Search This Blog

Wednesday, March 31, 2021

Blood from critically ill COVID-19 patients contains antibodies that contribute to clotting

 A McMaster University-led study has teased out the reason for blood clots caused by COVID-19, a serious potential complication of the virus.

Blood from critically ill COVID-19 patients contains antibodies that can contribute to clotting, says Ishac Nazy, associate professor of medicine and director of the McMaster Platelet Immunology Laboratory. These antibodies form immune complexes that activate platelets, the cells that lead to  clotformation. Some blood-thinner medications can block these immune complexes and potentially reduce clots.

"By discovering the mechanism, we can inform doctors on the use of blood-thinners, known as anticoagulants, that can stop the clotting in COVID-19 patients," said Nazy, whose findings have been published in the Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

Nazy said his laboratory suddenly saw an increase in patients with blood clots at the onset of the pandemic in Canada in early 2020, as COVID-19 began spreading worldwide.

At first, Nazy and his colleagues thought these patients had heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), a clotting condition that can occur in patients given heparin, ironically an anticoagulant medication.

However, these patients tested negative for HIT, despite being at medium to high-risk of the condition. Instead, these critically-ill patients were positive for COVID-19, which can also cause life-threatening blood clots.

Of the 10 patient blood samples tested by Nazy, six had platelet-activating immune complexes when their  were tested in the lab. These  were not found in eight recovered COVID‐19 patients or pre-pandemic patient samples.

Nazy said this discovery gives  better insight into the underlying mechanisms of COVID-19 and potential future therapies to combat .

This is increasingly important with the recent information regarding the clotting complication in a few patients who have received the AstraZeneca vaccine in several European countries. The mechanisms of clotting could potentially be similar in response to the infection by the virus or by the vaccines.

More information: Ishac Nazy et al. Platelet‐activating immune complexes identified in critically ill COVID‐19 patients suspected of heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia, Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis (2021). DOI: 10.1111/jth.15283

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-03-blood-critically-ill-covid-patients.html

Closer look urged at sunlight's efficacy in inactivating SARS-CoV-2 virus

 A year ago scientists everywhere were scrambling to get their minds around the SARS-CoV-2, a novel coronavirus that caused the pandemic from which we are only now beginning to emerge. The world clung to every new development, every bit of science that could provide clues to managing life in the presence of this mysterious killer.

Many science-backed COVID-19 management concepts remain unchanged to this day: handwashing with soap and warm water disrupts the virus' lipid membrane. Social distancing can attenuate the virus's spread, ideally keeping it out of a host until it degrades. Other notions, such as droplet contact being the primary mode of transmission, were modified when emerging evidence showed that under certain conditions, the virus could remain suspended in air for extended periods of time.

In a letter in the Journal of Infectious Diseases, a team of researchers from UC Santa Barbara, Oregon State University, University of Manchester and ETH Zurich examines another of SARS-CoV-2's well known characteristics—its vulnerability to sunlight. Their conclusion? It might take more than UV-B rays to explain sunlight inactivation of SARS-CoV-2.

The idea that an additional mechanism might be in play came when the team compared data from a July 2020 study that reported rapid sunlight inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 in a lab setting, with a theory of coronavirus inactivation by  that was published just a month earlier.

"The theory assumes that inactivation works by having UV-B hit the RNA of the virus, damaging it," said UC Santa Barbara mechanical engineering professor and lead author Paolo Luzzatto-Fegiz. Judging from the discrepancies between the experimental results and the predictions of the theoretical model, however, the research team felt that RNA inactivation by UV-B "might not be the whole story."

According to the letter, the experiments demonstrated virus inactivation times of about 10-20 minutes—much faster than predicted by the theory.

