Severe COVID-19 with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in a sickle cell disease adult patient: case report.

BACKGROUND: Sickle-cell anaemia is a widespread genetic disease prevalent worldwide among African and African-American populations. The pathogenesis is most often revealed by pulmonary conditions, including acute thoracic syndrome, which is affecting the life expectancy of these populations. The global spread of CoV2-SARS infection with a respiratory tropism, endothelial damages and procoagulant status endangers the SCD population. However, with only a few case reports, consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic on SCD population remain poorly known. CASE PRESENTATION: We report a case of a 33-year-old man with a history of homozygous SS homozygous sickle cell anemia who consulted on March 24, 2020 for febrile dyspnea 11 days after the onset of symptoms. A nasopharyngeal swab was positive for SARS-CoV-2. His respiratory status worsened rapidly in the emergency room and then in ICU leading to severe ARDS requiring intubation, curarization, and venovenous ECMO. Hematologically, severe hemolysis associated with major thrombocytopenia without documented spinal cord injury was noted. Several transfusion exchanges are performed. The evolution was finally slowly favorable and led to discharge from the intensive care unit and then from the hospital. CONCLUSIONS: This case recalls the importance of an increased prevention policy against COVID-19among the SCD population. In addition, from a therapeutic point of view, it advocates (1) a high preventive anticoagulation from the outset according to the level of D-dimers (2) the use of venovenous ECMO in this particular case, whereas this technique has had rather disappointing results in acute chest syndromes. (3) Unexpectedly, our patient did not develop pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and acute cor pulmonale (ACP), whereas this is a common feature of ARDS during SCD. These last two observations suggest a different pathophysiology of pulmonary disorders in SCD patients in the case of SARS COv2. It could be associated with marked hypoxemia secondary to pulmonary vascular vasodilation.

New Insights into the Use of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Non-high Risk Thrombotic APS Patients: Literature Review and Subgroup Analysis from a Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is discussed. Results from randomized controlled trials are available. It has been stated that a history of arterial thrombosis and triple positivity was associated with a higher risk of thrombosis in APS patients treated with DOACs. However, their efficacy in non-high-risk APS patients with isolated venous manifestations is unsolved. Therefore, we performed a sub-group analysis of a previously published meta-analysis after the exclusion of patients with triple positivity and those with history of arterial or small vessel thrombosis. RECENT FINDINGS: We identified 290 APS patients with previous isolated venous event treated with DOACs; among them, 25 (8.6%) patients experienced a recurrent thrombosis in comparison to 16% in the original cohort. We found that the rate of recurrent thrombosis is lower in APS patients with isolated venous manifestations than in overall APS patients including high-risk patients. Research about DOAC use in non-high-risk APS patients needs to be continued.

Lung Cancer Related Thrombosis (LCART): Focus on Immune Checkpoint Blockade.

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a common complication in lung cancer patients. Lung cancer confers an increased risk of thrombosis compared to other solid malignancies across all stages of the disease. Newer treatment agents, including checkpoint immunotherapy and targeted agents, may further increase the risk of CAT. Different risk-assessment models, such as the Khorana Risk Score, and newer approaches that incorporate genetic risk factors have been used in lung cancer patients to evaluate the risk of thrombosis. The management of CAT is based on the results of large prospective trials, which show similar benefits to low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in ambulatory patients. The anticoagulation agent and duration of therapy should be personalized according to lung cancer stage and histology, the presence of driver mutations and use of antineoplastic therapy, including recent curative lung surgery, chemotherapy or immunotherapy. Treatment options should be evaluated in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has been shown to impact the thrombotic risk in cancer patients. This review focuses on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, risk factors, novel predictive scores and management of CAT in patients with active lung cancer, with a focus on immune checkpoint inhibitors.

A RAND/UCLA-Modified VAS Study on Telemedicine, Telehealth, and Virtual Care in Daily Clinical Practice of Vascular Medicine.

