Houghton, Damon E.

AbstractPatients with thrombophilia remain concerned about venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk with COVID‐19 vaccinations. The aim of this study was to examine VTE outcomes in patients with inherited or acquired thrombophilia who were vaccinated for COVID‐19. Vaccinated patients ≥18 years between November 1, 2020 and November 1, 2021 were analyzed using electronic medical records across the Mayo Clinic enterprise. The primary outcome was imaging confirmed acute VTE occurring 90 days before and after the date of the first vaccine dose. Thrombophilia patients were identified through laboratory testing results and ICD‐10 codes. A total of 792 010 patients with at least one COVID‐19 vaccination were identified. Six thousand sixty‐seven of these patients were found to have a thrombophilia, among whom there was a total of 39 VTE events after compared to 51 VTE events before vaccination (0.64% vs. 0.84%, p = .20). In patients with Factor V Leiden or prothrombin gene mutation, VTE occurred in 27 patients before and in 29 patients after vaccination (0.61 vs. 0.65%, p = .79). In patients with antiphospholipid syndrome, VTE occurred in six patients before and four patients after vaccination (0.59% vs. 0.39%, p = .40). No difference was observed in the overall VTE rate when comparing the postvaccination 90 days to the prevaccination 90 days, adjusted hazard ratio 0.81 (95% confidence interval: 0.53–1.23). In this subgroup of COVID‐19 vaccinated patients with thrombophilia, there was no increased risk for acute VTE postvaccination compared to the prevaccination timeframe. These results are consistent with prior studies and should offer additional reassurance to patients with inherited or acquired thrombophilia.

Background Study aims were to analyze prospectively collected data from patients with cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) to determine the impact of VTE recurrence and anticoagulant-related bleeding on all-cause mortality. Patients/Methods Consecutive cancer patients with acute VTE treated with anticoagulants (March 1, 2013–November 30, 2021) were included in this analysis. Anticoagulant therapy-associated VTE recurrences, major bleeding, and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB) were assessed for their impact on all-cause mortality outcomes. Results This study included 1,812 cancer patients with VTE. Of these, there were 97 (5.4%) with recurrent VTE, 98 (5.4%) with major, and 104 (5.7%) with CRNMB while receiving anticoagulants. Recurrent VTE (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.52; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16–2.00; p = 0.0028), major bleeding (HR: 1.82; 95% CI: 1.41–2.31; p = 0.006), and CRNMB (HR; 1.38; 95% CI: 1.05–1.81; p = 0.018) each adversely influenced mortality outcomes. Deep vein thrombosis as the incident thrombotic event type was associated with VTE recurrence (HR: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.08–2.89; p = 0.02). Neither cancer type nor stage, chemotherapy, or Ottawa risk category influenced VTE recurrence. Higher body weights (HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 1.00–1.01; p = 0.005) were associated with increased major bleeding, while high Ottawa scores (HR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.46–0.96; p = 0.03) and apixaban treatment (HR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.45–0.84; p = 0.002) were associated with fewer major bleeding outcomes. Conclusion Among cancer patients receiving anticoagulant therapy for VTE, adverse outcomes such as VTE recurrence, major bleeding, or CRNMB increase mortality risk by 40 to 80%. Identifying variables predicting these outcomes may help risk-stratify patients with poor prognosis.

ImportanceDirect oral anticoagulant (DOAC)–associated intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) has high morbidity and mortality. The safety and outcome data of DOAC reversal agents in ICH are limited.ObjectiveTo evaluate the safety and outcomes of DOAC reversal agents among patients with ICH.Data SourcesPubMed, MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, Embase, EBSCO, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases were searched from inception through April 29, 2022.Study SelectionThe eligibility criteria were (1) adult patients (age ≥18 years) with ICH receiving treatment with a DOAC, (2) reversal of DOAC, and (3) reported safety and anticoagulation reversal outcomes. All nonhuman studies and case reports, studies evaluating patients with ischemic stroke requiring anticoagulation reversal or different dosing regimens of DOAC reversal agents, and mixed study groups with DOAC and warfarin were excluded.Data Extraction and SynthesisPreferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were used for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity. Two reviewers independently selected the studies and abstracted data. Data were pooled using the random-effects model.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was proportion with anticoagulation reversed. The primary safety end points were all-cause mortality and thromboembolic events after the reversal agent.ResultsA total of 36 studies met criteria for inclusion, with a total of 1832 patients (967 receiving 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate [4F-PCC]; 525, andexanet alfa [AA]; 340, idarucizumab). The mean age was 76 (range, 68-83) years, and 57% were men. For 4F-PCC, anticoagulation reversal was 77% (95% CI, 72%-82%; I2 = 55%); all-cause mortality, 26% (95% CI, 20%-32%; I2 = 68%), and thromboembolic events, 8% (95% CI, 5%-12%; I2 = 41%). For AA, anticoagulation reversal was 75% (95% CI, 67%-81%; I2 = 48%); all-cause mortality, 24% (95% CI, 16%-34%; I2 = 73%), and thromboembolic events, 14% (95% CI, 10%-19%; I2 = 16%). Idarucizumab for reversal of dabigatran had an anticoagulation reversal rate of 82% (95% CI, 55%-95%; I2 = 41%), all-cause mortality, 11% (95% CI, 8%-15%, I2 = 0%), and thromboembolic events, 5% (95% CI, 3%-8%; I2 = 0%). A direct retrospective comparison of 4F-PCC and AA showed no differences in anticoagulation reversal, proportional mortality, or thromboembolic events.Conclusions and RelevanceIn the absence of randomized clinical comparison trials, the overall anticoagulation reversal, mortality, and thromboembolic event rates in this systematic review and meta-analysis appeared similar among available DOAC reversal agents for managing ICH. Cost, institutional formulary status, and availability may restrict reversal agent choice, particularly in small community hospitals.