"The theory predicts that inactivation should happen an order of magnitude slower," Luzzatto-Fegiz said. In the experiments, viruses in simulated saliva and exposed to UV-B lamps were inactivated more than eight times faster than would have been predicted by the theory, while those cultured in a complete growth medium before exposure to UV-B were inactivated more than three times faster than expected. To make the math of the theory fit the data, according to the letter, SARS-CoV-2 would have to exceed the highest UV-B sensitivity of any currently known virus.

Or, Luzzato-Fegiz and colleagues reasoned, there could be another mechanism at play aside from RNA inactivation by UV-B rays. For instance, UV-A, another, less energetic component of sunlight might be playing a more active role than previously thought.

"People think of UV-A as not having much of an effect, but it might be interacting with some of the molecules in the medium," he said. Those reactive intermediate molecules in turn could be interacting with the virus, hastening inactivation. It's a concept familiar to those who work in  and other environmental science fields.

"So, scientists don't yet know what's going on," Luzzatto-Fegiz said; "Our analysis points to the need for additional experiments to separately test the effects of specific light wavelengths and medium composition."

Results of such experiments might provide clues into new ways of managing the virus with widely available and accessible UV-A and UV-B radiation. While UV-C radiation is proved effective against SARS-CoV-2, this wavelength does not reach the earth's surface and must be manufactured. Although UV-C is presently used in air filtration and in other settings, its short wavelengths and  also makes UV-C the most damaging form of UV radiation, limiting its practical application and raising other safety concerns.

"UV-C is great for hospitals," said co-author Julie McMurry. "But in other environments—for instance kitchens or subways—UV-C would interact with the particulates to produce harmful ozone." While no single intervention will eliminate risk, this research would provide one further tool to reduce exposure, thus slowing transmission and improving health outcomes.

Co-author and UCSB mechanical engineering professor Yangying Zhu added that UV-A turning out to be capable of inactivating the  could be very advantageous: there are now widely available inexpensive LED bulbs that are many times stronger than natural sunlight, which could accelerate inactivation times. UV-A could potentially be used far more broadly to augment air filtration systems at relatively low risk for human health, especially in high-risk settings such as hospitals and public transportation, but the specifics of each setting warrant consideration, said co-author Fernando Temprano-Coleto.


Explore further

Electrochemical oxidation to inactivate SARS-CoV-2

More information: Paolo Luzzatto-Fegiz et al. UVB Radiation Alone May Not Explain Sunlight Inactivation of SARS-CoV-2, The Journal of Infectious Diseases (2021). DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiab070
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-03-urge-closer-sunlight-efficacy-inactivating.html

Sanofi Discloses 7% Stake in Lava Therapeutics

 


  1.   

  Names of Reporting Persons

 

  SANOFI

  2. 

  Check the Appropriate Box if a Member of a Group (See Instructions)

  (a)  ☐        (b)  ☐

 

  3. 

  SEC Use Only

 

  4. 

  Citizenship or Place of Organization

 

  The Republic of France

Number of

Shares

 Beneficially 

Owned by

Each

Reporting

Person

With

  5.    

  Sole Voting Power

 

  1,919,455 shares

  6.  

  Shared Voting Power

 

  0 share

  7.  

  Sole Dispositive Power

 

  1,919,455 shares

  8.  

  Shared Dispositive Power

 

  0 share

  9.   

  Aggregate Amount Beneficially Owned by Each Reporting Person

 

  1,919,455 shares

10. 

  Check if the Aggregate Amount in Row (9) Excludes Certain Shares (See Instructions)

 

  ☐

11. 

  Percent of Class Represented by Amount in Row (9)

 

7.0%

12. 