Background: Telemedicine is increasingly used in several fields of healthcare, including vascular medicine. This study aimed to investigate the views of experts and propose clinical practice recommendations on the possible applications of telemedicine in vascular medicine. Methods: A clinical guidance group proposed a set of 67 clinical practice recommendations based on the synthesis of current evidence and expert opinion. The Telemedicine Vascular Medicine Working Group included 32 experts from Europe evaluating the appropriateness of each clinical practice recommendation based on published RAND/UCLA methodology in two rounds. Results: In the first round, 60.9% of clinical practice recommendations were rated as appropriate, 35.9% as uncertain, and 3.1% as inappropriate. The strongest agreement (a median value of 10) was reached on statements regarding the usefulness of telemedicine during the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, its usefulness for geographical areas that are difficult to access, and the superiority of video calls compared to phone calls only. The lowest degree of agreement (a median value of 2) was reported on statements regarding the utility of telemedicine being limited to the COVID-19 pandemic and regarding the applicability of teleconsultation in the diagnosis and management of abdominal aortic aneurysm. In the second round, 11 statements were re-evaluated to reduce variability. Conclusions: This study highlights the levels of agreement and the points that raise concern on the use of telemedicine in vascular medicine. It emphasizes the need for further clarification on various issues, including infrastructure, logistics, and legislation.

Algorithm for Rapid Exclusion of Clinically Relevant Plasma Levels of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients Using the DOAC Dipstick: An Expert Consensus Paper.

BACKGROUND: With the widespread use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), there is an urgent need for a rapid assay to exclude clinically relevant plasma levels. Accurate and rapid determination of DOAC levels would guide medical decision-making to (1) determine the potential contribution of the DOAC to spontaneous or trauma-induced hemorrhage; (2) identify appropriate candidates for reversal, or (3) optimize the timing of urgent surgery or intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS: The DOAC Dipstick test uses a disposable strip to identify factor Xa- or thrombin inhibitors in a urine sample. Based on the results of a systematic literature search followed by an analysis of a simple pooling of five retrieved clinical studies, the test strip has a high sensitivity and an acceptably high negative predictive value when compared with levels measured with liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry or calibrated chromogenic assays to reliably exclude plasma DOAC concentrations ≥30 ng/mL. CONCLUSION: Based on these data, a simple algorithm is proposed to enhance medical decision-making in acute care indications useful primarily in hospitals not having readily available quantitative tests and 24/7. This algorithm not only determines DOAC exposure but also differentiates between factor Xa and thrombin inhibitors to better guide clinical management.

Comparison of the DOAC Dipstick Test on Urine Samples With Chromogenic Substrate Methods on Plasma Samples in Outpatients Treated With Direct Oral Anticoagulants.

Identifying adherence to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) plays a major role in treatment efficacy and safety. The DOAC Dipstick can detect DOACs in urine samples of acutely diseased patients at plasma thresholds of about 30 ng/mL. A prospective observational consecutive cohort study was performed on outpatients taking DOACs. The presence of direct oral factor Xa inhibitors (DXIs) in patient urine samples were independently evaluated by visual interpretation of the DOAC Dipstick pad colors. DOAC plasma concentration was assessed using STA®-Liquid Anti-Xa and STA®-Liquid Anti-IIa chromogenic substrate assays. Positive DOAC Dipstick results were compared with a threshold plasma of DOAC concentration ≥30 ng/mL. Of 120 patients (age 55.4 + 16.1 years, female n = 63), 77 were on rivaroxaban and 43 on apixaban. Plasma concentrations were 129 ± 118 ng/mL for rivaroxaban, and 163 ± 130 ng/mL for apixaban, DOAC Dipstick test has a sensitivity of 97.2% and a positive predictive value of 89.5% at 30 ng/mL. No differences occurred between DXIs. Specificity and negative predictive value could not be determined due to the low number of true negative values. There were no differences in the interpretation of rivaroxaban and apixaban pad colors between observers (Kappa 1.0). Results show that DOAC Dipstick may be a useful tool for identifying DXIs in urine samples in an outpatient setting at a plasma threshold ≥ 30 ng/mL. Further studies should include patients treated with dabigatran, vitamin K antagonists, or other anticoagulants.

Triple positive profile in antiphospholipid syndrome: prognosis, relapse and management from a retrospective multicentre study.

