphatic malformation. Systemic steroids treated symptoms but was not curative. To this end, a combination of sirolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, and rivaroxaban, a factor Xa inhibitor, were used to reduce the size of the lesion and minimize the risk of thromboembolic events. This treatment has successfully kept the patient's symptoms in remission for greater than 2 years.

Central Retinal Vein Occlusion After Discontinuation of Rivaroxaban Therapy in a Young Patient with COVID-19 Pulmonary Embolism: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND We present the report of the first case, to the best of our knowledge, of central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) that occurred 3 days after anticoagulation discontinuation in a patient with a history of pulmonary embolism in the course of COVID-19. CASE REPORT A previously healthy 38-year-old man was hospitalized in April 2021 with severe COVID-19 pneumonia, complicated by segmental and subsegmental pulmonary embolism. The patient was treated with a concurrent combination of remdesivir, dexamethasone, therapeutic enoxaparin, ceftriaxone, passive oxygen therapy, and convalescent plasma therapy, which led to pulmonary improvement. The treatment with therapeutic enoxaparin (80 mg/0.8 mL twice a day) was continued for 1 month after discharge, followed by 15 mg of rivaroxaban twice a day for 3 weeks and 20 mg of rivaroxaban once a day for 11 weeks. Within 3 days after rivaroxaban discontinuation, the patient experienced a decrease in visual acuity in his right eye, to the level of 5/25. Nonischemic CRVO with cystoid macular edema was diagnosed and an intravitreal injection of ranibizumab was performed. Common identifiable factors contributing to CRVO were excluded, and the treatment with prophylactic enoxaparin was initiated. Two weeks later, macular edema decreased significantly and visual acuity improved to 20/20. The treatment with enoxaparin was discontinued. CONCLUSIONS Rebound hypercoagulability after discontinuation of rivaroxaban therapy can manifest as CRVO in a young patient with a history of COVID-19 pulmonary embolism. It was successfully treated with an intravitreal injection of ranibizumab.