  Type of Reporting Person (See Instructions)

 

  CO

 

2


Item 1.
  (a)  Name of Issuer
LAVA Therapeutics N.V.
  (b)  Address of Issuer’s Principal Executive Offices
Yalelaan 60, 3584 CM Utrecht, The Netherlands
Item 2.
  (a)  Name of Person Filing
Sanofi
  (b)  Address of Principal Business Office or, if none, Residence
54 Rue La Boétie, 75008 Paris (France)
  (c)  Citizenship
The Republic of France
  (d)  Title of Class of Securities
Common Shares, €0.12 par value
  (e)  CUSIP Number
N51517105
Item 3.  If this statement is filed pursuant to §§240.13d-1(b) or 240.13d-2(b) or (c), check whether the person filing is a:
  (a)    Broker or dealer registered under section 15 of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78o);
  (b)    Bank as defined in section 3(a)(6) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78c);
  (c)    Insurance company as defined in section 3(a)(19) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78c);
  (d)    Investment company registered under section 8 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-8);
  (e)    An investment adviser in accordance with §240.13d-1(b)(1)(ii)(E);
  (f)    An employee benefit plan or endowment fund in accordance with §240.13d-1(b)(1)(ii)(F);
  (g)    A parent holding company or control person in accordance with §240.13d-1(b)(1)(ii)(G);
  (h)    A savings association as defined in Section 3(b) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813);
  (i)    A church plan that is excluded from the definition of an investment company under section 3(c)(14) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-3);
  (j)    non-U.S. institution in accordance with § 240.13d–1(b)(1)(ii)(J);

 

  

(k)

  

  

Group, in accordance with § 240.13d–1(b)(1)(ii)(K). If filing as a non-U.S. institution in accordance with

§ 240.13d–1(b)(1)(ii)(J), please specify the type of institution:____________________________

 

3



Item 4.  Ownership
Provide the following information regarding the aggregate number and percentage of the class of securities of the issuer identified in Item 1.
  (a)  

Amount beneficially owned:

1,919,455 shares

  (b)  

Percent of class:

7.0%

  (c)  Number of shares as to which the person has:
    (i)  

Sole power to vote or to direct the vote

1,919,455 shares

    (ii)  

Shared power to vote or to direct the vote

0 share

    (iii)  

Sole power to dispose or to direct the disposition of

1,919,455 shares

    (iv)  

Shared power to dispose or to direct the disposition of

0 share


https://www.streetinsider.com/SEC+Filings/Form+SC+13G+LAVA+Therapeutics+NV+Filed+by%3A+Sanofi/18203652.html

Biden $2T infrastructure plan: 5 notes for healthcare leaders

 The White House on March 31 unveiled an approximately $2 trillion jobs and infrastructure plan that includes expanding access to long-term care services and other healthcare-related measures. 

The proposal, called the American Jobs Plan, targets aging highways and bridges, as well as climate change, the nation's digital infrastructure and home care. 

Here are five notes about the plan for healthcare leaders.

1. President Joe Biden's proposal provides $18 billion for upgrading veterans hospitals and clinics. 

2. The plan includes $400 billion to expand access to home- or community-based care for older Americans and disabled people under Medicaid. According to USA Today, this would involve aid to Americans to obtain long-term services and support, as well as increasing wages for essential home care workers who currently earn about $12 per hour.

3. The White House said President Biden's administration also wants to extend the long-standing Money Follows the Person program under Medicaid. The program, in part, aims to boost use of home and community-based services and reduce use of nursing homes and other institutionally based services.

4. President Biden's plan is partly paid for by increasing the corporate tax rate and global minimum tax, according to The Washington Post. The plan increases the corporate tax rate from 21 percent to 28 percent and the global minimum tax for U.S. multinational corporations from about 13 percent to 21 percent.

5. Republicans and business groups have criticized President Biden's plans for corporate tax increases because they contend it will hurt competition among American companies, according to The New York Times

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-management-administration/biden-s-2-trillion-infrastructure-plan-5-notes-for-healthcare-leaders.html

Caregiver and physician on financial implications of dementia

 In his recent First Opinion, “The long, exhausting reach of dementia care,” Jason Karlawish, a geriatric physician and co-director of the Penn Memory Center, wrote about how the coronavirus pandemic has led more Americans to realize how all-consuming life as a full-time caretaker can be. As many spouses and adult children of Alzheimer’s patients have long known, it’s often an isolating, arduous, and expensive experience.