OBJECTIVE: Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is defined by the association of thromboembolic and/or obstetrical clinical manifestations and the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies. The objective of our study was to evaluate the impact of the triple-positive profile in a cohort of 204 APS patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study, including patients with primary or secondary APS, meeting the Sydney criteria with at least one thrombotic and/or obstetrical complication. Clinical characteristics and the risk of relapse (defined by the occurrence of a new thrombotic event and/or a new adverse obstetrical event) between triple-positive and non-triple-positive APS patients were compared. RESULTS: 204 patients were included in our study, 68 were triple-positive and 136 were single or double positive. 122 patients (59.8%) had primary APS. 67 patients (32.8%) had obstetrical APS, with a higher rate among triple-positive patients (45.6% vs 26.5%, p=0.010), and 170 patients (83.3%) had thrombotic APS, without difference between triple-positive and others. Thrombotic events were more often venous (56.4%) than arterial (37.7%). Triple-positive patients had more placental complications than others (17.6% vs 2.9%, p=0.001) and more non-criteria events (48.5% vs 25.7%, p=0.002). Among non-criteria events, there was a higher frequency of Sneddon syndrome in triple-positive patients (7.4% vs 0.7%, p=0.028). The relapse rate was higher in triple-positive patients than in others (63.2% vs 39,7%, p=0002). In multivariate analysis, the triple-positive profile was associated with a higher risk of relapse (HR 1.63; 95% CI 1.04 to 2.55; p=0.031). CONCLUSION: The triple-positivity is associated with a higher risk of relapse and obstetrical complications.

Identifying high-risk profile in primary antiphospholipid syndrome through cluster analysis: French multicentric cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is an autoimmune disease characterised by thrombosis (arterial, venous or small vessel) or obstetrical events and persistent antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL), according to the Sydney classification criteria. Many studies have performed cluster analyses among patients with primary APS and associated autoimmune disease, but none has focused solely on primary APS. We aimed to perform a cluster analysis among patients with primary APS and asymptomatic aPL carriers without any autoimmune disease, to assess prognostic value. METHODS: In this multicentre French cohort study, we included all patients with persistent APS antibodies (Sydney criteria) measured between January 2012 and January 2019. We excluded all patients with systemic lupus erythematosus or other systemic autoimmune diseases. We performed hierarchical cluster analysis on the factor analysis of mixed data coordinates results with baseline patient characteristics to generate clusters. RESULTS: We identified four clusters: cluster 1, comprising 'asymptomatic aPL carriers', with low risk of events during follow-up; cluster 2, the 'male thrombotic phenotype', with older patients and more venous thromboembolic events; cluster 3, the 'female obstetrical phenotype', with obstetrical and thrombotic events; and cluster 4, 'high-risk APS', which included younger patients with more frequent triple positivity, antinuclear antibodies, non-criteria manifestations and arterial events. Regarding survival analyses, asymptomatic aPL carriers relapsed less frequently than the others, but no other differences in terms of relapse rates or deaths were found between clusters. CONCLUSIONS: We identified four clusters among patients with primary APS, one of which was 'high-risk APS'. Clustering-based treatment strategies should be explored in future prospective studies.

Drug-induced antiphospholipid syndrome: Analysis of the WHO international database.

OBJECTIVE: As with drug-induced lupus, some drugs may induce an antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). With the always growing numbers of new molecules, the list of the liable treatments evolves rapidly. We herein analyzed VigiBase, the international pharmacovigilance database, to identify drugs suspected of inducing APS. METHODS: All the reported cases associated with "anti-phospholipid syndrome" using the preferred term level of medDRA (dictionary of regulated drug activity) when associated with anti-phospholipid antibodies in VigiBase were analyzed. For each treatment, a Bayesian disproportionality indicator (i.e. information component, IC) was calculated. A drug was significantly associated with APS if the 95% lower-end of the IC credibility interval was positive (IC025 > 0). Drugs with potential protopathic bias were excluded. RESULTS: From 01/11/2000 to 25/07/2021, 790 reports of suspected drug-induced APS were found in VigiBase. After excluding drugs reported by a single country and drugs with protopathic bias, fourteen drugs (n = 359 reports) were associated with APS with an IC0 25 > 0. These drugs were hormons: ethinylestradiol-etonogestrel and drospirenone-ethynilestradiol; platelet growth factors: eltrombopag, romiplostim; vaccines: Human Papillomavirus vaccine, hepatitis A and B vaccines and typhoid vaccine; antibiotics: minocycline; nonstreroidal anti-inflammatory: rofecoxib; biotherapy: interferon beta-1-a, etanercept; anti-hypertensive drug: hydralazine; bisphosphonates: alendronic acid and antipsychotic: olanzapine. The mean age at diagnosis of drug-induced APS was 39.2 years [29.3;47.9] and there were 63.5% of female patients. The mean delay from first exposition to drug-induced APS was 19.7 months [4.5; 38.8]. Drug-induced APS was reported as a severe side effect in 66.3% of cases: 8.4% with a life-threatening event and 2.5% of death (n = 9). A third (n = 118, 32.9%) pulmonary embolism events were reported and 4.2% (15) cerebral infarctions. 14.8% (53) cases were associated with a systemic lupus, a sub-analysis without lupus cases showed the same severity of cases. CONCLUSION: This study identified 14 drugs potentially associated with drug-induced APS that may prove useful in the investigational work-up in any new diagnosis of APS. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03994302.

