Correction to: Cluster identification, selection, and description in Cluster randomized crossover trials: the PREP-IT trials

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article

Comparing direct oral anticoagulants and vitamin K antagonist use in morbidly obese patients with venous thromboembolism: A single center retrospective cohort study

Abstract Introduction: Limited data exists on the safety and efficacy of direct‐acting oral anticoagulants (DOAC) use in morbidly obese patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE). Given the benefits of DOAC use over vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), in terms of monitoring requirements, and dietary and drug interactions, it is important to evaluate whether this is consistent in the higher risk for VTE recurrence morbidly obese group body mass index (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2). Materials and methods: This retrospective, single‐center cohort study included patients with a BMI of at least 40 kg/m2 who were admitted to Emory University Hospital from 1st January 2012 to 31st May 2020 with acute VTE, and subsequently initiated on anticoagulation treatment with either DOAC or VKA (warfarin). Univariate and bivariate analyses were used to evaluate differences in demographics by treatment type and BMI. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression was used to assess the risk of VTE recurrence by type of treatment among morbidly obese patient subgroup. Results: There were 247 (11.8%) morbidly obese (≥ 40 kg/m2) patients who were more likely than non‐obese patients to be younger, female, and of non‐white race. Thirty percent of the study population (n=74) had a BMI >50 kg/m2. T ime‐to‐event analysis confirmed that the hazard of experiencing a recurrent thrombosis was not statistically significantly different among morbidly obese patients treated with a DOAC compared with VKA (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.28, confidence interval [CI] 0.07‐1.11, p = 0.07). Conclusions: This study aligns with previous literature and confirms that morbidly obese patients receiving DOAC or VKA have similar risks of recurrent VTE

Validation of an admission coagulation panel for risk stratification of COVID-19 patients.

BackgroundThere is limited data on the markers of coagulation and hemostatic activation (MOCHA) profile in Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its ability to identify COVID-19 patients at risk for thrombotic events and other complications.MethodsHospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-COV-2 from four Atlanta hospitals were included in this observational cohort study and underwent admission testing of MOCHA parameters (plasma d-dimer, prothrombin fragment 1.2, thrombin-antithrombin complex, fibrin monomer). Clinical outcomes included deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, access line thrombosis, ICU admission, intubation and mortality.Main resultsOf 276 patients (mean age 59 ± 6.4 years, 47% female, 62% African American), 45 (16%) had a thrombotic endpoint. Each MOCHA parameter was independently associated with a thrombotic event (pConclusionsAn admission MOCHA profile is useful to risk-stratify COVID-19 patients for thrombotic complications and more effective than isolated d-dimer for predicting risk of ICU admission and intubation

The B-Natural study—The outcome of immune tolerance induction therapy in patients with severe haemophilia B

Introduction: Inhibitors develop less frequently in haemophilia B (HB) than haemophilia A (HA). However, when present, the success of tolerization by immune tolerance induction (ITI) therapy is lower and the risk of complications higher. Aim: To evaluate the use and outcome of ITI in patients with HB and inhibitors. Methods: Subjects include singletons or siblings with a current/history of inhibitors enrolled in B-Natural—an observational study designed to increase understanding of clinical management of patients with HB. Patients were followed for 6 months and information on demographics, medical and social history, and treatment were recorded. Results: Twenty-nine patients with severe HB and inhibitors were enrolled in 24 centres. Twenty-two underwent one or more courses of ITI with or without immune suppression. Eight patients (36.4%) were successfully tolerized after the first course of ITI. One of these successes (12.5%) experienced allergic manifestations, whereas the corresponding number for the 10 treatment failures was five (50%). One of seven (14.2%) patients with large deletions and three of eight (37.5%) with nonsense mutations were tolerized at the first attempt, and all patients experiencing nephrosis either failed or were on-going. At study end, 11 (50%) were considered successfully tolerized after one or more ITI courses, three were unsuccessful, and eight were still undergoing treatment. Conclusion: Our data underscore the possibilities and difficulties of achieving tolerization in patients with HB with inhibitors. The type of mutation and complications appear to correlate with ITI outcome, but more accurate definitions of successful ITI are warranted