To learn more about the implications of dementia, both individual and systemic, STAT’s Patrick Skerrett spoke with Karlawish and Richard Bartholomew, who was the caregiver for his late wife while she was living with Alzheimer’s.  

This conversation has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity.

Jason, you’ve written that financial issues are often an early sign of Alzheimer’s. How does that work?  

Jason: I like to say that the banking and financial services industries are on the front line of America’s effort to detect and diagnose disabling cognitive impairments.  These are diseases of what’s called “higher cortical function,” namely our brain’s ability to think, decide, take in new information, and use social cognition appropriately. The hardest tasks are the ones that are affected earliest. This isn’t just anecdote, but multiple well-done studies following hundreds of people for years have shown this. So even before the stages of mild cognitive impairment, you will see folks having trouble doing financial tasks, making mistakes, being victims of fraud and exploitation. Once upon a time when everything was on paper, it was sort of hidden in plain sight. But now that everything’s electronic, financial firms are seeing this.

But nobody’s really monitoring that except the individual and her or his family?  

Jason: Yes and no. Some firms have been proactive and make efforts when a suspicious transaction occurs. Some firms have stepped in and offered the ability for trusted caregivers and contacts to monitor accounts without having access to the actual funds. There are even companies that have developed software so they can monitor someone’s account. But I think the point you’re getting at is: those things are not normative in the industry. That has not become a standard practice. That’s something that’s exceptional, which I think needs to change. I just think it’s unacceptable. It’s like cars without seatbelts.


In the United States, it’s up to families to provide care for loved ones with Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia and pay for it. What kind of services are you able to recommend to patients and their caregivers?

Richard: One thing I didn’t understand as a caregiver, that Dr. Karlawish explained to me, was the origin of Medicare-based hospice and how difficult it is for doctors who are working with Alzheimer’s patients to know when they are really in the terminal stages, and can justify hospice care.  

Jason: That’s right. The hospice benefit was designed for cancer. With persons living with dementia, arriving at a prognostic estimate that they have a prognosis of six month or less (the requirement for hospice care) is very difficult. And I think it’s one of several barriers to accessing the services and supports of hospice. Quite frankly, I think what hospice provided your wife she needed for a while, even if we weren’t thinking she was dying.

The other kind of care I often recommend is an adult day activity program, also called adult day care. And Richard, you witnessed the paucity of the programs and the quality of them. And it’s not because the programs are bad. It’s because they’re so profoundly under-resourced. And so I remember you would come back and say, ‘I found a great one, but it’s in a basement somewhere with no windows.’ 

In principle, adult-day programs should work. But they have struggled and many sadly shut down because of Covid. So they live on the economic margins. America doesn’t have an organized social insurance program, so they struggle to make ends meet. It’s an indictment of our health care system.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and others project that the number of people with Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia is going to double in the next three to four decades. That means the number of family caregivers will also double. Richard, having been a long term and loving family caregiver, do you have any advice to offer people who someday will be doing what you’ve done? 

Richard: I think we were extremely lucky. I did take a caregiver course at the Memory Center, I think before we started seeing Dr. Karlawish. So I heard in this small group of probably 10 people — all of us were caregivers — stories about what it’s like for other people with spouses with some form of dementia. And I was very lucky in that respect.

Jason: Yes, it’s the support that we were able to give you, Richard, included that caregiving class, our social work team, and others. And what’s interesting is that those supports that we provide have been made possible by a generous philanthropic gift from the Kaplan Family Foundation. If we had relied on billing through usual routes, of clinical billing through Medicare, we couldn’t pay the salaries of the people who run these programs. We couldn’t have provided that class. 

And it’s only going to get worse because will be more people who need care and fewer people who can care for them. We’re going to face the Alzheimer’s crisis. We already are in it, I would argue. And much of it is a crisis of our inability to organize a health care system to take care of people who are disabled from diseases like Alzheimer’s.

