• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Am J Hematol . Evaluation of the Prothrombin Fragment 1.2 in Patients with COVID-19

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Am J Hematol


. 2020 Aug 11.
doi: 10.1002/ajh.25962. Online ahead of print.
Evaluation of the Prothrombin Fragment 1.2 in Patients with COVID-19


Hanny Al-Samkari[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Fei Song[SUP] 2 3 [/SUP], Elizabeth Van Cott[SUP] 2 4 [/SUP], David J Kuter[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Rachel Rosovsky[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

Introduction: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may cause a hypercoagulable state. The D-dimer is frequently elevated in COVID-19, but other markers of coagulation activation, including the prothrombin fragment 1.2 (PF1.2) are poorly described.
Methods: We studied hospitalized adults with COVID-19 and PF1.2 measurement performed at any time during hospitalization. We evaluated the relationship between PF1.2 and synchronously measured D-dimer. We utilized receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to evaluate optimal thresholds for diagnosing thrombosis and multivariable logistic regression to evaluate association with thrombosis.
Results: 115 patients were included [110 (95.7%) critically ill]. PF1.2 and D-dimer were moderately positively correlated (r=0.542, P<0.001) but significant discordance was observed in elevation of each marker above the laboratory reference range (59.0% elevated PF1.2 vs. 98.5% elevated D-dimer). Median PF1.2 levels were higher in patients with thrombosis than those without (611 vs. 374 pmol/L, P=0.006). In ROC analysis, PF1.2 had superior specificity and conferred a higher positive likelihood ratio in identifying patients with thrombosis than D-dimer (PF1.2 threshold of >523 pmol/L: 69.2% sensitivity, 67.7% specificity; >924 pmol/L: 37.9% sensitivity, 87.8% specificity). In multivariable analysis, a PF1.2 >500 pmol/L was significantly associated with VTE [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 4.26, 95% CI, 1.12-16.21, P=0.034] and any thrombotic manifestation (adjusted OR 3.85, 95% CI, 1.39-10.65, P=0.010); conversely, synchronously measured D-dimer was not significantly associated with thrombosis. 90.6% of patients with a non-elevated PF1.2 result did not develop VTE.
Conclusions: PF1.2 may be a useful assay, and potentially more discriminant than D-dimer, in identifying thrombotic manifestations in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
 
Back
Top Bottom