You are leaving Medscape Education
Cancel Continue
Log in to save activities Your saved activities will show here so that you can easily access them whenever you're ready. Log in here CME & Education Log in to keep track of your credits.
 

CME / ABIM MOC / CE

Will Full-Dose Anticoagulation Become Standard Care in Severe COVID-19?

  • Authors: News Author: Mitchel L. Zoler, PhD; CME Author: Laurie Barclay, MD
  • CME / ABIM MOC / CE Released: 10/21/2022
  • Valid for credit through: 10/21/2023
Start Activity

  • Credits Available

    Physicians - maximum of 0.25 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™

    ABIM Diplomates - maximum of 0.25 ABIM MOC points

    Nurses - 0.25 ANCC Contact Hour(s) (0.25 contact hours are in the area of pharmacology)

    Pharmacists - 0.25 Knowledge-based ACPE (0.025 CEUs)

    Physician Assistant - 0.25 AAPA hour(s) of Category I credit

    IPCE - 0.25 Interprofessional Continuing Education (IPCE) credit

    You Are Eligible For

    • Letter of Completion
    • ABIM MOC points

Target Audience and Goal Statement

This activity is intended for critical care clinicians, hematologists/oncologists, cardiologists, internists, pharmacists, nurses, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, pulmonologists, and other members of the health care team for patients with critically ill patients with COVID-19.

The goal of this activity is for learners to be better able to describe the safety profile and effect of increased intensity of prophylactic antithrombotic therapy on preventing venous thrombotic events and arterial thrombotic complications associated with severe COVID-19 infection, based on findings of COVID-PACT, a multicenter, 2×2 factorial, open-label, randomized controlled trial with blinded endpoint adjudication in intensive care unit-level patients with COVID-19.

Upon completion of this activity, participants will:

  • Assess the safety profile and effect of increased intensity of prophylactic antithrombotic therapy on preventing venous and arterial thrombotic complications associated with severe COVID-19 infection, based on the findings of COVID-PACT
  • Evaluate the clinical implications of the safety of increased intensity of prophylactic antithrombotic therapy on preventing venous and arterial thrombotic complications associated with severe COVID-19 infection, based on findings of COVID-PACT
  • Outline implications for the healthcare team


Disclosures

Medscape, LLC requires every individual in a position to control educational content to disclose all financial relationships with ineligible companies that have occurred within the past 24 months. Ineligible companies are organizations whose primary business is producing, marketing, selling, re-selling, or distributing healthcare products used by or on patients.

All relevant financial relationships for anyone with the ability to control the content of this educational activity are listed below and have been mitigated. Others involved in the planning of this activity have no relevant financial relationships.


News Author

  • Mitchel L. Zoler, PhD

    Freelance writer, Medscape

    Disclosures

    Mitchel L. Zoler, PhD, has no relevant financial relationships.

CME Author

  • Laurie Barclay, MD

    Freelance writer and reviewer
    Medscape, LLC

    Disclosures

    Laurie Barclay, MD, has the following relevant financial relationships:
    Formerly owned stocks in: AbbVie Inc.

Editor/Compliance Reviewer

  • Amanda Jett, PharmD, BCACP

    Associate Director, Accreditation and Compliance, Medscape, LLC

    Disclosures

    Amanda Jett, PharmD, BCACP, has no relevant financial relationships.

Compliance Reviewer

  • Yaisanet Oyola, MD

    Associate Director, Accreditation and Compliance, Medscape, LLC

    Disclosures

    Yaisanet Oyola, MD, has no relevant financial relationships.

Peer Reviewer

This activity has been peer reviewed and the reviewer has no relevant financial relationships.


Accreditation Statements



In support of improving patient care, Medscape, LLC is jointly accredited with commendation by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.

This activity was planned by and for the healthcare team, and learners will receive 0.25 Interprofessional Continuing Education (IPCE) credit for learning and change.

    For Physicians

  • Medscape, LLC designates this enduring material for a maximum of 0.25 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.

    Successful completion of this CME activity, which includes participation in the evaluation component, enables the participant to earn up to 0.25 MOC points in the American Board of Internal Medicine's (ABIM) Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program. Participants will earn MOC points equivalent to the amount of CME credits claimed for the activity. It is the CME activity provider's responsibility to submit participant completion information to ACCME for the purpose of granting ABIM MOC credit.

    Contact This Provider

    For Nurses

  • Awarded 0.25 contact hour(s) of continuing nursing education for RNs and APNs; 0.25 contact hours are in the area of pharmacology.

    Contact This Provider

    For Pharmacists

  • Medscape, LLC designates this continuing education activity for 0.25 contact hour(s) (0.025 CEUs) (Universal Activity Number JA0007105-0000-22-350-H01-P).

