Explore the vast range of titles available.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is frequently observed in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). However, reported VTE rates differ substantially. We aimed at evaluating available data and estimating the prevalence of VTE in patients with COVID‐19. We conducted a systematic literature search (MEDLINE, EMBASE, World Health Organization COVID‐19 database) to identify studies reporting VTE rates in patients with COVID‐19. Studies with suspected high risk of bias were excluded from quantitative synthesis. Pooled outcome rates were obtained within a random effects meta‐analysis. Subgroup analyses were performed for different settings (intensive care unit [ICU] vs non‐ICU hospitalization and screening vs no screening) and the association of d‐dimer levels and VTE risk was explored. Eighty‐six studies (33,970 patients) were identified and 66 (28,173 patients, mean age: 62.6 years, 60.1% men, 19.4% ICU patients) were included in quantitative analysis. The overall VTE prevalence estimate was 14.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.6‐16.9), 40.3% (95% CI, 27.0‐54.3) with ultrasound screening and 9.5% (95% CI, 7.5‐11.7) without screening. Subgroup analysis revealed high heterogeneity, with a VTE prevalence of 7.9% (95% CI, 5.1‐11.2) in non‐ICU and 22.7% (95% CI, 18.1‐27.6) in ICU patients. Prevalence of pulmonary embolism (PE) in non‐ICU and ICU patients was 3.5% (95% CI, 2.2‐5.1) and 13.7% (95% CI, 10.0‐17.9). Patients developing VTE had higher d‐dimer levels (weighted mean difference, 3.26 µg/mL; 95% CI, 2.76‐3.77) than non‐VTE patients. VTE occurs in 22.7% of patients with COVID‐19 in the ICU, but VTE risk is also increased in non‐ICU hospitalized patients. Patients developing VTE had higher d‐dimer levels. Studies evaluating thromboprophylaxis strategies in patients with COVID‐19 are needed to improve prevention of VTE.

Cancer-associated thrombosis (including venous thromboembolism (VTE) and arterial events) is highly consequential for patients with cancer and is associated with worsened survival. Despite substantial improvements in cancer treatment, the risk of VTE has increased in recent years; VTE rates additionally depend on the type of cancer (with pancreas, stomach and primary brain tumours having the highest risk) as well as on individual patient’s and cancer treatment factors. Multiple cancer-specific mechanisms of VTE have been identified and can be classified as mechanisms in which the tumour expresses proteins that alter host systems, such as levels of platelets and leukocytes, and in which the tumour expresses procoagulant proteins released into the circulation that directly activate the coagulation cascade or platelets, such as tissue factor and podoplanin, respectively. As signs and symptoms of VTE may be non-specific, diagnosis requires clinical assessment, evaluation of pre-test probability, and objective diagnostic testing with ultrasonography or CT. Risk assessment tools have been validated to identify patients at risk of VTE. Primary prevention of VTE (thromboprophylaxis) has long been recommended in the inpatient and post-surgical settings, and is now an option in the outpatient setting for individuals with high-risk cancer. Anticoagulant therapy is the cornerstone of therapy, with low molecular weight heparin or newer options such as direct oral anticoagulants. Personalized treatment incorporating risk of bleeding and patient preferences is essential, especially as a diagnosis of VTE is often considered by patients even more distressing than their cancer diagnosis, and can severely affect the quality of life. Future research should focus on current knowledge gaps including optimizing risk assessment tools, biomarker discovery, next-generation anticoagulant development and implementation science.The association between cancer and a state of increased coagulability results in an elevated risk of venous thromboembolism (which includes deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism), a severe co-morbidity that can lead to worsened survival.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the second leading cause of death in patients with cancer. These patients are at an increased risk of developing VTE and are more likely to have a recurrence of VTE and bleeding while taking anticoagulants. Management of VTE in patients with cancer is a major therapeutic challenge and remains suboptimal worldwide. In 2013, the International Initiative on Thrombosis and Cancer (ITAC-CME), established to reduce the global burden of VTE in patients with cancer, published international guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of VTE and central venous catheter-associated thrombosis. The rapid global adoption of direct oral anticoagulants for management of VTE in patients with cancer is an emerging treatment trend that needs to be addressed based on the current level of evidence. In this Review, we provide an update of the ITAC-CME consensus recommendations based on a systematic review of the literature ranked according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation scale. These guidelines aim to address in-hospital and outpatient cancer-associated VTE in specific subgroups of patients with cancer.