Colchicine and the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 (ACT): an open-label, factorial, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 disease is accompanied by a dysregulated immune response and hypercoagulability. The Anti-Coronavirus Therapies (ACT) inpatient trial aimed to evaluate anti-inflammatory therapy with colchicine and antithrombotic therapy with the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin for prevention of disease progression in patients hospitalised with COVID-19. METHODS: The ACT inpatient, open-label, 2 × 2 factorial, randomised, controlled trial was done at 62 clinical centres in 11 countries. Patients aged at least 18 years with symptomatic, laboratory confirmed COVID-19 who were within 72 h of hospitalisation or worsening clinically if already hospitalised were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive colchicine 1·2 mg followed by 0·6 mg 2 h later and then 0·6 mg twice daily for 28 days versus usual care; and in a second (1:1) randomisation, to the combination of rivaroxaban 2·5 mg twice daily plus aspirin 100 mg once daily for 28 days versus usual care. Investigators and patients were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome, assessed at 45 days in the intention-to-treat population, for the colchicine randomisation was the composite of the need for high-flow oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or death; and for the rivaroxaban plus aspirin randomisation was the composite of major thrombosis (myocardial infarction, stroke, acute limb ischaemia, or pulmonary embolism), the need for high-flow oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or death. The trial is registered at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, NCT04324463 and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Oct 2, 2020, and Feb 10, 2022, at 62 sites in 11 countries, 2749 patients were randomly assigned to colchicine or control and the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin or to the control. 2611 patients were included in the analysis of colchicine (n=1304) versus control (n=1307); 2119 patients were included in the analysis of rivaroxaban and aspirin (n=1063) versus control (n=1056). Follow-up was more than 98% complete. Overall, 368 (28·2%) of 1304 patients allocated to colchicine and 356 (27·2%) of 1307 allocated to control had a primary outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 1·04, 95% CI 0·90-1·21, p=0·58); and 281 (26·4%) of 1063 patients allocated to the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin and 300 (28·4%) of 1056 allocated to control had a primary outcome (HR 0·92, 95% CI 0·78-1·09, p=0·32). Results were consistent in subgroups defined by vaccination status, disease severity at baseline, and timing of randomisation in relation to onset of symptoms. There was no increase in the number of patients who had at least one serious adverse event for colchicine versus control groups (87 [6·7%] of 1304 vs 90 [6·9%] of 1307) or with rivaroxaban and aspirin versus control groups (85 [8·0%] vs 91 [8·6%]). Among patients assigned to colchicine, 8 (0·61%) had adverse events that led to discontinuation of study drug, mostly gastrointestinal in nature. 17 (1·6%) patients assigned to the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin had bleeding compared with seven (0·66%) of those allocated to control (p=0·042); the number of serious bleeding events was two (0·19%) versus six (0·57%), respectively (p=0·18). No patients assigned to rivaroxaban and aspirin had serious adverse events that led to discontinuation of study drug. INTERPRETATION: Among patients hospitalised with COVID-19, neither colchicine nor the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin prevent disease progression or death. FUNDING: Canadian Institutes for Health Research, Bayer, Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton Health Sciences Research Institute, Thistledown Foundation. TRANSLATIONS: For the Portuguese, Russian and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Eligibility for Posthospitalization Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background A recent randomized trial, the MICHELLE trial, demonstrated improved posthospital outcomes with a 35-day course of prophylactic rivaroxaban for patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at high risk of venous thromboembolism. We explored how often these findings may apply to an unselected clinical population of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Methods and Results Using a 35-hospital retrospective cohort of patients hospitalized between March 7, 2020, and January 23, 2021, with COVID-19 (MI-COVID19 database), we quantified the percentage of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who would be eligible for rivaroxaban at discharge per MICHELLE trial criteria and report clinical event rates. The main clinical outcome was derived from the MICHELLE trial and included a composite of symptomatic venous thromboembolism, pulmonary embolus-related death, nonhemorrhagic stroke, and cardiovascular death at 35 days. Multiple sensitivity analyses tested different eligibility and exclusion criteria definitions to determine the effect on eligibility for postdischarge anticoagulation prophylaxis. Of 2016 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who survived to discharge and did not have another indication for anticoagulation, 25.9% (n=523) would be eligible for postdischarge thromboprophylaxis per the MICHELLE trial criteria (range, 2.9%-39.4% on sensitivity analysis). Of the 416 who had discharge anticoagulant data collected, only 13.2% (55/416) were actually prescribed a new anticoagulant at discharge. Of patients eligible for rivaroxaban per the MICHELLE trial, the composite clinical outcome occurred in 1.2% (6/519); similar outcome rates were 5.7% and 0.63% in the MICHELLE trial's control (no anticoagulation) and intervention (rivaroxaban) groups, respectively. Symptomatic venous thromboembolism events and all-cause mortality were 6.2% (32/519) and 5.66% in the MI-COVID19 and MICHELLE trial control cohorts, respectively. Conclusions Across 35 hospitals in Michigan, ≈1 in 4 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 would qualify for posthospital thromboprophylaxis. With only 13% of patients actually receiving postdischarge prophylaxis, there is a potential opportunity for improvement in care.

Randomized Study of Rivaroxaban vs Placebo on Disease Progression and Symptoms Resolution in High-Risk Adults With Mild Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection may be associated with a prothrombotic state, predisposing patients for a progressive disease course. We investigated whether rivaroxaban, a direct oral anticoagulant factor Xa inhibitor, would reduce coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) progression. METHODS: Adults (N = 497) with mild COVID-19 symptoms and at high risk for COVID-19 progression based on age, body mass index, or comorbidity were randomized 1:1 to either daily oral rivaroxaban 10 mg (N = 246) or placebo equivalent (N = 251) for 21 days and followed to day 35. Primary end points were safety and progression. Absolute difference in progression risk was assessed using a stratified Miettinen and Nurminen method. RESULTS: The study was terminated after 497 of the target 600 participants were enrolled due to a prespecified interim analysis of the first 200 participants that crossed the futility boundary for the primary efficacy end point in the intent-to-treat population. Enrollees were 85% aged <65 years; 60% female; 27% Hispanic, Black, or other minorities; and 69% with ≥2 comorbidities. Rivaroxaban was well tolerated. Disease progression rates were 46 of 222 (20.7%) in rivaroxaban vs 44 of 222 (19.8%) in placebo groups, with a risk difference of -1.0 (95% confidence interval, -6.4 to 8.4; P = .78). CONCLUSIONS: We did not demonstrate an impact of rivaroxaban on disease progression in high-risk adults with mild COVID-19. There remains a critical public health gap in identifying scalable effective therapies for high-risk people in the outpatient setting to prevent COVID-19 progression.