Benefice and pitfall of direct oral anticoagulants in very high-risk myeloproliferative neoplasms.

INTRODUCTION: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have recently proven their efficacy and safety, as primary and secondary prevention agents for thrombosis in cancer patients. We aimed to determine if DOACs might be a suitable choice to reduce the thrombotic risk in myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analysed a large multicentric cohort of MPN patients treated with rivaroxaban or apixaban after atrial fibrillation (AF) or thrombotic events. RESULTS: We included 135 MPN patients with a median follow-up of 23.8 months since DOAC initiation. Twenty patients (14.8 %) developed 30 thrombotic events (28 arterial thromboses in 19 patients) for a global incidence of 6.5 % patient-years. No difference was highlighted between apixaban and rivaroxaban in terms of thrombosis risk, but the incidence of arterial thrombosis was significantly higher on low-dose DOACs (11.9 vs. 4.5 % patient-years, p = 0.04). Bleeding events were more frequent in the full-dose group (41.2 vs. 15.2 %, p = 0.006). However, major and clinically relevant non major (CRNM) bleeding events occurred in 18 patients (13.3 %), with no difference between the groups. Age was the only identified thrombotic risk factor, whereas risk factors for major or CRNM bleeding were a full-dose treatment regimen and a combination of DOAC/low-dose aspirin. CONCLUSIONS: DOACs seem effective in preventing venous thrombosis in MPN patients with AF or VTE. For these high-risk patients, low-dose DOACs exposed patients to more arterial thrombosis but fewer bleeding events. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate and compare DOACs to the currently recommended antithrombotic drugs for high-risk MPN patients.

Fibrinolytic Proteins and Factor XIII as Predictors of Thrombotic and Hemorrhagic Complications in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients.

Introduction: In a prospective cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients, an extensive characterization of hemostatic alterations by both global and specific assays was performed to clarify mechanisms underlying the coagulopathy and identify predictive factors for thrombotic and hemorrhagic events during hospitalization. Materials and Methods: Intensive care unit (ICU; n = 46) and non-ICU (n = 55) patients were enrolled, and the occurrence of thrombotic and hemorrhagic events was prospectively monitored. At study inclusion, thromboelastometry together with the measurement of specific coagulation proteins and hypercoagulation markers was performed. Results: Patients (median age 67 years) showed significantly shorter clot formation time together with greater maximum clot firmness by thromboelastometry, increased levels of F1 + 2 and D-dimer, as biomarkers of hypercoagulability, and of procoagulant factors V, VIII, IX, XI, and fibrinogen, while FXIII was significantly reduced. The concentration of fibrinolytic proteins, tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) and plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 (PAI-1) were elevated in the overall cohort of patients. Many of these hemostatic alterations were significantly greater in ICU compared to non-ICU subjects and, furthermore, they were associated with inflammatory biomarker elevation [i.e., interleukin 6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP), neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and procalcitonin]. After enrollment, 7 thrombosis and 14 major bleedings occurred. Analysis of clinical and biological data identified increased t-PA, PAI-1, and NLR values as independent predictive factors for thrombosis, while lower FXIII levels were associated with bleeding. Conclusion: This study demonstrates alterations in all different hemostatic compartments analyzed, particularly in severe COVID-19 conditions, that strongly correlated with the inflammatory status. A potential role of fibrinolytic proteins together with NLR and of FXIII as predictors of thrombotic and hemorrhagic complications, respectively, is highlighted.