The effect of conventional anti-platelet agents is limited in secondary stroke prevention, and their effects are blunted under high shear stress in the presence of increased levels of circulating von Willebrand factor (VWF). VWF is critically involved in thrombus formation at sites of stenotic extracranial/intracranial arteries. A third generation anti-VWF aptamer (BT200) has been generated which could be useful for secondary stroke prevention. To characterize the effects of BT200 in blood of patients with large artery atherosclerosis stroke (LAA). Blood samples were obtained from 33 patients with acute stroke or transient ischemic attack to measure inhibition of VWF activity and VWF-dependent platelet function. Patients who received clopidogrel or dual antiplatelet therapy did not differ in VWF dependent platelet function tests from aspirin treated patients. Of 18 patients receiving clopidogrel with or without aspirin, only 3 had a prolonged collagen adenosine diphosphate closure time, and none of the patients had ristocetin induced aggregation in the target range. BT200 concentration-dependently reduced median VWF activity from 178 to < 3%, ristocetin induced platelet aggregation from 40U to < 10U and prolonged collagen adenosine diphosphate closure times from 93 s to > 300 s. Baseline VWF activity correlated (r = 0.86, p < 0.001) with concentrations needed to reduce VWF activity to < 20% of normal, indicating that BT200 acts in a target concentration-dependent manner. Together with a long half-life supporting once weekly administration, the safety and tolerability observed in an ongoing phase I trial, and the existence of a reversal agent, BT200 is an interesting drug candidate.

To prevent bleeding in severe haemophilia A [SHA, defined as factor VIII (FVIII) activity < 1%] regular prophylactic FVIII replacement therapy is required, and the benefits of factor products with extended half-life (EHL) over traditional standard half-life (SHL) are still being debated. We performed a multi-centre, retrospective cohort study of persons with SHA in Austria aiming to compare clinical outcomes and factor utilization in patients with SHA, who switched from prophylaxis with SHL to an EHL. Data were collected from haemophilia-specific patient diaries and medical records. Twenty male persons with SHA (median age: 32.5 years) were included. The most common reason for switching to the EHL was a high bleeding rate with SHL. Switch to rFVIII-Fc resulted in a significantly decreased annualized bleeding rate (ABR; median difference (IQR): − 0.3 (− 4.5–0); Wilcoxon signed-rank test for matched pairs: Z = − 2.7, p = 0.008) and number of prophylactic infusions per week (− 0.75 (− 1.0–0.0); Z = − 2.7, p = 0.007). Factor utilization was comparable to prior prophylaxis with SHL (0.0 (− 15.8–24.8) IU/kg/week; Z = − 0.4, p = 0.691). In summary, switch to EHL (rFVIII-Fc) was associated with an improved clinical outcome, reflected by ABR reduction, and less frequent infusions, without significantly higher factor usage.

Low‐molecular‐weight‐heparins (LMWHs) have been established for the treatment of cancer‐associated venous thromboembolism (VTE). Recently published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with LMWHs. The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to evaluate efficacy and safety of DOACs versus LMWHs and update the evidence for treatment of VTE in cancer. Biomedical databases were screened for RCTs evaluating DOACs for cancer‐associated VTE. Primary efficacy and safety outcomes of this meta‐analysis were recurrent VTE and major bleeding at 6 months. Secondary outcomes comprised clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB), major gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary bleeding, mortality, fatal bleeding/pulmonary embolism, and treatment discontinuation rate. We performed prespecified subgroup analyses. Pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained by the Mantel‐Haenszel method within a random‐effect model. We screened 759 articles and included 4 RCTs (n = 2894). DOACs significantly reduced recurrent VTEs compared to LMWHs (5.2% vs 8.2%; RR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.43‐0.91]), but were associated with a nonsignificant increase in major bleedings (4.3% vs 3.3%; RR, 1.31 [95% CI, 0.83‐2.08]) and a significant increase in CRNMB (10.4% vs 6.4%; RR, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.19‐2.28]). Mortality risks were comparable between groups (RR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.83‐1.18]). Preterm treatment discontinuation was less common with DOACs (RR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.81‐0.96]). Major bleeding was more frequent in patients with GI cancer treated with DOACs (RR, 2.30 [95% CI, 1.08‐4.88]). In patients with cancer‐associated VTE, DOACs are more effective in preventing recurrent VTE compared to LMWH. However, risk of bleeding is increased with DOACs, especially in patients with GI cancer.

Background Adeno-associated virus (AAV)-based gene therapy for haemophilia has advanced substantially in the last 13 years; recently, three products have received approvals from regulatory authorities. Although the impact on quality of life seems promising, some limitations remain, such as the presence of pre-existing anti-AAV neutralising antibodies and the occurrence of hepatotoxicity. This review follows the CSL Behring-sponsored symposium at the 27th Congress of the European Hematology Association (EHA) 2022 that examined the haemophilia gene therapy process from a 360-degree multidisciplinary perspective. Here, the faculty (haematologist, nurse and haemophilia patient) summarised their own viewpoints from the symposium, with the aim of highlighting the key considerations required to engage with gene therapy effectively, for both patients and providers, as well as the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration, including with industry. Results When considering these new therapies, patients face a complex decision-making process, which includes whether gene therapy is right for them at their current stage of life. The authors agreed that collaboration and tailored education across the multidisciplinary team (including patients and their carers/families), starting early in the process and continuing throughout the long-term follow-up period, is key for the success of gene therapy. Additionally, patient expectations, which may surround eligibility, follow-up requirements and treatment outcomes, should be continually explored. During these ongoing discussions, transparent communication of the unknown factors, such as anticipated clotting factor levels, long-term factor expression and safety, and psychological changes, is critical. To ensure efficiency and comprehensiveness, clearly‑defined protocols should outline the whole process, which should include the recording and management of long-term effects. Conclusion In order to engage effectively, both patients and providers should be familiar with these key considerations prior to their involvement with the haemophilia gene therapy process. The future after the approval of haemophilia gene therapies remains to be seen and real-world evidence is eagerly awaited.