    Contact This Provider

  • For Physician Assistants

    Medscape, LLC has been authorized by the American Academy of PAs (AAPA) to award AAPA Category 1 CME credit for activities planned in accordance with AAPA CME Criteria. This activity is designated for 0.25 AAPA Category 1 CME credits. Approval is valid until 10/21/2023. PAs should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation.

For questions regarding the content of this activity, contact the accredited provider for this CME/CE activity noted above. For technical assistance, contact [email protected]


Instructions for Participation and Credit

There are no fees for participating in or receiving credit for this online educational activity. For information on applicability and acceptance of continuing education credit for this activity, please consult your professional licensing board.

This activity is designed to be completed within the time designated on the title page; physicians should claim only those credits that reflect the time actually spent in the activity. To successfully earn credit, participants must complete the activity online during the valid credit period that is noted on the title page. To receive AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™, you must receive a minimum score of 75% on the post-test.

Follow these steps to earn CME/CE credit*:

  1. Read the target audience, learning objectives, and author disclosures.
  2. Study the educational content online or printed out.
  3. Online, choose the best answer to each test question. To receive a certificate, you must receive a passing score as designated at the top of the test. We encourage you to complete the Activity Evaluation to provide feedback for future programming.

You may now view or print the certificate from your CME/CE Tracker. You may print the certificate but you cannot alter it. Credits will be tallied in your CME/CE Tracker and archived for 6 years; at any point within this time period you can print out the tally as well as the certificates from the CME/CE Tracker.

*The credit that you receive is based on your user profile.

CME / ABIM MOC / CE

Will Full-Dose Anticoagulation Become Standard Care in Severe COVID-19?

Authors: News Author: Mitchel L. Zoler, PhD; CME Author: Laurie Barclay, MDFaculty and Disclosures

CME / ABIM MOC / CE Released: 10/21/2022

Valid for credit through: 10/21/2023

processing....

Note: The information on the coronavirus outbreak is continually evolving. The content within this activity serves as a historical reference to the information that was available at the time of this publication. We continue to add to the collection of activities on this subject as new information becomes available. It is the policy of Medscape Education to avoid the mention of brand names or specific manufacturers in accredited educational activities. However, manufacturer names related to the approved COVID-19 vaccines are provided in this activity in an effort to promote clarity. The use of manufacturer names should not be viewed as an endorsement by Medscape of any specific product or manufacturer.

Clinical Context

SARS-CoV2 infection increases risk for venous and arterial thrombosis, particularly in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The inflammatory response to infection includes coagulation cascade activation, systemic endothelial dysfunction, and hyperreactive platelet response.

In critically ill patients without COVID-19, anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis is recommended because it significantly decreases venous thrombotic events. However, findings of randomized controlled trials of anticoagulant and antiplatelet treatment in patients with COVID-19 have been mixed, perhaps reflecting differing study populations, designs, and endpoints.

Study Synopsis and Perspective

BARCELONA — Hospitalized patients in the ICU because of an acute COVID-19 infection had significantly fewer thrombotic events and complications when treated with full-dose anticoagulation compared with patients who received standard-dose anticoagulation prophylaxis, but full-dose anticoagulation also triggered an excess of moderate and severe bleeding events, randomized trial results show.

The new findings from the COVID-PACT trial in an exclusively US-based cohort of 382 on-treatment patients in the ICU with COVID-19 infection may lead to a change in existing guidelines, which currently recommend standard-dose prophylaxis based on results from prior head-to-head comparisons, such as guidelines posted this past March from the American Society of Hematology.[1]

The new findings suggest "full-dose anticoagulation should be considered to prevent thrombotic complications in selected critically ill patients with COVID-19" after weighing an individual patient's risk for both thrombotic events and bleeding, David D. Berg, MD, said at the annual congress of the European Society of Cardiology. Simultaneous with his report at the congress, the results also appeared online in Circulation.[2]

"What the results tell us is that full-dose anticoagulation in critically ill patients with COVID-19 is highly effective for reducing thrombotic complications," said Dr Berg, a cardiologist and critical care physician at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts.

"Need to Replace the Guidelines"

"We probably need to replace the guidelines," said Eduardo Ramacciotti, MD, PhD, MPH, a professor of vascular surgery at Santa Casa School of Medicine in São Paulo, Brazil. Dr Ramacciotti praised the study's design, the endpoints, and the fact that the design excluded patients at high risk for bleeding complications, particularly those with a fibrinogen level below 200 mg/dL (2 g/L).

But other experts questioned the significance of the COVID-PACT results, given that the outcomes did not show that full-dose anticoagulation produced incremental improvement in patient survival.