Thromboprophylaxis and clinical outcomes in moderate COVID-19 patients: A comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Many thrombotic complications are linked to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Antithrombotic treatments are important for prophylaxis against these thrombotic events. OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to compare enoxaparin and rivaroxaban as prophylactic anticoagulants in moderate cases of COVID-19 in terms of efficacy, safety, and clinical outcomes. METHODS: The study involved 124 patients with moderate COVID-19 (pneumonia without hypoxia) divided into two groups. The first group (G1) comprised 66 patients who received enoxaparin subcutaneously at a dose of 0.5 mg/kg every 12 h until discharge from the hospital. The second group (G2) comprised 58 patients who received oral rivaroxaban at a dose of 10 mg once daily until discharge from the hospital. The outcomes evaluated in this study were as follows: intermediate care unit (IMCU) duration, the number of patients transferred from the IMCU to the intensive care unit (ICU), ICU duration, the total length of hospital stay, in-hospital mortality, and thrombotic and bleeding complications. RESULTS: No significant differences in IMCU duration (p = 0.39), ICU duration (p = 0.96), and total length of hospital stay (p = 0.73) were observed between the two groups. The percentage of patients requiring ICU admission after hospitalization was 21.2% in G1 and 22.4% in G2 (p = 0.87). The mortality rate was 12.1% in G1 and 10.3% in G2 (p = 0.76). The proportion of patients who had thrombotic complications was 9.1% in G1 and 12.1% in G2 (p = 0.59). The incidence of mild bleeding was 3% in G1 and 1.7% in G2 (p = 0.64). CONCLUSION: Either enoxaparin or rivaroxaban may be used as thromboprophylaxis agents in managing patients with moderate COVID-19. Either medication has no clear advantage over the other.

Rivaroxaban versus no anticoagulation for post-discharge thromboprophylaxis after hospitalisation for COVID-19 (MICHELLE): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients hospitalised with COVID-19 are at risk for thrombotic events after discharge; the role of extended thromboprophylaxis in this population is unknown. METHODS: In this open-label, multicentre, randomised trial conducted at 14 centres in Brazil, patients hospitalised with COVID-19 at increased risk for venous thromboembolism (International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism [IMPROVE] venous thromboembolism [VTE] score of ≥4 or 2-3 with a D-dimer >500 ng/mL) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive, at hospital discharge, rivaroxaban 10 mg/day or no anticoagulation for 35 days. The primary efficacy outcome in an intention-to-treat analysis was a composite of symptomatic or fatal venous thromboembolism, asymptomatic venous thromboembolism on bilateral lower-limb venous ultrasound and CT pulmonary angiogram, symptomatic arterial thromboembolism, and cardiovascular death at day 35. Adjudication was blinded. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. The primary and safety analyses were carried out in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04662684. FINDINGS: From Oct 8, 2020, to June 29, 2021, 997 patients were screened. Of these patients, 677 did not meet eligibility criteria; the remaining 320 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive rivaroxaban (n=160 [50%]) or no anticoagulation (n=160 [50%]). All patients received thromboprophylaxis with standard doses of heparin during hospitalisation. 165 (52%) patients were in the intensive care unit while hospitalised. 197 (62%) patients had an IMPROVE score of 2-3 and elevated D-dimer levels and 121 (38%) had a score of 4 or more. Two patients (one in each group) were lost to follow-up due to withdrawal of consent and not included in the intention-to-treat primary analysis. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in five (3%) of 159 patients assigned to rivaroxaban and 15 (9%) of 159 patients assigned to no anticoagulation (relative risk 0·33, 95% CI 0·12-0·90; p=0·0293). No major bleeding occurred in either study group. Allergic reactions occurred in two (1%) patients in the rivaroxaban group. INTERPRETATION: In patients at high risk discharged after hospitalisation due to COVID-19, thromboprophylaxis with rivaroxaban 10 mg/day for 35 days improved clinical outcomes compared with no extended thromboprophylaxis. FUNDING: Bayer.

Rivaroxaban with Aspirin Versus Aspirin for Peripheral Arterial Disease and Intermittent Claudication. Rationale and Design of the COMPASS CLAUDICATION Trial.

