Seroconversion rates following COVID-19 vaccination among patients with cancer.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic saw one of the fastest developments of vaccines in an effort to combat an out-of-control pandemic. The 2 most common COVID-19 vaccine platforms currently in use, messenger RNA (mRNA) and adenovirus vector, were developed on the basis of previous research in use of this technology. Postauthorization surveillance of COVID-19 vaccines has identified safety signals, including unusual cases of thrombocytopenia with thrombosis reported in recipients of adenoviral vector vaccines. One of the devastating manifestations of this syndrome, termed vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT), is cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST). This review summarizes the current evidence and indications regarding biology, clinical characteristics, and pharmacological management of VITT with CVST. Observations: VITT appears to be similar to heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), with both disorders associated with thrombocytopenia, thrombosis, and presence of autoantibodies to platelet factor 4 (PF4). Unlike VITT, HIT is triggered by recent exposure to heparin. Owing to similarities between these 2 conditions and lack of high-quality evidence, interim recommendations suggest avoiding heparin and heparin analogues in patients with VITT. Based on initial reports, female sex and age younger than 60 years were identified as possible risk factors for VITT. Treatment consists of therapeutic anticoagulation with nonheparin anticoagulants and prevention of formation of autoantibody-PF4 complexes, the latter being achieved by administration of high-dose intravenous immunoglobin (IVIG). Steroids, which can theoretically inhibit the production of new antibodies, have been used in combination with IVIG. In severe cases, plasma exchange should be used for clearing autoantibodies. Monoclonal antibodies, such as rituximab and eculizumab, can be considered when other therapies fail. Routine platelet transfusions, aspirin, and warfarin should be avoided because of the possibility of worsening thrombosis and magnifying bleeding risk. Conclusions and Relevance: Adverse events like VITT, while uncommon, have been described despite vaccination remaining the most essential component in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. While it seems logical to consider the use of types of vaccines (eg, mRNA-based administration) in individuals at high risk, treatment should consist of therapeutic anticoagulation mostly with nonheparin products and IVIG.

/pdf/clinical-characteristics-and-pharmacological-management-of-fqxhdm0xvh.pdf

Clinical Characteristics and Pharmacological Management of COVID-19 Vaccine-Induced Immune Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia With Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis: A Review.

Scientists from across the globe are racing to develop effective vaccines and therapeutics for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Plans are beginning to emerge for ensuring the equitable worldwide distribution of vaccines and therapeutics resulting from biomedical innovations. Absent broad agreement and buy-in on those plans, governments may prioritize their own populations, resulting in inequitable distribution of medical products both within and among countries. During the 2009 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic, wealthy nations bought virtually all vaccine supplies. Even after the WHO appealed for donations, supplies for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) were limited. The White House may have already sought exclusive access to a COVID-19 vaccine candidate. European and Asian countries have imposed export controls on personal protective equipment and ventilators, with similar export controls likely to extend to COVID-19 vaccine and therapeutic stocks.

The development and widespread distribution of COVID-19 medical treatments are a common global interest. Here we offer a proposal for global cooperation to ensure equitable distribution of vaccines and therapies for COViD-19.

The Equitable Distribution of COVID-19 Therapeutics and Vaccines

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious respiratory condition sustained by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which manifests prevalently as mild to moderate respiratory tract infection. Nevertheless, in a number of cases the clinical course may deteriorate, with onset of end organ injury, systemic dysfunction, thrombosis and ischemia. Given the clinical picture, baseline assessment and serial monitoring of blood lactate concentration may be conceivably useful in COVID-19. We hence performed a systematic literature review to explore the possible association between increased blood lactate levels, disease severity and mortality in COVID-19 patients, including comparison of lactate values between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. We carried out an electronic search in Medline and Scopus, using the keywords "COVID-19" OR "SARS-CoV-2" AND "lactate" OR "lactic acid" OR "hyperlactatemia", between 2019 and present time (i.e. October 10, 2021), which allowed to identify 19 studies, totalling 6,459 patients. Overall, we found that COVID-19 patients with worse outcome tend to display higher lactate values than those with better outcome, although most COVID-19 patients in the studies included in our analysis did not have sustained baseline hyperlactatemia. Substantially elevated lactate values were neither consistently present in all COVID-19 patients who developed unfavourable clinical outcomes. These findings suggest that blood lactate monitoring upon admission and throughout hospitalization may be useful for early identification of higher risk of unfavourable COVID-19 illness progression, though therapeutic decisions based on using conventional hyperlactatemia cut-off values (i.e., 2.0 mmol/L) upon first evaluation may be inappropriate in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Blood lactate concentration in COVID-19: a systematic literature review.

After witnessing extraordinary scientific and regulatory efforts to speed development of and access to new COVID-19 interventions, patients facing other serious diseases have begun to ask "where's our Operation Warp Speed?" and "why isn't Emergency Use Authorization an option for our health crises?" Although this pandemic bears a number of unique features, the response to COVID-19 offers translatable lessons, in both its successes and failures, for non-pandemic diseases. These include the importance of collaborating across sectors, supporting the highest-priority research efforts, adopting rigorous and innovative trial designs, and sharing reliable information quickly. In addition, the regulatory response to the pandemic demonstrates that lowering standards for marketing authorization can result in increased safety concerns, missed opportunities for research and treatment, and delays in determining what works. Accordingly, policymakers and patient advocates seeking to build on the COVID-19 experience for non-pandemic diseases with unmet treatment needs should focus their efforts on promoting robust and efficient research designs, improving access to clinical trials, and facilitating use of the Food and Drug Administration's existing Expanded Access pathway.

Helpful Lessons and Cautionary Tales: How Should COVID-19 Drug Development and Access Inform Approaches to Non-Pandemic Diseases?

https://escholarship.org/content/qt9p1571t6/qt9p1571t6.pdf?t=qmrb09

Expanded Access Programs, compassionate drug Use, and Emergency Use Authorizations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The clinical trial agreement (CTA) is a key but often underappreciated document governing the relationship between a study site and a sponsor. Previous anecdotal materials have suggested that investigators may not often be involved in the review or negotiation of the CTA and may attach little importance to it. To provide more systematic current information, survey methods were used to explore the level of engagement, knowledge, and perceptions of investigators in the United States. The survey was distributed to more than 700 investigators-university affiliated and nonaffiliated-and/or related study staff, of whom 167 responded. Most respondents identified that they did not manage the clinical trial agreement process but were actively engaged in its review. Most were encouraged by their institutions to participate. However, some respondents expressed concerns with regard to their satisfaction with the content of the CTA, particularly with respect to issues such as financial negotiations and payments, indemnification, and subject injury language. The majority of investigators either strongly agreed or agreed that it was important for the investigator to be actively involved in the CTA process. Data from this survey provide the first systematic look at the current practices of US investigators, possible issues, and areas for improvement from the investigator's point of view.

JoAnn P. Pfeiffer

Papers

Expanded Access Programs, compassionate drug Use, and Emergency Use Authorizations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Management of Clinical Trial Agreements: Current Practices of Investigators in the United States.