Thromboembolic Disease in Patients With Cancer and COVID-19: Risk Factors, Prevention and Practical Thromboprophylaxis Recommendations-State-of-the-Art.

Cancer and COVID-19 are both well-established risk factors predisposing to thrombosis. Both disease entities are correlated with increased incidence of venous thrombotic events through multifaceted pathogenic mechanisms involving the interaction of cancer cells or SARS-CoV2 on the one hand and the coagulation system and endothelial cells on the other hand. Thromboprophylaxis is recommended for hospitalized patients with active cancer and high-risk outpatients with cancer receiving anticancer treatment. Universal thromboprophylaxis with a high prophylactic dose of low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) or therapeutic dose in select patients, is currentlyindicated for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Also, prophylactic anticoagulation is recommended for outpatients with COVID-19 at high risk for thrombosis or disease worsening. However, whether there is an additive risk of thrombosis when a patient with cancer is infected with SARS-CoV2 remains unclear In the current review, we summarize and critically discuss the literature regarding the epidemiology of thrombotic events in patients with cancer and concomitant COVID-19, the thrombotic risk assessment, and the recommendations on thromboprophylaxis for this subgroup of patients. Current data do not support an additive thrombotic risk for patients with cancer and COVID-19. Of note, patients with cancer have less access to intensive care unit care, a setting associated with high thrombotic risk. Based on current evidence, patients with cancer and COVID-19 should be assessed with well-established risk assessment models for medically ill patients and receive thromboprophylaxis, preferentially with LMWH, according to existing recommendations. Prospective trials on well-characterized populations do not exist.

Practical Recommendations for Optimal Thromboprophylaxis in Patients with COVID-19: A Consensus Statement Based on Available Clinical Trials.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been shown to be strongly associated with increased risk for venous thromboembolism events (VTE) mainly in the inpatient but also in the outpatient setting. Pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis has been shown to offer significant benefits in terms of reducing not only VTE events but also mortality, especially in acutely ill patients with COVID-19. Although the main source of evidence is derived from observational studies with several limitations, thromboprophylaxis is currently recommended for all hospitalized patients with acceptable bleeding risk by all national and international guidelines. Recently, high quality data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) further support the role of thromboprophylaxis and provide insights into the optimal thromboprophylaxis strategy. The aim of this statement is to systematically review all the available evidence derived from RCTs regarding thromboprophylaxis strategies in patients with COVID-19 in different settings (either inpatient or outpatient) and provide evidence-based guidance to practical questions in everyday clinical practice. Clinical questions accompanied by practical recommendations are provided based on data derived from 20 RCTs that were identified and included in the present study. Overall, the main conclusions are: (i) thromboprophylaxis should be administered in all hospitalized patients with COVID-19, (ii) an optimal dose of inpatient thromboprophylaxis is dependent upon the severity of COVID-19, (iii) thromboprophylaxis should be administered on an individualized basis in post-discharge patients with COVID-19 with high thrombotic risk, and (iv) thromboprophylaxis should not be routinely administered in outpatients. Changes regarding the dominant SARS-CoV-2 variants, the wide immunization status (increasing rates of vaccination and reinfections), and the availability of antiviral therapies and monoclonal antibodies might affect the characteristics of patients with COVID-19; thus, future studies will inform us about the thrombotic risk and the optimal therapeutic strategies for these patients.

Genetic Predictors of the Development of Complications after Coronary Stenting.

