Dataset Information

Early initiation of prophylactic anticoagulation for prevention of COVID-19 mortality: a nationwide cohort study of hospitalized patients in the United States.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Deaths among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are partially attributed to venous thromboembolism and arterial thromboses. Anticoagulants prevent thrombosis formation, possess anti-inflammatory and anti-viral properties, and may be particularly effective for treating patients with COVID-19.

Objective

To evaluate whether initiation of prophylactic anticoagulation within 24 hours of admission is associated with decreased risk of death among patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Design

Observational cohort study.

Setting

Nationwide cohort of patients receiving care in the Department of Veterans Affairs, the largest integrated healthcare system in the United States.

Participants

All patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection March 1 to July 31, 2020, without a history of therapeutic anticoagulation.

Exposures

Prophylactic doses of subcutaneous heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin, or direct oral anticoagulants.

Main outcomes and measures

30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes: inpatient mortality and initiating therapeutic anticoagulation.

Results

Of 4,297 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 3,627 (84.4%) received prophylactic anticoagulation within 24 hours of admission. More than 99% (n=3,600) received subcutaneous heparin or enoxaparin. We observed 622 deaths within 30 days of admission, 513 among those who received prophylactic anticoagulation. Most deaths (510/622, 82%) occurred during hospitalization. In inverse probability of treatment weighted analyses, cumulative adjusted incidence of mortality at 30 days was 14.3% (95% CI 13.1-15.5) among those receiving prophylactic anticoagulation and 18.7% (95% CI 15.1-22.9) among those who did not. Compared to patients who did not receive prophylactic anticoagulation, those who did had a 27% decreased risk for 30-day mortality (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.66-0.81). Similar associations were found for inpatient mortality and initiating therapeutic anticoagulation. Quantitative bias analysis demonstrated that results were robust to unmeasured confounding (e-value lower 95% CI 1.77). Results persisted in a number of sensitivity analyses.

Conclusions and relevance

Early initiation of prophylactic anticoagulation among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 was associated with a decreased risk of mortality. These findings provide strong real-world evidence to support guidelines recommending the use of prophylactic anticoagulation as initial therapy for COVID-19 patients upon hospital admission.

SUBMITTER: Rentsch CT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7743107 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate whether early initiation of prophylactic anticoagulation compared with no anticoagulation was associated with decreased risk of death among patients admitted to hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) in the United States.DesignObservational cohort study.SettingNationwide cohort of patients receiving care in the Department of Veterans Affairs, a large integrated national healthcare system.ParticipantsAll 4297 patients admitted to hospital from 1 March to 31 July 2020 with laboratory confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and without a history of anticoagulation.Main outcome measuresThe main outcome was 30 day mortality. Secondary outcomes were inpatient mortality, initiating therapeutic anticoagulation (a proxy for clinical deterioration, including thromboembolic events), and bleeding that required transfusion.ResultsOf 4297 patients admitted to hospital with covid-19, 3627 (84.4%) received prophylactic anticoagulation within 24 hours of admission. More than 99% (n=3600) of treated patients received subcutaneous heparin or enoxaparin. 622 deaths occurred within 30 days of hospital admission, 513 among those who received prophylactic anticoagulation. Most deaths (510/622, 82%) occurred during hospital stay. Using inverse probability of treatment weighted analyses, the cumulative incidence of mortality at 30 days was 14.3% (95% confidence interval 13.1% to 15.5%) among those who received prophylactic anticoagulation and 18.7% (15.1% to 22.9%) among those who did not. Compared with patients who did not receive prophylactic anticoagulation, those who did had a 27% decreased risk for 30 day mortality (hazard ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.66 to 0.81). Similar associations were found for inpatient mortality and initiation of therapeutic anticoagulation. Receipt of prophylactic anticoagulation was not associated with increased risk of bleeding that required transfusion (hazard ratio 0.87, 0.71 to 1.05). Quantitative bias analysis showed that results were robust to unmeasured confounding (e-value lower 95% confidence interval 1.77 for 30 day mortality). Results persisted in several sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsEarly initiation of prophylactic anticoagulation compared with no anticoagulation among patients admitted to hospital with covid-19 was associated with a decreased risk of 30 day mortality and no increased risk of serious bleeding events. These findings provide strong real world evidence to support guidelines recommending the use of prophylactic anticoagulation as initial treatment for patients with covid-19 on hospital admission.

