ArticleBlood advances2024
Antithrombotic efficacy and bleeding risks of vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia treatments.
Article in Blood advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Solving the mystery of vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2026Article
- The hidden threat: understanding anti-PF4 disorders without proximate heparin exposure.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Endothelial cell activation enhances thromboinflammation in vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia.Blood advances · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractCurrent guidelines for treating vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) recommend nonheparin anticoagulants and IV immunoglobulin (IVIg). However, the efficacy of these treatments remains uncertain due to case studies involving small patient numbers, confounding factors (eg, concurrent treatments), and a lack of animal studies. A recent study proposed danaparoid and heparin as potential VITT therapies because of their ability to disrupt VITT IgG-platelet factor 4 (PF4) binding. Here, we examined the effects of various anticoagulants (including unfractionated [UF] heparin, danaparoid, bivalirudin, fondaparinux, and argatroban), IVIg, and the FcγRIIa receptor-blocking antibody, IV.3. Our investigation focused on VITT IgG-PF4 binding, platelet activation, thrombocytopenia, and thrombosis. Danaparoid, at therapeutic doses, was the sole anticoagulant that reduced VITT IgG-PF4 binding, verified by affinity-purified anti-PF4 VITT IgG. Although danaparoid and high-dose UF heparin (10 U/mL) inhibited platelet activation, none of the anticoagulants significantly affected thrombocytopenia in our VITT animal model and all prolonged bleeding time. IVIg and all anticoagulants except UF heparin protected the VITT mice from thrombosis. Direct FcγRIIa receptor inhibition with IV.3 antibody is an effective approach for managing both thrombosis and thrombocytopenia in the VITT mouse model. Our results underscore the necessity of animal model investigations to inform and better guide clinicians on treatment choices. This study provides compelling evidence for the development of FcγRIIa receptor blockers to prevent thrombosis in VITT and other FcγRIIa-related inflammatory disorders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.