Due to the fact that there are scientific discussions about the significance of gene polymorphisms in the risk of developing cardiovascular complications after a percutaneous coronary intervention, it is of interest to evaluate the genetic predictors of the development of cardiovascular events. This study is a molecular genetic study. Association with the genes of biomarkers for inflammation and immune response increases the risk of cardiovascular events: rs1234313 (TNFSF4): (A/G, OR-4.57 (2.35-8.87), p ≤ 0.0001), (A/G-A/A, OR-3.14 (1.75-5.63), p ≤ 0.0001), and (A/G, OR = 4.01 (2.19-7.36), p ≤ 0.0001); rs3184504 (SH2D3); ATXN2: (C/T, OR-2.53 (1.28-5.01), T/T, OR-2.99 (1.13-7.92), p = 0.017)), (C/T-T/T, OR-2.61 (1.35-5.07), p = 0.000), and (OR-1.89 (1.15-3.09), p = 0.009)). According to the lipid metabolism biomarker genes, rs2943634: (A/C OR-2.57 (1.18-5.62), p = 0.013); according to the endothelial biomarker genes, rs2713604: (DNAJB8-AS1; GATA2): (C/T, OR-4.27 (2.35-7.76), p ≤ 0.0001), (C/T-C/C, OR-4.13 (2.31-7.40), p ≤ 0.0001), (OR-4.05 (2.24-7.30), p ≤ 0.0001), and (C/T, OR-3.46 (1.99-6.00), p ≤ 0.0001). The regression analysis found that in the presence of the rs2943634 gene polymorphism, the risk of late cardiovascular events increases by 4.007 times with 95% CI (1.502:10.692), p = 0.006. The genes of biomarkers for the risk of cardiovascular events are rs1234313(TNFSF4), rs3184504 (SH2D3; ATXN2), rs2943634, and rs2713604 (DNAJB8-AS1; GATA2). The only predictor of the development of new cardiovascular events was rs2943634, which belongs to the group of lipid metabolism biomarkers.

Identification of bronchoalveolar and blood immune-inflammatory biomarker signature associated with poor 28-day outcome in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

The local immune-inflammatory response elicited by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is still poorly described, as well as the extent to which its characteristics may be associated with the outcome of critical Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In this prospective monocenter study, all consecutive COVID-19 critically ill patients admitted from February to December 2020 and explored by fiberoptic bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) were included. Biological assays, including digital ELISA cytokine profiling and targeted eicosanoid metabolomic analysis, were performed on paired blood and BAL fluid (BALF). Clinical outcome was assessed through the World Health Organization 10-point Clinical Progression Scale (WHO-CPS) at the 28th day (D28) following the admission to intensive care unit. A D28-WHO-CPS value higher than 5 defined a poor outcome. Seventy-six patients were included, 45 (59%) had a poor day-28 outcome. As compared to their counterparts, patients with D28-WHO-CPS > 5 exhibited a neutrophil-predominant bronchoalveolar phenotype, with a higher BALF neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, a blunted local type I interferon response, a decompartimentalized immune-inflammatory response illustrated by lower BALF/blood ratio of concentrations of IL-6 (1.68 [0.30-4.41] vs. 9.53 [2.56-19.1]; p = 0.001), IL-10, IL-5, IL-22 and IFN-γ, and a biological profile of vascular endothelial injury illustrated by a higher blood concentration of VEGF and higher blood and/or BALF concentrations of several vasoactive eicosanoids. In critically ill COVID-19 patients, we identified bronchoalveolar and blood immune-inflammatory biomarker signature associated with poor 28-day outcome.

Clinical and prognostic significance of antinuclear antibodies in primary antiphospholipid syndrome: A multicenter retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: The antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) (1) is defined by the development of vascular thrombosis, or pregnancy morbidity in the presence of persistent antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). Antinuclear antibodies (ANA) can be detected in primary APS patients without any clinical systemic autoimmune disease. The presence of ANA antibodies could confer a specific phenotype in primary APS. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the characteristics of APS patients with antinuclear antibodies without other autoimmune disease (ANA positive APS patients) in comparison with primary APS without ANA or secondary APS patients with associated systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). METHODS: Clinical and biologic data from 195 APS were retrospectively collected and patients were classified as primary APS with positive ANA (ANA-positive APS), primary APS without any ANA (ANA-negative APS), and SLE-associated APS (SLE-APS). RESULTS: Fourty patients (21%) were classified into ANA-positive APS group, 77 (39%) in ANA-negative APS and 78 (40%) in SLE-APS. In ANA-positive APS patients, 20 patients (51%) had arterial thrombosis, 14 (41%) had veinous thrombosis and 19% had obstetrical complications. There was no difference between the three groups for the frequency of thrombotic manifestations and obstetrical complications. ANA-positive APS patients had more non-criteria manifestations than ANA-negative APS (48% versus 25%; P≤0.01). ANA-positive APS had more triple aPL positivity (59% versus 18%; P<0.001) and more thrombosis and obstetrical recurrences (63% versus 36%; P<0.01) in comparison with ANA-negative APS patients. ANA-positive APS had more triple aPL positivity than SLE-APS patients (54% versus 33%; P<0.05). ANA-positive APS and SLE-APS patients had similar clinical manifestations, and recurrences. Despite a limited follow-up (28 months (11-50)) none of the ANA-positive APS develop SLE. Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapies were similar for the three groups. SLE-APS patients received more immunomodulatory therapies. CONCLUSION: ANA positivity in patients with APS enables to individualize a subset of patients with a more severe phenotype. Whereas the ANA positivity does not seem to be associated with the risk to develop SLE, prospective studies with a longer follow-up are necessary, in particular to evaluate the effect of additional therapies in this subset of APS.