Project description:BackgroundBoth COVID-19 and pregnancy are associated with hypercoagulability. Due to the increased risk for thrombosis, the United States National Institute of Health's recommendation for prophylactic anticoagulant use for pregnant patients has expanded from patients hospitalized for severe COVID-19 manifestation to all patients hospitalized for the manifestation of COVID-19 (no guideline: before December 26, 2020; first update: December 27, 2022; second update: February 24, 2022-present). However, no study has evaluated this recommendation.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to characterize prophylactic anticoagulant use among hospitalized pregnant people with COVID-19 from March 20, 2020, to October 19, 2022.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study in large US health care systems across 7 states. The cohort of interest was pregnant patients who were hospitalized with COVID-19, without previous coagulopathy or contraindication to anticoagulants (n=2767). The treatment group consisted of patients prescribed prophylactic dose anticoagulation between 2 days before and 14 days after COVID-19 treatment onset (n=191). The control group was patients with no anticoagulant exposure between 14 days before and 60 days after COVID-19 treatment onset (n=2534). We ascertained the use of prophylactic anticoagulants with attention to the updates in guidelines and emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. We propensity score matched the treatment and control group 1:1 on the most important features contributing to the prophylactic anticoagulant administration status classification. Outcome measures included coagulopathy, bleeding, COVID-19-related complications, and maternal-fetal health outcomes. Additionally, the inpatient anticoagulant administration rate was validated in a nationwide population from Truveta, a collective of 700 hospitals across the United States.ResultsThe overall administration rate of prophylactic anticoagulants was 7% (191/2725). It was lowest after the second guideline update (no guideline: 27/262, 10%; first update: 145/1663, 8.72%; second update: 19/811, 2.3%; P<.001) and during the omicron-dominant period (Wild type: 45/549, 8.2%; Alpha: 18/129, 14%; Delta: 81/507, 16%; and Omicron: 47/1551, 3%; P<.001). Models developed on retrospective data showed that the variable most associated with the administration of inpatient prophylactic anticoagulant was comorbidities prior to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The patients who were administered prophylactic anticoagulant were also more likely to receive supplementary oxygen (57/191, 30% vs 9/188, 5%; P<.001). There was no statistical difference in a new diagnosis of coagulopathy, bleeding, or maternal-fetal health outcomes between those who received treatment and the matched control group.ConclusionsMost hospitalized pregnant patients with COVID-19 did not receive prophylactic anticoagulants across health care systems as recommended by guidelines. Guideline-recommended treatment was administered more frequently to patients with greater COVID-19 illness severity. Given the low rate of administration and differences between treated and untreated cohorts, efficacy could not be assessed.

Project description:Rationale: More information on risk factors for death from tuberculosis in the United States could help reduce the tuberculosis mortality rate, which has remained steady for more than a decade.Objective: To identify risk factors for tuberculosis-related death in adults.Methods: We performed a retrospective study of 1,304 adults with tuberculosis who died before treatment completion and 1,039 frequency-matched control subjects who completed tuberculosis treatment in 2005 to 2006 in 13 states reporting 65% of U.S. tuberculosis cases. We used in-depth record abstractions and a standard algorithm to classify deaths in persons with tuberculosis as tuberculosis-related or not. We then compared these classifications to causes of death as coded in death certificates. We used multivariable logistic regression to calculate adjusted odds ratios for predictors of tuberculosis-related death among adults compared with those who completed tuberculosis treatment.Results: Of 1,304 adult deaths, 942 (72%) were tuberculosis related, 272 (21%) were not, and 90 (7%) could not be classified. Of 847 tuberculosis-related deaths with death certificates available, 378 (45%) did not list tuberculosis as a cause of death. Adjusting for known risks, we identified new risks for tuberculosis-related death during treatment: absence of pyrazinamide in the initial regimen (adjusted odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.9-6.0); immunosuppressive medications (adjusted odds ratio, 2.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-5.6); incomplete tuberculosis diagnostic evaluation (adjusted odds ratio, 2.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-3.3), and an alternative nontuberculosis diagnosis before tuberculosis diagnosis (adjusted odds ratio, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-2.2).Conclusions: Most persons who died with tuberculosis had a tuberculosis-related death. Intensive record review revealed tuberculosis as a cause of death more often than did death certificate diagnoses. New tools, such as a tuberculosis mortality risk score based on our study findings, may identify patients with tuberculosis for in-hospital interventions to prevent death.