"We should abandon the thought that intensified anticoagulation should be routine because it did not overall increase the number of patients discharged from the hospital alive," commented John W. Eikelboom, MBBS, a professor of hematology and thromboembolism at McMaster University in Hamilton, Canada.

"Preventing venous thrombosis is a good thing, but the money is in saving lives and stopping need for ventilation, and we haven't been successful doing that with an antithrombotic strategy," said Dr Eikelboom. "It is useful to prevent venous thrombosis, but we need to look elsewhere to improve the outcomes of [critically ill] patients with COVID-19."

Reducing Thromboembolism Is a "Valid Goal"

Dr Berg took a different view. "It's a valid goal to try to reduce venous thromboembolism complications," the major benefit seen in his study, he said. "There is clinical significance to reducing thrombotic events in terms of how people feel, their functional status, and their complications. There are a lot of clinically relevant consequences of thrombosis beyond mortality."

COVID-PACT ran at 34 US centers from August 2020 to March 2022, but stopped short of its enrollment goal of 750 patients because of waning numbers of patients with COVID-19 admitted to ICUs. In addition to randomly assigning patients within 96 hours of their ICU admission to full-dose anticoagulation or to standard-dose antithrombotic prophylaxis, the study included a second, concurrent randomization to the antiplatelet agent clopidogrel or to no antiplatelet drug. Both randomizations used an open-label design.

The results failed to show a discernable effect from adding clopidogrel on both the primary efficacy and primary safety endpoints, adding to accumulated evidence that treatment with an antiplatelet agent, including aspirin, confers no antithrombotic benefit in patients with COVID-19.

The trial's participants averaged 61 years old, 53% had hypertension, and 30% had diabetes. The median time after ICU admission when randomized treatment began was 2.1 days, and researchers followed patients for a median of 13 days, including a median time receiving anticoagulation of 10.6 days.

The trial design allowed clinicians to use either low-molecular-weight heparin or unfractionated heparin for anticoagulation, and 82% of patients received low-molecular-weight heparin as their initial treatment. The prespecified design called for an on-treatment analysis because of an anticipated high crossover rate. During the trial, 34% of patients who started on the prophylactic dose switched to full dose and 17% had the reverse crossover.

95% Increased Win Ratio With Full Dose

The study's primary efficacy endpoint used a win-ratio analysis that included 7 different adverse outcomes that ranged from death from venous or arterial thrombosis to clinically silent deep vein thrombosis.[3] Treatment with full-dose anticoagulation led to a significant 95% increase in win ratio.

Researchers also applied a more conventional time-to-first-event secondary efficacy analysis, which showed that full-dose anticoagulation cut the incidence of an adverse outcome by a significant 44% relative to prophylactic dosing.

The 2 study groups showed no difference in all-cause death rates. The efficacy advantage of the full-dose regimen was driven by reduced rates of venous thrombotic events, especially a reduction in clinically evident deep vein thrombotic events.

The primary safety endpoint was the rate of fatal or life-threatening bleeding episodes, and although life-threatening bleeds were numerically more common among the full-dose recipients (4 events compared with 1 event on prophylaxis dosing), the difference was not significant, and no patients died from a bleeding event.

More Secondary Safety Bleeds

The safety difference showed up in a secondary measure of bleeding severity, the rate of GUSTO moderate or severe bleeds.[4] These occurred in 15 of the full-dose recipients compared with 1 patient receiving the prophylactic dose.

Dr Berg highlighted that several prior studies have assessed various anticoagulation regimens in critically ill (ICU-admitted and on respiratory or cardiovascular support) patients with COVID-19. For example, 2 influential reports published in 2021 by the same team of investigators in the New England Journal of Medicine had sharply divergent results.

One multicenter study, which tested full-dose heparin against prophylactic treatment in more than 1000 critically ill patients, was stopped prematurely because it had not shown a significant difference between the treatment groups.[5] The second study, in more than 2000 multicenter patients with COVID-19 who did not require critical-level organ support, showed clear superiority of the full-dose heparin regimen.[6]

Notably, both previous studies used a different primary efficacy endpoint than the COVID-PACT study. The earlier reports both measured efficacy in terms of patients being alive and off organ support by 21 days from randomization.

Patients to Exclude

Although Dr Berg stressed the clear positive result, he also cautioned that they should not apply to patients excluded from the study: those with severe coagulopathies, those with severe thrombocytopenia, and patients already maintained on dual antiplatelet therapy. He also cautioned against using the full-dose strategy in elderly patients because in COVID-PACT those who developed bleeding complications tended to be older.