Non-criteria manifestations in primary antiphospholipid syndrome: a French multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: From this retrospective study, we aimed to (1) describe the prevalence and characteristics of non-criteria features in primary antiphospholipid syndrome (p-APS) and (2) determine their prognostic value. METHODS: This retrospective French multicenter cohort study included all patients diagnosed with p-APS (Sydney criteria) between January 2012 and January 2019. We used Kaplan-Meier and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models to compare the incidence of relapse in p-APS with and without non-criteria manifestations. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-nine patients with p-APS were included during the study time, with a median age of 52.50 years [39.0; 65.25] and mainly women (n = 112; 62.6%). Among them, forty-three patients (24.0%) presented at least one non-criteria manifestation during the follow-up: autoimmune cytopenias (n = 17; 39.5%), Libman Sachs endocarditis (n = 5; 11.6%), APS nephropathy (n = 4; 9.3%), livedo reticularis (n = 8; 18.6%), and neurological manifestations (n = 12; 27.9%). In comparison to p-APS without any non-criteria manifestations (n = 136), p-APS with non-criteria features had more arterial thrombosis (n = 24; 55.8% vs n = 48; 35.3%; p = 0.027) and more frequent pre-eclampsia (n = 6; 14.3% vs n = 4; 3.1%; p = 0.02). The prevalence of triple positivity was significantly increased in patients with non-criteria features (n = 20; 47.6% vs n = 25; 19.8%; p = 0.001). Patients with p-APS and non-criteria manifestations (n = 43) received significantly more additional therapies combined with vitamin K antagonists and/or antiaggregants. Catastrophic APS (CAPS) tended to be more frequent in p-APS with non-criteria features (n = 2; 5.1% vs none; p = 0.074). The p-APS with non-criteria manifestations had significantly increased rates of relapse (n = 20; 58.8% vs 33; 33.7%; p = 0.018) in bivariate analysis, but in survival analyses, the hazard ratio (HR) of relapse was not significantly different between the two groups (HR at 1.34 [0.67; 2.68]; p = 0.40). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of non-criteria features is important to consider, as they are associated with particular clinical and laboratory profiles, increased risk of relapse, and need for additional therapies. Prospective studies are necessary to better stratify the prognosis and the management of p-APS.

Association between Radiotherapy and Risk of Cancer Associated Venous Thromboembolism: A Sub-Analysis of the COMPASS-CAT Study.

BACKGROUND: The role and effect of radiotherapy in the development of VTE has not been extensively explored; Methods: This is a post-hoc analysis from the COMPASS-CAT trial. Patients with breast, lung, colon or ovarian cancer, with early, locally advanced or metastatic disease and receiving chemotherapy were included. Primary endpoint was documented symptomatic VTE; Results: A total of 1355 patients were enrolled between November 2013 and November 2015. Of those, 194 patients were excluded because of missing data or the use of anticoagulation. Of the evaluable patients, 361 patients received radiotherapy (33.6%) At a median follow up of 6 months, 9.1% (n = 33) of patients receiving radiotherapy developed a VTE event (excluding those with missing data on follow up). After applying the competing risk model, radiotherapy remained significantly associated with increased risk for VTE (HR 2.47, 95% CI: 1.47-4.12, p = 0.001). Stratification analysis for the cohort that received radiotherapy revealed an increased risk of VTE in women compared to men (10.8% vs. 2.7%; p = 0.03), in those older than 50 (12.2% vs. 3.7%; p = 0.011); for patients receiving anthracycline chemotherapy (14.4% vs. 2.9%; p < 0.001) and hormonal therapy (12.9% vs. 3.9%; p < 0.001); Conclusions: Analysis from the COMPASS-CAT revealed a significant correlation between radiotherapy and VTE in patients with cancer. Further studies are needed to better understand the potential cellular toxicity associated with radiotherapy.

