[Arterial thrombosis due to heparin induced thrombocytopenia]

BACKGROUND

Type II heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a procoagulant disorder that is caused by IgG-antibodies against platelet factor 4 (PF4)-heparin (H) complex. Clotting tendency is also increased. This is characterized by a ≥ 50% decrease in platelet count between 5-10 days after exposure to unfractionated or low-molecular weight heparin.

CASE DESCRIPTION

A 49-year-old woman presented with neurological symptoms and pain in her right hand shortly after hospitalisation in Spain. She had an ischaemic CVA and arterial perfusion difficulties in her right arm due to a large thrombus in the aortic arch and some of its branches. She was treated with thrombolytic therapy and dalteparin. Based on initially mild thrombocytopenia that progressed rapidly after admission and her 7-day exposure to enoxaparin during the previous hospital admission, we diagnosed heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) with arterial thrombosis.

CONCLUSION

It can be difficult to diagnose HIT. A clinical probability score based on clinical parameters and laboratory results is useful in this. Quick diagnosis and treatment are of great importance because of the high risk of complications.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in patients with Philadelphia-negative myeloproliferative disorders and unusual splanchnic or cerebral vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Philadelphia-negative myeloproliferative disorders (Ph-MPD) are common causes of unusual splanchnic or cerebral vein thrombosis, which is treated with unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a dangerous potential complication of this therapy, but it has rarely been reported in Ph-MPD.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed clinical records of 29 patients with Ph-MPD who have been treated with UFH or LMWH for unusual splanchnic or cerebral vein thrombosis (3 cerebral sinus, 6 portal and 20 hepatic vein). The goal of the study was to determine the occurrence of new thrombotic events during heparin therapy secondary to HIT (HITT).

RESULTS

During heparin therapy, 5 out of the 29 patients (17%) developed a new thrombotic episode (pulmonary embolism) with a high clinical probability of HIT based on the 4 T's score even though not all the patients developed 'true' thrombocytopenia. A diagnosis of HIT was established in 2 patients (6.8%) through the presence of heparin-related antibodies.

CONCLUSIONS

Ph-MPD patients on heparin warrant careful monitoring and HIT has to be suspected whenever platelet counts drop or a new thrombosis is detectable.

Frequency of Anti-Heparin-PF4 Complex Antibodies (HIT Antibodies) in Uremic Patients on Chronic Intermittent Hemodialysis

The aim of this study was to determine the frequency of heparin/platelet factor (PF) 4 complex antibodies in 305 uremic patients treated with chronic intermittent hemodialysis using unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin for 3 months. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) antibodies were detected by ELISA in 7 patients (2.3%) who had no history of HIT. Two patients abruptly developed HIT associated with the formation of clots in the extracorporeal circuit after they were found to be carrying HIT antibodies. These patients were suspected to have a similar trigger: an increased dose of recombinant human erythropoietin (rHuEPO). The drug might induce parallel changes in hematocrit (Ht) levels and platelet counts until the onset of HIT. After the onset of HIT, a parallel phenomenon between Ht and platelet counts was not found because of the thrombocytopenia due to HIT. Although HIT onset has been reported during the initial phase of dialysis sessions, there have been few reports on the onset of HIT in uremic patients on dialysis with long-term heparin anticoagulation. In this study, HIT was observed in 2 uremic patients on chronic dialysis with intermittent use of heparin. In some patients on chronic intermittent dialysis carrying HIT antibodies, HIT may occur following rHuEPO treatment. The presence of HIT should be borne in mind in chronic dialysis patients carrying HIT antibodies for 3 months or more.

Successful heparin desensitization after anaphylactic shock due to heparin

A successful desensitization protocol in a patient with low molecular weight heparin induced anaphylactic reaction is being presented. A 72-years-old patient who was known to have multiple drug allergies and asthma was admitted with acute renal insufficiency. She had an anaphylactic reaction with a low molecular weight heparin during a hemodialysis session. Peritoneal dialysis was not feasible. Anticoagulation with warfarin was not considered appropriate; alternative anticoagulants were not available. Therefore a desensitization protocol was planned and applied, comprising of IV administration of diluted heparin by gradually increasing doses (0.1 to 5000 units), at 15 minute intervals, completing 8 hours before the procedure. By this way, IV heparin could be administered during the subsequent hemodialysis sessions with no reactions. The Naranjo probability scale revealed a probable adverse reaction associated with nadroparin for this patient. Anaphylactic reaction to low molecular weight heparins is reported rarely in the literature. To the best of our knowledge, this is the third case of successful heparin desensitization. When other anticoagulants are not available and anticoagulation is indispensible, heparin desensitization can be an option.