Dr Berg also noted that heparin prophylaxis is a well-established intervention for ICU-admitted patients without COVID-19 for the purpose of preventing venous thromboembolisms without evidence that this approach reduces deaths or organ failure.

But he conceded that "the priority of treatment depends on whether it saves lives, so anticoagulation is probably not as high a priority as other effective treatments," that reduce mortality. "Preventing venous thromboembolism has rarely been shown to have a mortality benefit," Dr Berg noted.

COVID-PACT received no direct commercial funding. Dr Berg has been a consultant to AstraZeneca, Mobility Bio, and Youngene Therapeutics, and he participated in a trial sponsored by Kowa. Dr Ramacciotti has been a consultant to or speaker on behalf of Aspen, Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Mylan, Pfizer, and Sanofi, and he has received research support from Bayer, Esperon, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr Eikelboom has received honoraria and research support from Bayer.

European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Congress 2022. Presented August 29, 2022.

Circulation. Published online August 29, 2022.

Study Highlights

  • In COVID-PACT, 390 ICU-level patients with COVID-19 at 34 US centers were randomly assigned to full-dose or standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation.
  • Absent an indication for antiplatelet therapy, 292 patients were also randomly assigned to clopidogrel or no antiplatelet therapy.
  • At randomization, 99% of patients required advanced respiratory therapy (15% invasive mechanical ventilation).
  • During hospitalization, 40% required invasive ventilation.
  • The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of death from venous or arterial thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, clinically evident DVT, type 1 myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, systemic embolic event or acute limb ischemia, or clinically silent DVT, through hospital discharge or 28 days.
  • Because of decreasing ICU-level COVID-19 admissions, recruitment was stopped early in March 2022 at ∼50% planned recruitment.
  • Comparing anticoagulation strategies, a greater proportion of wins occurred with full-dose (12.3%) vs standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (6.4%; win ratio, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.08-3.55; P=.028).
  • This efficacy advantage was driven by reduced venous thrombotic event rates, especially reduction in clinically evident DVT.
  • Time-to-event analysis was consistent for primary efficacy (full-dose vs standard-dose incidence 9.9% vs 15.2%; HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.32-0.99; P=.046).
  • The primary safety endpoint (fatal or life-threatening bleeding) occurred in 4 (2.1%) receiving full-dose vs 1 (0.5%) receiving standard-dose (P=.19) and the secondary safety endpoint (GUSTO moderate/severe bleeding) in 15 (7.9%) versus 1 (0.5%; P=.002).
  • All-cause mortality was not significantly different between groups (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.56-1.48; P=.70); no patients died from bleeding events.
  • Primary efficacy or safety endpoints did not differ with clopidogrel vs no antiplatelet therapy.

Table. Full-Dose Anticoagulation vs Standard-Dose Prophylactic Anticoagulation in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19

Outcome Full-dose Anticoagulation (N = 191) Standard-dose Prophylactic Anticoagulation (N = 191) Statistical Significance
Wins*, % 12.3 6.4 Win ratio: 1.95; P=.028
Time-to-event analysis, % 9.9 15.2 HR, 0.56; P=.046
All-cause mortality, % 18.8 16.8 HR, 0.91; P=.70
Fatal or life-threatening bleeding, % 2.1 0.5 P=.19
GUSTO moderate/severe bleeding, % 7.9 0.5 P=.002

*Wins defined as a composite endpoint of death from venous or arterial thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, clinically evident DVT, type 1 myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, systemic embolic event or acute limb ischemia, or clinically silent DVT, through hospital discharge or 28 days. GUSTO, Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries; HR, hazard ratio.

  • The investigators concluded that in critically ill patients with COVID-19, full-dose anticoagulation, but not clopidogrel, reduced thrombotic complications but with increased bleeding, driven primarily by transfusions in hemodynamically stable patients and no apparent excess in mortality.
  • Adding clopidogrel had no discernable effect on primary efficacy/safety endpoints, supporting accumulated evidence that antiplatelet treatment with aspirin or other agents has no antithrombotic benefit in patients with COVID-19.
  • High-dose anticoagulation should not be used in patients excluded from this study: those with severe coagulopathies/thrombocytopenia or already maintained on dual antiplatelet therapy.
  • As patients with bleeding complications tended to be older, high-dose anticoagulation should be avoided in elderly patients.

Clinical Implications

  • In ICU patients with COVID-19, full-dose anticoagulation, but not clopidogrel, reduced thrombotic complications but with increased bleeding.
  • The findings may support revisiting current consensus treatment guidelines recommending standard-dose prophylactic intensity anticoagulation in such patients.

Implications for the Healthcare Team

High-dose anticoagulation should be avoided in elderly patients and those at high bleeding risk.

 

Earn Credit