Anticoagulation, immortality, and observations of COVID-19

Thromboprophylaxis strategies to improve the prognosis of COVID-19

The outbreak of 2019 novel coronavirus disease (Covid-19) has deeply challenged the world population, but also our medical knowledge. Special attention has been paid early to an activation of coagulation, then to an elevated rate of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19. These data suggested that anticoagulant drugs should be evaluated in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. The publication of unexpected high rates of VTE in patients hospitalized with COVID-19, despite receiving thromboprophylaxis, open the way to dedicated trials, evaluating modified regimens of thromboprophylaxis. Moreover, the further improvement in our comprehension of the disease, particularly the pulmonary endothelial dysfunction increased the hope that anticoagulant drugs may also protect patients from pulmonary thrombosis. In this comprehensive review, we cover the different situations where thromboprophylaxis standard may be modified (medically-ill inpatients, ICU inpatients, outpatients), and describe some of the current randomized controls trials evaluating new regimens of thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19, including the preliminary available results. We also discuss the potential of anticoagulant drugs to target the thromboinflammation described in patients with severe COVID-19.

Attention to Immortal Time Bias in Critical Care Research

Observational studies in critical care medicine offer a popular and practical approach to questions of treatment effectiveness. Although observational research is widely understood to be susceptible to design and interpretation challenges, one well-described source of bias-immortal time bias (ITB)-is frequently present yet often overlooked. ITB may be introduced by study design oversights or mishandled during data analysis. When present, ITB can create inappropriate estimates of the benefit or harm of an exposure or intervention. Studies examining treatments in critically ill patients may be particularly susceptible to ITB, with consequences for clinical adoption and design and initiation of randomized trials. In this Critical Care Perspective, we illustrate the persistent problem of ITB in observational research using recent studies of hydrocortisone, ascorbic acid, and thiamine therapy in patients with sepsis and septic shock. Of the eight studies examined, none contained enough design or reporting elements to rule out the presence of ITB. To mitigate the influence of ITB in future observational studies, we present a novel checklist to help readers assess the features of study design, analysis, and reporting that introduce ITB or obscure its presence. We recommend that commonly used tools designed to evaluate observational research studies should include an ITB assessment.

Mortality, critical illness, and mechanical ventilation among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 on therapeutic anticoagulants

Background

COVID-19 is associated with hypercoagulability and increased incidence of thrombosis. We compared the clinical outcomes of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 who were on therapeutic anticoagulants to those on prophylactic anticoagulation.

Materials and methods

We performed an observational study of adult inpatients' with COVID-19 from March 9 to June 26, 2020. We compared patients who were continued on their outpatient prescribed therapeutic anticoagulation and those who were newly started on therapeutic anticoagulation for COVID-19 (without other indication) to those who were on prophylactic doses. The primary outcome was overall death while secondary outcomes were critical illness (World Health Organization Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement score ≥5), mechanical ventilation, and death among patients who first had critical illness. We adjusted for age, sex, race, body mass index (BMI), Charlson score, glucose on admission, and use of antiplatelet agents.

Results

Of 1716 inpatients with COVID-19, 171 patients were continued on their therapeutic anticoagulation and 78 were started on new therapeutic anticoagulation for COVID-19. In patients continued on home therapeutic anticoagulation, there were no differences in overall death, critical illness, mechanical ventilation, or death among patients with critical illness compared to patients on prophylactic anticoagulation. In patients receiving new therapeutic anticoagulation for COVID-19, there was increased death (OR 5.93; 95% CI 3.71-9.47), critical illness (OR 14.51; 95% CI 7.43-28.31), need mechanical ventilation (OR 11.22; 95% CI 6.67-18.86), and death after first having critical illness (OR 5.51; 95% CI 2.80-10.87).

Conclusions

Therapeutic anticoagulation for inpatients with COVID-19 was not associated with improved outcomes.