Delayed-type hypersensitivity to low molecular weight heparins and heparinoids: cross-reactivity does not depend on molecular weight

BACKGROUND

Cross-reactivity is a widespread phenomenon in patients who develop cutaneous delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) reactions to low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs). As molecular weight is believed to be a key determinant of sensitization to heparins, the recently developed LMWH bemiparin, with the lowest molecular weight of all LMWHs, appeared to be a significant improvement.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate cross-reactivity between bemiparin and several other LMWHs and heparinoids by means of subcutaneous testing. Methods Test doses of bemiparin and several other LMWHs/heparinoids were given to eight patients with a history of local eczematous reactions after subcutaneous injection of enoxaparin.

RESULTS

Seven of eight patients showed cross-reactivity following subcutaneous injection of bemiparin. In addition, nearly all tested substances caused local eczematous reactions in at least some patients, with the exception of fondaparinux, which was well tolerated by all patients. Of all substances tested, bemiparin had the highest cross-reactivity with enoxaparin. Substances with a lower molecular weight did not cross-react less frequently than the others.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant correlation was found between the molecular weight of the tested substances and the frequency of DTH reactions. In patients with DTH to enoxaparin, the LMWH bemiparin is not a suitable alternative.

Allergy to heparins and anticoagulants with a similar pharmacological profile: an update

Heparins are widely used as anticoagulants. Immunologically-mediated side effects raise the question as to whether other substances with heparin-like pharmacological effects can be safely applied. Hypersensitivity reactions to heparin consist of heparin-induced immune thrombocytopenia, allergic vasculitis, hypereosinophilia, immediate hypersensitivity as well as delayed-type skin reactions. Hypersensitivity to unfractionated and low-molecular-weight heparins and semisynthetic heparinoids is increasingly common, and the pathogenesis, however, is still not fully understood. Clinically, this phenomenon is of relevance because of its increasing incidence and the resulting therapeutic difficulties that arise because several cross-reactions between unfractionated and low-molecular-weight heparins as well as between various heparins and heparinoids have been observed. In some patients with cross-reactivity between various heparins and semisynthetic heparinoids, recombinant hirudins, may be safe and effective. Combined allergy to recombinant hirudins and heparins, however, has been reported. Therefore, there is an urgent need for therapeutic alternatives.

Close Approximation of Two Platelet Factor 4 Tetramers by Charge Neutralization Forms the Antigens Recognized by HIT Antibodies

OBJECTIVE

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a prothrombotic drug reaction caused by antibodies that recognize positively charged platelet factor 4 (PF4), bound to the polyanion, heparin. The resulting immune complexes activate platelets. Unfractionated heparin (UFH) causes HIT more frequently than low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), whereas the smallest heparin-like molecule (the pentasaccharide, fondaparinux), induces anti-PF4/heparin antibodies as frequently as LMWH, but without exhibiting cross-reactivity with these antibodies. To better understand these findings, we analyzed the molecular structure of the complexes formed between PF4 and UFH, LMWH, or fondaparinux.

METHODS AND RESULTS

By atomic force microscopy and photon correlation spectroscopy, we show that with any of the 3 polyanions, but in the order, UFH>LMWH>>fondaparinux--PF4 forms clusters in which PF4 tetramers become closely apposed, and to which anti-PF4/heparin antibodies bind. By immunoassay, HIT antibodies bind strongly to PF4/H/PF4 complexes, but only weakly to single PF4/heparin molecules.

CONCLUSIONS

HIT antigens are formed when charge neutralization by polyanion allows positively charged PF4 tetramers to undergo close approximation. Whereas such a model could explain why all 3 polyanions form antibodies with similar specificities, the striking differences in the relative size and amount of complexes formed likely correspond to the observed differences in immunogenicity (UFH>LMWH approximately fondaparinux) and clinically relevant cross-reactivity (UFH>LMWH>>fondaparinux).

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in neurologic patients treated with low-molecular-weight heparin

The authors prospectively studied the risk for immune-mediated heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) in neurologic patients during administration of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) vs unfractionated heparin (UFH). None of 111 neurologic patients receiving LMWH developed HIT, whereas HIT occurred in 2.5% of 200 patients treated with UFH (p = 0.17). The rate of heparin-induced antibodies in patients treated with LMWH was lower than in patients treated with UFH (1.8 vs 20.5%; p < 0.001).