BACKGROUND: The COMPASS trial demonstrated that in patients with peripheral arterial disease, the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin reduces the risk of major adverse limb events, but it is not known whether this combination can also improve symptoms in patients with intermittent claudication. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of the combination on claudication distance. STUDY DESIGN: Eighty-eight patients with intermittent claudication will be randomized to receive rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin 100 mg once daily or aspirin 100 mg once daily for 24 weeks. The primary outcome is the change in claudication distance from the baseline to 24 weeks, measured by 6 min walking test and treadmill test. The primary safety outcome is the incidence of major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major bleeding according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis criteria. SUMMARY: The COMPASS CLAUDICATION trial will provide high-quality evidence regarding the effect of the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin on claudication distance in patients with peripheral arterial disease.

Pulmonary embolism in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia on adequate oral anticoagulation.

Thrombotic complications are common in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia with important consequences on the diagnostic and therapeutic management. We report a consecutive series of five patients on long-term oral anticoagulation therapy who presented to our hospital for severe COVID-19 pneumonia associated with segmental acute pulmonary embolism despite adherence to therapy and with an adequate anticoagulant range at the time of the event. Four patients were receiving a direct oral anticoagulant (two with edoxaban, one with rivaroxaban and one with apixaban) and one patient a vitamin K antagonist. No significant thrombotic risk factors, active cancer, or detectable venous thromboembolism were present. In all cases, elevated d-dimer and fibrinogen levels with a parallel rise in markers of inflammation were documented. The combination of these findings seems to support the hypothesis that considers the local vascular damage determined by severe viral infection as the main trigger of thrombi detected in the lungs, rather than emboli from peripheral veins.

"I just didn't want to trust it at all": Atrial fibrillation patient's treatment experience of rivaroxaban and warfarin.

BACKGROUND: In the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF), anticoagulant medications such as warfarin and rivaroxaban are commonly prescribed to reduce the risk of ischaemic strokes, and other thromboembolic events. Research has highlighted advantages and disadvantages of each of these medications, but there remains an absence of qualitative evidence regarding the lived experiences of AF patients. The present study helps address this gap and obtain a greater understanding of the patient experience and beliefs surrounding their anticoagulant medication. METHOD: Semi-structured qualitative interviews with a purposive sample of 20 participants (10 warfarin, 10 rivaroxaban). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. RESULTS: Data analysis led to the generation of three key themes: positive perceptions of medication, distrust of alternatives, and inconsistencies in support experiences. CONCLUSIONS: Positive perceptions of one anticoagulant medication (ACM) and distrust of alternatives may influence patients' confidence in switching medications. This is potentially problematic where there is a lack of patient engagement in medication changes, as seen during the COVID pandemic. Gaps in patient understanding of anticoagulation, including lack of clarity around medications selection and misconceptions about treatment, were evident. By addressing these misconceptions, clinicians may be better positioned to support people with AF in self-management of their ACM.

Direct oral anticoagulant plasma levels in hospitalized COVID-19 patients treated with dexamethasone.