Direct oral anticoagulant use and risk of severe COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Hypercoagulability and thromboembolism are prominent features of severe COVID-19, and ongoing anticoagulant use might be protective.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide register-based cohort study in Sweden, February through May, 2020, to assess whether ongoing direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use was associated with reduced risk of hospital admission for laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, or a composite of intensive care unit (ICU) admission or death due to laboratory-confirmed COVID-19.

RESULTS

DOAC use (n = 103 703) was not associated with reduced risk of hospital admission for COVID-19 (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] [95% confidence interval] 1.00 [0.75-1.33] vs. nonuse atrial fibrillation comparator [n = 36 875]; and aHR 0.94 [0.80-1.10] vs. nonuse cardiovascular disease comparator [n = 355 699]), or ICU admission or death due to COVID-19 (aHRs 0.76 [0.51-1.12], and 0.90 [0.71-1.15], respectively).

CONCLUSION

Ongoing DOAC use was not associated with reduced risk of severe COVID-19, indicating that prognosis would not be modified by early outpatient DOAC initiation.

Anticoagulant interventions in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A scoping review of randomized controlled trials and call for international collaboration

INTRODUCTION

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is associated with a high incidence of thrombosis and mortality despite standard anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis. There is equipoise regarding the optimal dose of anticoagulant intervention in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and consequently, immediate answers from high-quality randomized trials are needed.

METHODS

The World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform was searched on June 17, 2020 for randomized controlled trials comparing increased dose to standard dose anticoagulant interventions in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Two authors independently screened the full records for eligibility and extracted data in duplicate.

RESULTS

A total of 20 trials were included in the review. All trials are open label, 5 trials use an adaptive design, 1 trial uses a factorial design, 2 trials combine multi-arm parallel group and factorial designs in flexible platform trials, and at least 15 trials have multiple study sites. With individual target sample sizes ranging from 30 to 3000 participants, the pooled sample size of all included trials is 12 568 participants. Two trials include only intensive care unit patients, and 10 trials base patient eligibility on elevated D-dimer levels. Therapeutic intensity anticoagulation is evaluated in 14 trials. All-cause mortality is part of the primary outcome in 14 trials.

DISCUSSION

Several trials evaluate different dose regimens of anticoagulant interventions in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Because these trials compete for sites and study participants, a collaborative effort is needed to complete trials faster, conduct pooled analyses and bring effective interventions to patients more quickly.

Anticoagulation practice patterns in COVID-19: A global survey

Background

Best practice for prevention, diagnosis, and management of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unknown due to limited published data in this population.

Objectives

We aimed to assess current global practice and experience in management of COVID-19-associated coagulopathy to identify information to guide prospective and randomized studies.

Methods

Physicians were queried about their current approach to prophylaxis, diagnosis, and treatment of VTE in patients with COVID-19 using an online survey tool distributed through multiple international organizations between April 10 and 14, 2020.

Results

Five hundred fifteen physicians from 41 countries responded. The majority of respondents (78%) recommended prophylactic anticoagulation for all hospitalized patients with COVID-19, with most recommending use of low-molecular-weight heparin or unfractionated heparin. Significant practice variation was found regarding the need for dose escalation of anticoagulation outside the setting of confirmed or suspected VTE. Respondents reported the use of bedside testing when unable to perform standard diagnostic imaging for diagnosis of VTE. Two hundred ninety-one respondents reported observing thrombotic complications in their patients, with 64% noting that the complication was pulmonary embolism. Of the 44% of respondents who estimated incidence of thrombosis in patients with COVID-19 in their hospital, estimates ranged widely from 1% to 50%. One hundred seventy-four respondents noted bleeding complications (34% minor bleeding, 14% clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding, and 12% major bleeding).

Conclusion

Well-designed epidemiologic studies are urgently needed to understand the incidence and risk factors of VTE and bleeding complications in patients with COVID-19. Randomized clinical trials addressing use of anticoagulation are also needed.