Search

Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) is a rare but serious complication of adenoviral vector-based COVID-19 vaccines. Similar to heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), antibodies reacting to platelet factor 4 (PF4) are responsible for platelet activation in VITT. The diagnosis of VITT includes the detection of anti-PF4 antibodies. Particle gel immunoassay (PaGIA) is one of the rapid immunoassays that is commonly used in the diagnosis of HIT to detect anti-PF4 antibodies. The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic performance of PaGIA in patients suspected of VITT. In this retrospective, single-center study, the correlation between PaGIA, enzyme immunoassay (EIA), and modified heparin-induced platelet aggregation assay (HIPA) in patients with findings suggestive of VITT was investigated. A commercially available PF4 rapid immunoassay (ID PaGIA H/PF4, Bio-Rad-DiaMed GmbH, Switzerland) and an anti-PF4/heparin EIA (ZYMUTEST HIA IgG, Hyphen Biomed) were used according to manufacturer's instructions. Modified HIPA was accepted as the gold standard test. Between March 8 and November 19, 2021, a total of 34 samples from clinically well-characterized patients (14 males, 20 females, mean age: 48.2 ± 18.2 years) were analyzed with PaGIA, EIA, and modified HIPA. VITT was diagnosed in 15 patients. Sensitivity and specificity of PaGIA were 54 and 67%, respectively. Anti-PF4/heparin optical density values were not significantly different between PaGIA positive and negative samples ( p  = 0.586). The sensitivity and specificity of EIA, on the other hand, were 87 and 100%, respectively. In conclusion, PaGIA is not reliable in the diagnosis of VITT because of its low sensitivity and specificity., Competing Interests: T.B. has received research funding from CoaChrom Diagnostica GmbH, DFG, Robert Bosch GmbH, Stiftung Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhämatologie e.V.: Ergomed, DRK Blutspendedienst, Deutsche Herzstiftung, Ministerium fuer Wissenschaft, Forschung und Kunst Baden-Wuerttemberg; has received lecture honoraria from Aspen Germany GmbH, Bayer Vital GmbH, Bristol-Myers Squibb GmbH & Co., Doctrina Med AG, Meet The Experts Academy UG, Schoechl Medical Education GmbH, Stago GmbH, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma GmbH, Novo Nordisk Pharma GmbH, Leo Pharma GmbH, Swedish Orphan Biovitrum GmbH; has provided consulting services to Terumo; has provided expert witness testimony relating to heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and non-HIT thrombocytopenic and coagulopathic disorders. All of these are outside the current work. Other authors declare no competing financial interests., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is caused by platelet-activating antibodies that recognize platelet factor 4/heparin (PF4/hep) complexes. The in vitro demonstration of PF4/hep antibodies using functional and immunological methods is essential for optimal management of patients suspected to have HIT. Since functional assays are technically challenging and limited to specialized laboratories, antigen-binding assays are commonly used in routine laboratories., Study Design: Blood samples from 448 consecutive patients in whom HIT was suspected were investigated using a latex agglutination test HemosIL® HIT-Ab(PF4-H) (HemosIL-Ab), two chemiluminescence tests HemosIL AcuStar HIT-Ab(PF4-H) (HemosIL AcuStar-Ab) and AcuStar HIT-IgG(PF4-H) (HemosIL AcuStar-IgG), an in-house PF4/hep IgG enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and the heparin induced platelet aggregation (HIPA) test., Results: Antibodies against PF4/hep were detectable in 44 out of 119 samples using HemosIL-Ab among which 20 samples were also reactive in the HIPA; and in 122, 64 and 108 out of 448 sera using HemosIL AcuStar-Ab, HemosIL AcuStar-IgG and in-house PF4/hep IgG-EIA, respectively, among which 52 sera were also reactive in the HIPA. All assays had high sensitivities of >95% for platelet activating antibodies; however, they differed in their specificities. The highest specificity and positive predictive value was observed by HemosIL AcuStar-IgG (96% and 78%, respectively)., Conclusion: Automated immunoassays are useful in the laboratory investigations of HIT and present a potential improvement toward standardization of laboratory investigations of HIT. The high positive predictive capability may justify treating the patient with alternative anticoagulants without waiting for the results of a functional assay., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background The rapid emergence of the Omicron variant and its large number of mutations led to its classification as a variant of concern (VOC) by the World Health Organization. Subsequently, Omicron evolved into distinct sublineages (eg, BA.1 and BA.2), which currently represent the majority of global infections. Initial studies of the neutralizing response toward BA.1 in convalescent and vaccinated individuals showed a substantial reduction. Methods We assessed antibody (immunoglobulin G [IgG]) binding, ACE2 (angiotensin-converting enzyme 2) binding inhibition, and IgG binding dynamics for the Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 variants compared to a panel of VOCs/variants of interest, in a large cohort (N = 352) of convalescent, vaccinated, and infected and subsequently vaccinated individuals. Results While Omicron was capable of efficiently binding to ACE2, antibodies elicited by infection or immunization showed reduced binding capacities and ACE2 binding inhibition compared to wild type. Whereas BA.1 exhibited less IgG binding compared to BA.2, BA.2 showed reduced inhibition of ACE2 binding. Among vaccinated samples, antibody binding to Omicron only improved after administration of a third dose. Conclusions Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 can still efficiently bind to ACE2, while vaccine/infection-derived antibodies can bind to Omicron. The extent of the mutations within both variants prevents a strong inhibitory binding response. As a result, both Omicron variants are able to evade control by preexisting antibodies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is caused by platelet-activating antibodies that recognize platelet factor 4/heparin (PF4/hep)-complexes. The in vitro demonstration of PF4/hep antibodies using functional assays is essential for an optimal management of patients suspected to have HIT. However, conventional functional assays are technically challenging and limited to specialized laboratories. In contrast, flow cytometers are commonly used in routine laboratories. The aim of this study is to investigate the performance characteristics of a commercially available, flow cytometer based assay in the diagnosis of HIT. Sera of consecutive patients with suspected HIT were investigated using the Emo-test HIT Confirm® assay and compared to the standard method consisting of an IgG-specific enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for anti-PF4/hep antibodies and the heparin induced platelet aggregation (HIPA) test. 390 sera were included in the study, 164 sera tested IgG EIA-positive, of which 33 also tested HIPA-positive. No HIPA-positive samples were EIA-negative. In the Emo-test HIT Confirm® assay, 112 sera revealed positive results (%Hepla > 13); however, 51 (45.5%) were EIA-negative. Of the 33 HIPA-positive/EIA-positive HIT sera, 23 tested positive in the Emo-test HIT Confirm® assay, 2 gave ambiguous results, and 8 sera yielded false-negative results. Accordingly, the HIT Confirm® assay showed a sensitivity of 69.7% with a slightly better specificity of 75.4% compared to the EIA (sensitivity 100%, specificity 63.3%). An increase in diagnostic specificity for HIT to 85% was found when positive results were obtained in both the Emo-test HIT Confirm® assay and EIA. The Emo-Test HIT Confirm® assay may improve the specificity of laboratory investigations of HIT. However, the assay can only be recommended in combination with an immunoassay due to the high rate of false negativity. Our observation indicates a need to establish external quality assessment for functional assays to avoid such clinically relevant pitfalls. • The HIT Confirm® assay may improve the specificity of laboratory investigations of HIT. • However, the assay can only be recommended in combination with an immunoassaydue to the high rate of false negativity. • This indicates a need to establish external quality assessment for functional assays to avoid such relevant pitfalls. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]