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are not recommended in COVID-19 patients receiving dexamethasone because of potential drug-drug and drug-disease interactions affecting anticoagulant concentration and activity. To evaluate short- and long-term pharmacokinetic interactions, serial through and peak DOAC plasma levels were prospectively measured during and after dexamethasone therapy, as well as during the acute phase and after recovery from COVID-19 in hospitalized, non-critically ill patients undergoing treatment with DOACs. Thirty-three (18 males, mean age 79 years) consecutive patients received DOACs (17 apixaban, 12 rivaroxaban, 4 edoxaban) for atrial fibrillation (n = 22), venous thromboembolism (n = 10), and acute myocardial infarction (n = 1). Twenty-six patients also received dexamethasone at a dose of 6 mg once daily for a median of 14 days. Trough DOAC levels on dexamethasone were within and below expected reference ranges respectively in 87.5 and 8.3% of patients, with no statistically significant differences at 48-72 h and 14-21 days after dexamethasone discontinuation. Peak DOAC levels on dexamethasone were within expected reference ranges in 58.3% of patients, and below ranges in 33.3%, of whom over two thirds had low values also off dexamethasone. No significant differences in DOAC levels were found during hospitalization and after resolution of COVID-19. Overall, 28 patients were discharged alive, and none experienced thrombotic or bleeding events. In this study, dexamethasone administration or acute COVID-19 seemed not to affect DOAC levels in hospitalized, non-critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Randomized clinical trial to evaluate a routine full anticoagulation Strategy in Patients with Coronavirus Infection (SARS-CoV2) admitted to hospital: Rationale and design of the ACTION (AntiCoagulaTlon cOroNavirus)-Coalition IV trial.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies have suggested a higher risk of thrombotic events in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Moreover, elevated D-dimer levels have been identified as an important prognostic marker in COVID-19 directly associated with disease severity and progression. Prophylactic anticoagulation for hospitalized COVID-19 patients might not be enough to prevent thrombotic events; therefore, therapeutic anticoagulation regimens deserve clinical investigation. DESIGN: ACTION is an academic-led, pragmatic, multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase IV clinical trial that aims to enroll around 600 patients at 40 sites participating in the Coalition COVID-19 Brazil initiative. Eligible patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 with symptoms up to 14 days and elevated D-dimer levels will be randomized to a strategy of full-dose anticoagulation for 30 days with rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily (or full-dose heparin if oral administration is not feasible) vs standard of care with any approved venous thromboembolism prophylaxis regimen during hospitalization. A confirmation of COVID-19 was mandatory for study entry, based on specific tests used in clinical practice (RT-PCR, antigen test, IgM test) collected before randomization, regardless of in the outpatient setting or not. Randomization will be stratified by clinical stability at presentation. The primary outcome is a hierarchical analysis of mortality, length of hospital stay, or duration of oxygen therapy at the end of 30 days. Secondary outcomes include the World Health Organization's 8-point ordinal scale at 30 days and the following efficacy outcomes: incidence of venous thromboembolism , acute myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolism, major adverse limb events, duration of oxygen therapy, disease progression, and biomarkers. The primary safety outcomes are major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria. SUMMARY: The ACTION trial will evaluate whether in-hospital therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban for stable patients, or enoxaparin for unstable patients, followed by rivaroxaban through 30 days compared with standard prophylactic anticoagulation improves clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer levels.

Therapeutic versus prophylactic anticoagulation for patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer concentration (ACTION): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is associated with a prothrombotic state leading to adverse clinical outcomes. Whether therapeutic anticoagulation improves outcomes in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 is unknown. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of therapeutic versus prophylactic anticoagulation in this population. METHODS: We did a pragmatic, open-label (with blinded adjudication), multicentre, randomised, controlled trial, at 31 sites in Brazil. Patients (aged ≥18 years) hospitalised with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer concentration, and who had COVID-19 symptoms for up to 14 days before randomisation, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either therapeutic or prophylactic anticoagulation. Therapeutic anticoagulation was in-hospital oral rivaroxaban (20 mg or 15 mg daily) for stable patients, or initial subcutaneous enoxaparin (1 mg/kg twice per day) or intravenous unfractionated heparin (to achieve a 0·3-0·7 IU/mL anti-Xa concentration) for clinically unstable patients, followed by rivaroxaban to day 30. Prophylactic anticoagulation was standard in-hospital enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin. The primary efficacy outcome was a hierarchical analysis of time to death, duration of hospitalisation, or duration of supplemental oxygen to day 30, analysed with the win ratio method (a ratio >1 reflects a better outcome in the therapeutic anticoagulation group) in the intention-to-treat population. The primary safety outcome was major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding through 30 days. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04394377) and is completed. FINDINGS: From June 24, 2020, to Feb 26, 2021, 3331 patients were screened and 615 were randomly allocated (311 [50%] to the therapeutic anticoagulation group and 304 [50%] to the prophylactic anticoagulation group). 576 (94%) were clinically stable and 39 (6%) clinically unstable. One patient, in the therapeutic group, was lost to follow-up because of withdrawal of consent and was not included in the primary analysis. The primary efficacy outcome was not different between patients assigned therapeutic or prophylactic anticoagulation, with 28 899 (34·8%) wins in the therapeutic group and 34 288 (41·3%) in the prophylactic group (win ratio 0·86 [95% CI 0·59-1·22], p=0·40). Consistent results were seen in clinically stable and clinically unstable patients. The primary safety outcome of major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding occurred in 26 (8%) patients assigned therapeutic anticoagulation and seven (2%) assigned prophylactic anticoagulation (relative risk 3·64 [95% CI 1·61-8·27], p=0·0010). Allergic reaction to the study medication occurred in two (1%) patients in the therapeutic anticoagulation group and three (1%) in the prophylactic anticoagulation group. INTERPRETATION: In patients hospitalised with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer concentration, in-hospital therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban or enoxaparin followed by rivaroxaban to day 30 did not improve clinical outcomes and increased bleeding compared with prophylactic anticoagulation. Therefore, use of therapeutic-dose rivaroxaban, and other direct oral anticoagulants, should be avoided in these patients in the absence of an evidence-based indication for oral anticoagulation. FUNDING: Coalition COVID-19 Brazil, Bayer SA.