Endothelial dysfunction and hypercoagulability in severe sickle-cell acute chest syndrome.

RATIONALE: Acute pulmonary hypertension (PH) may develop during sickle-cell acute chest syndrome (ACS), and is associated with an increased mortality. Its mechanisms remain poorly known. We questioned whether there is endothelial dysfunction and hypercoagulability in severe ACS, with and without acute PH. METHODS: In a prospective monocentre cohort follow-up study, all sickle-cell adult patients with ACS admitted to the intensive care unit underwent transthoracic echocardiography and measurement of biomarkers of coagulation, endothelial activation and platelet and erythrocyte activation. Acute PH was defined as a high echocardiographic probability of PH. The biological profiles of sickle-cell patients were analysed at the time of ACS, contrasting with the existence of acute PH, and compared with steady-state and with non-sickle-cell controls (healthy subjects and community-acquired pneumonia). RESULTS: Most patients (36 patients with 39 ACS episodes; 23 males; median age 27 years) had thoracic pain, dyspnoea and computed tomography scan lung consolidation. Acute PH was diagnosed in seven (19%) patients. Erythrocyte- and platelet-derived microparticles and the pro-coagulant activity of microparticles were higher in ACS patients with acute PH, compared with their counterparts. Compared with healthy controls, ACS patients had higher levels of tissue factor, fibrin monomers, D-dimer, release of pro-coagulant microparticles and erythrocyte- and platelet-derived microparticles. Compared with community-acquired pneumonia patients, ACS patients had increased levels of fibrin monomers and erythrocyte- and platelet-derived microparticles. CONCLUSIONS: Severe ACS is characterised by endothelial dysfunction and hypercoagulability, with a marked pro-coagulant profile in cases of associated PH.

Improved strategies to counter the COVID-19 pandemic: Lockdowns vs. primary and community healthcare.

COVID-19 pandemic mitigation strategies are mainly based on social distancing measures and healthcare system reinforcement. However, many countries in Europe and elsewhere implemented strict, horizontal lockdowns because of extensive viral spread in the community which challenges the capacity of the healthcare systems. However, strict lockdowns have various untintended adverse social, economic and health effects, which have yet to be fully elucidated, and have not been considered in models examining the effects of various mitigation measures. Unlike commonly suggested, the dilemma is not about health vs wealth because the economic devastation of long-lasting lockdowns will definitely have adverse health effects in the population. Furthermore, they cannot provide a lasting solution in pandemic containment, potentially resulting in a vicious cycle of consecutive lockdowns with in-between breaks. Hospital preparedness has been the main strategy used by governments. However, a major characteristic of the COVID-19 pandemic is the rapid viral transmission in populations with no immunity. Thus, even the best hospital system could not cope with the demand. Primary, community and home care are the only viable strategies that could achieve the goal of pandemic mitigation. We present the case example of Greece, a country which followed a strategy focused on hospital preparedness but failed to reinforce primary and community care. This, along with strategic mistakes in epidemiological surveillance, resulted in Greece implementing a second strict, horizontal lockdown and having one of the highest COVID-19 death rates in Europe during the second wave. We provide recommendations for measures that will reinstate primary and community care at the forefront in managing the current public health crisis by protecting hospitals from unnecessary admissions, providing primary and secondary prevention services in relation to COVID-19 and maintaining population health through treatment of non-COVID-19 conditions. This, together with more selective social distancing measures (instead of horizontal lockdowns), represents the only viable and realistic long-term strategy for COVID-19 pandemic mitigation.