Project description:BackgroundHealthy lifestyle and screening represent 2 major approaches to colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention. It remains unknown whether the CRC-preventive benefit of healthy lifestyle differs by endoscopic screening status, and how the combination of healthy lifestyle with endoscopic screening can improve CRC prevention.Methods and findingsWe assessed lifestyle and endoscopic screening biennially among 75,873 women (Nurses' Health Study, 1988 to 2014) and 42,875 men (Health Professionals Follow-up Study, 1988 to 2014). We defined a healthy lifestyle score based on body mass index, smoking, physical activity, alcohol consumption, and diet. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) and population-attributable risks (PARs) for CRC incidence and mortality in relation to healthy lifestyle score according to endoscopic screening. Participants' mean age (standard deviation) at baseline was 54 (8) years. During a median of 26 years (2,827,088 person-years) follow-up, we documented 2,836 incident CRC cases and 1,013 CRC deaths. We found a similar association between healthy lifestyle score and lower CRC incidence among individuals with and without endoscopic screening, with the multivariable HR per one-unit increment of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.80 to 0.90) and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.81 to 0.88), respectively (P-interaction = 0.99). The fraction of CRC cases that might be prevented (PAR) by endoscopic screening alone was 32% (95% CI, 31% to 33%) and increased to 61% (95% CI, 42% to 75%) when combined with healthy lifestyle (score = 5). The corresponding PAR (95% CI) increased from 15% (13% to 16%) to 51% (17% to 74%) for proximal colon cancer and from 47% (45% to 50%) to 75% (61% to 84%) for distal CRC. Results were similar for CRC mortality. A limitation of our study is that our study participants are all health professionals and predominantly whites, which may not be representative of the general population.ConclusionsOur study suggests that healthy lifestyle is associated with lower CRC incidence and mortality independent of endoscopic screening. An integration of healthy lifestyle with endoscopic screening may substantially enhance prevention for CRC, particularly for proximal colon cancer, compared to endoscopic screening alone.

Project description:BackgroundThere is growing concern that racial and ethnic minority communities around the world are experiencing a disproportionate burden of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We investigated racial and ethnic disparities in patterns of COVID-19 testing (i.e., who received testing and who tested positive) and subsequent mortality in the largest integrated healthcare system in the United States.Methods and findingsThis retrospective cohort study included 5,834,543 individuals receiving care in the US Department of Veterans Affairs; most (91%) were men, 74% were non-Hispanic White (White), 19% were non-Hispanic Black (Black), and 7% were Hispanic. We evaluated associations between race/ethnicity and receipt of COVID-19 testing, a positive test result, and 30-day mortality, with multivariable adjustment for a wide range of demographic and clinical characteristics including comorbid conditions, health behaviors, medication history, site of care, and urban versus rural residence. Between February 8 and July 22, 2020, 254,595 individuals were tested for COVID-19, of whom 16,317 tested positive and 1,057 died. Black individuals were more likely to be tested (rate per 1,000 individuals: 60.0, 95% CI 59.6-60.5) than Hispanic (52.7, 95% CI 52.1-53.4) and White individuals (38.6, 95% CI 38.4-38.7). While individuals from minority backgrounds were more likely to test positive (Black versus White: odds ratio [OR] 1.93, 95% CI 1.85-2.01, p < 0.001; Hispanic versus White: OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.74-1.94, p < 0.001), 30-day mortality did not differ by race/ethnicity (Black versus White: OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.80-1.17, p = 0.74; Hispanic versus White: OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.73-1.34, p = 0.94). The disparity between Black and White individuals in testing positive for COVID-19 was stronger in the Midwest (OR 2.66, 95% CI 2.41-2.95, p < 0.001) than the West (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.11-1.39, p < 0.001). The disparity in testing positive for COVID-19 between Hispanic and White individuals was consistent across region, calendar time, and outbreak pattern. Study limitations include underrepresentation of women and a lack of detailed information on social determinants of health.ConclusionsIn this nationwide study, we found that Black and Hispanic individuals are experiencing an excess burden of SARS-CoV-2 infection not entirely explained by underlying medical conditions or where they live or receive care. There is an urgent need to proactively tailor strategies to contain and prevent further outbreaks in racial and ethnic minority communities.