Ashrani, Aneel A.

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.

AbstractBackgroundClinical picture and outcome of incidental pulmonary embolism (iPE) compared to symptomatic pulmonary embolism (sPE) remain unclear.MethodsDemographics, recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), mortality, major bleeding, and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB) were compared between iPE and sPE patients who were followed prospectively at Mayo Thrombophilia Clinic (March 1, 2013 to August 1, 2020).ResultsOut of 3576 VTE patients, 1417 (39.6%) had PE: 562 (39.7%) iPE and 855 sPE. Patients with cancer were more likely to have iPE (400 iPE vs. 314 sPE) compared to those without cancer (162 iPE vs. 541 sPE). VTE recurrence rate (all per 100 person‐years) was similar in all iPE and sPE patients (3.34 vs. 3.68, p = .50), with cancer (4.16 vs. 4.89, p = .370), and without cancer patients (0.89 vs. 2.80, p = .25). Higher mortality observed in all patients with iPE compared to sPE (46.45 vs. 23.47, p < .001) and with cancer (56.41 vs. 45.77, p = .03) became not significant after adjustment for age, antiplatelet therapy, metastases, and cancer location. Noncancer iPE patients had higher mortality (15.95 vs. 7.18, p = .006) even after adjustment (p = .05). The major bleeding rate was also higher in all patients iPE compared to sPE (7.10 vs. 3.68, p = .03), but not after adjustment (p = .974); higher major bleeding rate in noncancer patients (6.49 vs. 1.25, p = .007) remained significant after adjustment (.02). CRNMB rate was similar to iPE and sPE patients.ConclusioniPE represents a more serious clinical condition compared to sPE as indicated by the higher mortality and major bleeding but these differences reflect underlying comorbidities rather than the seriousness of the embolic event.

Background: Whether VTE risk can be further stratified among patients with neurologic disease and leg paresis is unknown. Objective: To identify independent risk factors for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) among patients with neurologic disease and leg paresis. Methods: Using the population-based resources of the Rochester Epidemiology Project, we identified all Olmsted County, MN residents with incident DVT or PE over the 45-year period, 1966 to 2010. We performed a case-control study nested within the Olmsted County population with incident VTE associated with neurologic disease and leg paresis over the 18-year period, 1988-2010 (n=192). For each VTE case, we identified 1 Olmsted County resident with neurologic disease, leg paresis and no VTE (control) matched to each case on sex, date of birth (+/- 5 years), calendar year (+/- 1 year) and duration of medical records. Using conditional logistic regression, we tested duration of paresis (index-3 months, 3-12 months, and > 12 months), paresis etiology, and degree of immobility as potential risk factors for VTE after adjusting for other known VTE risk factors, including hospitalization for major surgery or acute medical illness, trauma/fracture, and active cancer. Results: In univariate analyses of the 192 pairs, trauma/fracture, hospitalization for major surgery or for acute medical illness, active cancer, duration of paresis, and degree of immobility were associated with VTE. In the multivariable analysis, hospitalization for acute medical illness, active cancer, degree of immobility (ambulatory without/with assistance, function from a wheelchair base, bed bound; OR: 2.60; 95%Cl: 1.65-4.11); p=<0.0001) were independent predictors of VTE. Conclusion: Among patients with neurologic disease and leg paresis, VTE risk can be further stratified by hospitalization for acute medical illness, active cancer and degree of immobility; these patients should be considered for VTE prophylaxis.

AbstractRare cases of COVID‐19 vaccinated individuals develop anti‐platelet factor 4 (PF4) antibodies that cause thrombocytopenia and thrombotic complications, a syndrome referred to as vaccine‐induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT). Currently, information on the characteristics and persistence of anti‐PF4 antibodies that cause VITT after Ad26.COV2.S vaccination is limited, and available diagnostic assays fail to differentiate Ad26.COV2.S and ChAdOx1 nCoV‐19‐associated VITT from similar clinical disorders, namely heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and spontaneous HIT. Here we demonstrate that while Ad26.COV2.S‐associated VITT patients are uniformly strongly positive in PF4‐polyanion enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs); they are frequently negative in the serotonin release assay (SRA). The PF4‐dependent p‐selectin expression assay (PEA) that uses platelets treated with PF4 rather than heparin consistently diagnosed Ad26.COV2.S‐associated VITT. Most Ad26.COV2.S‐associated VITT antibodies persisted for >5 months in PF4‐polyanion ELISAs, while the PEA became negative earlier. Two patients had otherwise unexplained mild persistent thrombocytopenia (140‐150 x 103/µL) 6 months after acute presentation. From an epidemiological perspective, differentiating VITT from spontaneous HIT, another entity that develops in the absence of proximate heparin exposure, and HIT is important, but currently available PF4‐polyanion ELISAs and functional assay are non‐specific and detect all three conditions. Here, we report that a novel un‐complexed PF4 ELISA specifically differentiates VITT, secondary to both Ad26.COV2.S and ChAdOx1 nCoV‐19, from both spontaneous HIT, HIT and commonly‐encountered HIT‐suspected patients who are PF4/polyanion ELISA‐positive but negative in functional assays. In summary, Ad26.COV2.S‐associated VITT antibodies are persistent, and the un‐complexed PF4 ELISA appears to be both sensitive and specific for VITT diagnosis.