Over the past years, neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) were shown to contribute to states of acute and chronic inflammatory disease. They are composed of expelled chromatin and decorated by neutrophil-derived proteins. Therefore, the analysis of DNA complexes with myeloperoxidase (MPO) by ELISA has become an attractive tool to measure NET formation in in vitro and in vivo samples. When we used a published MPO-DNA ELISA protocol and included an isotype control for the anti-MPO coating antibody, we observed high assay specificity for in vitro prepared NET samples, whereas the specificity for in vivo plasma samples was low. In addition, the assay failed to detect in vitro generated MPO-DNA complexes when spiked into plasma. Therefore, we set out to improve the specificity of the MPO-DNA ELISA for plasma samples. We found that the use of Fab fragments or immunoglobulins from different species or reversal of the antibody pair led to either a high background or a low dynamic range of detection that did not improve the specificity for plasma samples. Also, the use of higher plasma dilutions or pre-clearing of plasma immunoglobulins were ineffective. Finally, we found that a commercial reagent designed to block human anti-mouse antibodies and multivalent substances increased the detection window between the MPO antibody and isotype control for highly diluted plasma. We applied this modified ELISA protocol to analyze MPO-DNA complexes in human blood samples of acute and chronic inflammatory conditions. While markers of neutrophil activation and NET formation such as MPO, elastase and citrullinated histone H3 correlated significantly, we observed no correlation with the levels of MPO-DNA complexes. Therefore, we conclude that ELISA measurements of MPO-DNA complexes in human plasma are highly questionable regarding specificity of NET detection. In general, plasma analyses by ELISA should more frequently include isotype controls for antibodies to demonstrate target specificity.

Robert Kralovics and colleagues report that the JAK2 V617F somatic mutation that drives the development of chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms is associated with the presence of a specific inherited haplotype in JAK2 . Genome-wide association studies have identified a number of new disease susceptibility loci that represent haplotypes defined by numerous SNPs. SNPs within a disease-associated haplotype are thought to influence either the expression of genes or the sequence of the proteins they encode. In a series of investigations of the JAK2 gene in myeloproliferative neoplasms, we uncovered a new property of haplotypes that can explain their disease association. We observed a nonrandom distribution of the somatic JAK2 V617F oncogenic mutation between two parental alleles of the JAK2 gene. We identified a haplotype that preferentially acquires JAK2 V617F and confers susceptibility to myeloproliferative neoplasms. One interpretation of our results is that a certain combination of SNPs may render haplotypes differentially susceptible to somatic mutagenesis. Thus, disease susceptibility loci may harbor somatic mutations that have a role in disease pathogenesis.

The current standard of care treatment for severe hemophilia A and B (SHA and SHB) is the prophylactic intravenous replacement of coagulation factor VIII or IX (FVIII/FIX) to prevent spontaneous bleeding. Persons with hemophilia without prophylactic treatment receive therapy in case of bleeding, i.e., on demand. To assess treatment patterns, utilization of products, and bleeding outcomes in a real-world cohort of persons with SHA and SHB, defined as FVIII or FIX activity < 1%, data was retrospectively collected from hemophilia-specific patient diaries used for home treatment, medical records, and entries into the Austrian Hemophilia Registry from the year 2012 to 2017. Fifty-three male persons with SHA (n = 47) and SHB (n = 6) were included; 26 with SHA and 5 with SHB were on prophylaxis, 8 and 1 switched therapy regimen, and 13 and 0 received on-demand therapy. Persons on prophylaxis used a mean factor FVIII or FIX dose of 71.7 and 40.1 IU/kg/week. Median (IQR) annualized bleeding rates (ABR) in SHA were 28.0 (23.4–31.3) in the on-demand, 4.9 (1.6–13.5) in the prophylaxis group, and 3.0 (2.0–6.8) in the prophylactic group of SHB. Three persons with SHA had zero bleeds during the observation period. On-demand therapy and hepatitis B and C were associated with higher ABR but not age, weight, and HIV positivity. Bleeding rates and the proportion of on-demand therapy in persons with hemophilia were high in our real-world cohort. Further improvement is needed, which might be facilitated with the advent of factor products with extended half-life or non-factor therapies.