[Effect of anticoagulant therapy on the course of COVID-19 in comorbid patients].

INTRODUCTION: Analysis of the pathogenesis of coronavirus infection caused SARS-CoV-2 indicates a significant impact of hemorheological disorders on its course and outcomes. It is known that chronic cardiovascular diseases are associated with the risk of severe course and lethal outcomes both in COVID-19 and other infectious diseases. Therefore, in each case it is necessary to study the interaction and mutual influence of different components of the treatment program prescribed to such patients.The purpose of this work was to evaluate the effect of coagulation activity on the course of a novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19) and to justify the management of comorbid patients having been received novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in previously selected doses according to indications in concomitant somatic diseases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Total 76 cases of confirmed coronavirus infection in patients who had been received initial therapy on an outpatient basis were analyzed. 26 patients who received NOACs (rivaroxaban, apixaban, dabigatran) made up the main group and 50 - the comparison (control) group in which patients had not been administered any drugs that affect blood clotting until the episode of COVID-19. All patients have been prescribed therapy following the Provisional guidelines «Prevention, diagnosis and treatment of coronavirus infection (COVID-19)¼ (https://static-0.minzdrav.gov.ru/system/attachments/attaches/). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The number of hospitalizations was significantly fewer in the group of patients who had been received NOACs (19 vs. 66% in the control group). No deaths or cases of severe respiratory and/or renal failure were observed in the main group, while adverse outcomes were noted in 14% of patients who had not been administered these drugs. CONCLUSION: Taking NOACs reduces the probability of severe course and adverse outcomes in the development of coronavirus infection caused by SARS-CoV-2, which indicates a significant contribution of coagulation mechanisms to the pathogenesis in COVID-19. There were no indications for drug replacement and correction of anticoagulant therapy regimens in patients who received adequate therapy with oral anticoagulants for treating a non-severe form of coronavirus infection in ambulatory patient settings.

[Learning with COVID-19: what about anticoagulation?]

Infection caused by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) is associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic disease. So-me authors recommend anticoagulation at therapeutic doses for, at least, the most severely ill patients; this practice is not free of risks, which is why only thromboembolic prophylaxis is recommended by other consensuses. In the case of previously anticoagulated patients, changing the oral anticoagulant for a low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is generally recommended. We present the cases of two patients admitted due to COVID-19, without serious clinical data, in whom anticoagulation (acenocoumarol and rivaroxaban, respectively) was replaced by LMWH at therapeutic doses, both presenting abdominal bleeding. This type of bleeding is an infrequent complication in anticoagulated patients, but the concurrence of two cases in a short period of time in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic leads us to consider that there is not yet any clear evidence on therapeutic anticoagulation in SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Rationale and design for the study of rivaroxaban to reduce thrombotic events, hospitalization and death in outpatients with COVID-19: The PREVENT-HD study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is associated with both venous and arterial thrombotic complications. While prophylactic anticoagulation is now widely recommended for hospitalized patients with COVID-19, the effectiveness and safety of thromboprophylaxis in outpatients with COVID-19 has not been established. STUDY DESIGN: PREVENT-HD is a double-blind, placebo-controlled, pragmatic, event-driven phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in symptomatic outpatients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 at risk for thrombotic events, hospitalization, and death. Several challenges posed by the pandemic have necessitated innovative approaches to clinical trial design, start-up, and conduct. Participants are randomized in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by time from COVID-19 confirmation, to either rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily or placebo for 35 days. The primary efficacy end point is a composite of symptomatic venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, acute limb ischemia, non-central nervous system systemic embolization, all-cause hospitalization, and all-cause mortality. The primary safety end point is fatal and critical site bleeding according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis definition. Enrollment began in August 2020 and is expected to enroll approximately 4,000 participants to yield the required number of end point events. CONCLUSIONS: PREVENT-HD is a pragmatic trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of the direct oral anticoagulant rivaroxaban in the outpatient setting to reduce major venous and arterial thrombotic events, hospitalization, and mortality associated with COVID-19.