Abstract Background: Heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a rare immune mediated complication that is triggered in a subset of patients temporal to therapeutic heparin exposure. Laboratory testing is based on screening for the presence of serum anti-PF4 antibodies using sensitive solid-phase immunoassays. If antibodies are detected, functional testing to demonstrate the platelet activating properties and heparin dependence of these immune complexes is then performed. Previous studies have reported possible clinical utility in identifying non heparin dependent platelet activating antibodies using a buffer control with zero heparin in the serotonin release functional assay (SRA). These reports suggested a correlation between reactivity in the zero heparin buffer control and pathogenicity of HIT antibodies which may define a subtype of HIT, referred to as autoimmune HIT. We aimed to investigate the utility of zero heparin buffer control as a part of an inhouse validation study of a mass spectrometry-coupled SRA (Mayo-SRA). Methods: Three hundred archived serum samples were tested using anti-PF4 IgG antibody enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA; Immucor Diagnostics, GA, USA). SRA was preformed on all samples using Mayo-SRA and reference 14C SRA methods. Zero heparin control buffer was included in the Mayo-SRA assay. Serotonin release &gt;20% in the low dose heparin (0.1U/mL, LDH) and ELISA optical density (OD) &gt;0.4 were considered positive. Drug interference studies were performed by spiking known SRA-positive samples with increasing concentrations of unfractionated heparin (UFH), low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or fondaparinux in the LDH and zero heparin SRA. The clinical 4T score was calculated retrospectively calculated for all patients. Results: Of the 300 tested samples, 57 were anti-PF4 ELISA positive. 33 of the 57 samples were positive using the reference 14C SRA method. Whereas 43 samples were positive by Mayo-SRA assay. Three additional samples were positive by Mayo-SRA, but negative by both screening anti-PF4 ELISA and the reference SRA method (Fig- 1A). Lastly, 13 samples were anti-PF4 ELISA positive, but SRA negative by both methods in comparison. Interestingly, 44 of 46 (95%) samples interpreted positive by LDH were also interpreted positive (serotonin release &gt;20%) under zero heparin conditions. These included the 3 samples that were positive by Mayo-SRA but negative by both screening anti-PF4 ELISA and the reference SRA. The overall % serotonin release using zero heparin control was significantly lower (P= 0.003, paired Student T-test) compared to LDH (Fig-1B). In addition, zero heparin followed a similar pattern as LDH, with highest levels at ELISA OD units &gt;2 (Fig-1C). Strikingly, drug interference studies showed artifactual serotonin release in the zero heparin reaction, which was not detected in the absence of spiked drugs. For UFH, serotonin release in zero heparin control occurred at very low spiked concentrations, ≥0.063 U/mL. LMWH and fondaparinux spiking experiments also displayed similar zero heparin serotonin release patterns (Fig-1D). Of note, none of these interferences were detected in UFH spiked SRA-negative samples (data not shown). Conclusion: Contrary to prior results suggesting that less than 50% of LDH SRA positive samples are also positive in the zero heparin SRA, our results show high zero heparin SRA positivity rate of &gt;95%. Zero heparin SRA showed a pattern with highest levels at ELISA OD units &gt;2 suggesting that reactivity in this condition is a function of antibody strength rather than a qualitative difference (i.e. "autoimmune" HIT antibodies vs "non-autoimmune" HIT antibodies). In addition, contamination of patient sera with small amounts of remnant heparin can significantly impact platelet activation in the zero heparin SRA test. Thus, zero heparin SRA positive results may be artifactual and represent residual heparin contained in the patient sample. Figure legend: Fig-1A. Scatter plots of SRA positive samples grouped by 4T scores. Red dots are Mayo-SRA only positive samples. Fig-1B and Fig-1C. Scatter plots of % serotonin release of Mayo-SRA positive samples at LDH (circles) vs. zero heparin buffers (squares), and grouped by ELISA OD values, respectively. Fig-1D. % Serotonin release of known SRA-positive samples spiked with increasing concentrations of UFH, LMWH, or fondaparinux at LDH (white) or zero heparin buffers (red). Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Pruthi: CSL Behring: Honoraria; Genentech: Honoraria; Bayer Healthcare AG: Honoraria; HEMA Biologics: Honoraria; Instrumentation Laboratory: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria. Padmanabhan: Veralox Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.