We should expect and hope for better treatments that slow the disease. But without treatments that slow each and every cause of the disease, we’re going to have to learn how to live with some degree of cognitive disability that needs care. So we really need to start a national conversation about how we’re going to organize a system of care for people like Richard Bartholomew and his wife, Julia Converse. 

And I am cautiously optimistic that the events of the last 12 months have woken us to caregiving, have made us realize how essential this very human activity is. And maybe, going forward, policymakers will listen.

https://www.statnews.com/2021/03/31/caregiver-and-physician-discuss-caregiving-dementia/

CDC: Age-adjusted death rate up 15.9% in 2020; COVID 3rd Leading Cause

 The CDC released the Provisional Mortality Data — United States, 2020 today:

During January–December 2020, the estimated 2020 age-adjusted death rate increased for the first time since 2017, with an increase of 15.9% compared with 2019, from 715.2 to 828.7 deaths per 100,000 population. COVID-19 was the underlying or a contributing cause of 377,883 deaths (91.5 deaths per 100,000). COVID-19 death rates were highest among males, older adults, and AI/AN and Hispanic persons. The highest numbers of overall deaths and COVID-19 deaths occurred during April and December. COVID-19 was the third leading underlying cause of death in 2020, replacing suicide as one of the top 10 leading causes of death

https://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2021/03/cdc-age-adjusted-death-rate-increased.html 

How Many Seniors Have Osteoporosis?

 About one in five American women 50 and older have osteoporosis, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data showed.

In cross-sectional survey data from 2017-2018, 19.6% of this demographic had osteoporosis at the femoral neck, lumbar spine, or both, reported Neda Sarafrazi, PhD, of the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) in Hyattsville, Maryland, and colleagues in an NCHS Data Brief.

The age-adjusted prevalence of osteoporosis in men was far lower, afflicting only about 4.4% of men 50 and older.

All in all, osteoporosis was present in 12.6% of all American adults 50 and older, which was defined as a bone mineral density (BMD) value at least 2.5 standard deviations below young-adult average at the femoral neck or lumbar spine.

In NHANES, lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD were measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry on Hologic Discovery Model A Densitometers.

Not surprisingly, osteoporosis was far more common among older adults, affecting 17.7% of all men and women 65 and older, versus 8.4% of those ages 50-64.

Rates stood at 27% for women ages 65 and older and 13.1% of women at ages 50-64.

In men, prevalence values were 5.7% in those 65 and older and 3.3% in the 50-64 group.

Osteoporosis became slightly more common over the years, Sarafrazi's group found. In 2007-2008, osteoporosis was seen in 9.4% of Americans 50 and older. The biggest uptick occurred in women, increasing nearly 5 percentage points from the earlier period. Rates remained steady throughout the years for men.

"Monitoring the prevalence of osteoporosis and low bone mass may inform public health programs that focus on reducing or preventing osteoporosis and its consequences," Sarafrazi's group noted. "Healthy People 2020 has a goal of 5.3% or less for the prevalence of osteoporosis at the femur neck for adults aged 50 and over."

"In the United States, the prevalence of osteoporosis among adults aged 50 and over at the femur neck only was 6.3% and has not met the 2020 goal," they underscored.

The data also showed an epidemic of low bone mass -- a precursor of osteoporosis, defined as BMD of 1 to 2.5 standard deviations below the young-adult average.

Among all adults ages 50 and older, 43.1% had low bone mass at the femoral neck, lumbar spine, or both. Prevalence was 51.5% among women and 33.5% among men.

The overall rate hit 47.5% in those 65 and older. But older age was less of a factor for women, with almost no difference between the 50-64 and 65-plus age groups.

For both sexes, prevalence rates of low bone mass held steady during the decade between 2007-2008 and 2017-2018.


Primary Source