Decreased prevalence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia with low-molecular-weight heparin and related drugs

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) Type II represents a disease spectrum associated with a high risk of thrombosis leading to limb loss and death. The pathophysiology of HIT is based on the development of antibodies to the heparin-platelet factor 4 (PF4) complex. Unfractionated heparin (UFH) is heterogeneous in molecular chain length and degree of sulfation accounting in part, for, the heterogeneity of HIT antibodies. Because of its smaller size, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) does not interact with PF4 and platelets as efficiently as does UFH. This translates into a lower risk of immune sensitization with LMWH than with UFH treatment. LMWH is less likely than UFH to cause antibody generation and thus patients do not develop clinical HIT at the same frequency with LMWH as with UFH treatment. The antibodies generated by LMWH treatment are more often immunoglobulin A (IgA) and IgM as opposed to IgG antibodies, which are associated with symptomatic clinical HIT generated by exposure to UFH. However, platelet activation/aggregation can occur from LMWHs in the presence of most pre-existing HIT antibodies that had been generated from UFH exposure, although the response is less than that caused by UFH plus HIT antibody. With the expanded use of LMWH, the frequency of clinical HIT may naturally decline, given that LMWHs are less likely to generate HIT antibody.

Investigations of the immunoglobulin subtype transformation of anti-heparin-platelet factor 4 antibodies during treatment with a low-molecular-weight heparin (clivarin) in orthopedic patients

CONTEXT

It is now widely accepted that the pathophysiology of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) syndrome is mediated by the generation of a wide array of functional and molecularly heterogeneous anti-heparin-platelet factor 4 (AHPF4) antibodies that may mediate platelet and/or endothelial cell activation/destruction.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the differential prevalence and functionality of AHPF4 immunoglobulin subtypes (IgA, IgG, and IgM) in plasmas obtained from orthopedic patients immobilized with Plaster-Cast and treated with clivarin (a low-molecular-weight heparin) in comparison to a placebo for the prophylaxis of deep-vein thrombosis.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Clivarin was administered subcutaneously at a fixed daily dosage of 1750 U without any adjustment or loading dosage. Citrated plasmas were obtained at baseline, at 10 to 14 days, and at postbrace procedure (5-12 weeks). An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was used to quantitate the AHPF4 antibody titers. The functionality of the ELISA-positive samples was determined by a 14C-serotonin release assay (SRA).

RESULTS

In the ELISA test, 16 of 1073 samples (1.5%; 6 in clivarin and 10 in placebo groups) were positive for AHPF4 antibodies (mean optical density [OD] = 0.46 +/- 0.02). None of the ELISA-positive samples for AHPF4 antibodies could mediate platelet activation responses as determined by the SRA (0%-3% serotonin release, P >.10, n = 16). Through differential immunoglobulin subtype analysis of the samples positive for (cumulative) AHPF4 antibodies, we determined that their relative prevalence in plasma were as follows: IgM (mean OD = 0.71 +/- 0.13) > IgG (0.31 +/- 0.08) > IgA (0.14 +/- 0.02). Although there was no significant difference in the total antibody titers between clivarin and placebo groups, the antibody subtyping data showed conversion trends (ie, IgA [clivarin to placebo], IgG [placebo to clivarin], and IgM [clivarin to placebo]).

CONCLUSION

These observations indicate that even at reduced dosages, clivarin can shift the immunogenic up-regulation toward the IgG subpopulation; however, the IgG subtype is of a nonfunctional type of AHPF4 antibody and thus may not cause any HIT-related pathogenic responses.

Differential effects of clivarin and heparin in patients undergoing hip and knee surgery for the generation of anti-heparin-platelet factor 4 antibodies

The pathophysiology of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) syndrome is mediated via a heterogeneous group of heparin(s)-platelet factor 4 (H-PF4) complexes bound to their antibodies. These anti-H-PF4 (AHPF4) antibodies that are capable of binding to the FcgammaRIIA receptor [cluster of differentiation (CD) 32] on platelets, resulting in platelet activation, widely vary in their specific activities as platelet activation (functionality). Predisposing factors related to specific pathologic conditions may also contribute to the generation of these antibodies and their relative functionality during HIT syndrome. To understand this phenomenon, a sub-study was carried out in patients undergoing elective total hip and knee replacement surgery (ECHOS Study) and who were treated with unfractionated heparin (UFH) and a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH; Clivarin). Approximately 600 patients per arm [UFH=7,500 anti-Xa U twice a day (b.i.d.) subcutaneous (s.c.) and clivarin=4200 U once daily (o.d.) s.c.], age >40 years, received prophylactic treatment for a minimum of 11-14 days. Plasma samples were collected at pre-dose, days 2-4, days 11-14 and at follow-up 6-8 weeks after discharge and were analyzed for AHPF4 antibody titers. Functionality of the enzyme-linked immunosorbant assay (ELISA)-positive AHPF4 antibodies to cause platelet activation was tested by 14C-serotonin release assay (SRA). Both UFH and clivarin treatments in orthopedic surgical patients resulted in a progressive generation of AHPF4 antibodies. The relative prevalence/functionality of AHPF4 antibodies in clivarin arm was markedly lower (two- to threefold, p<0.001) as compared to UFH at each time point. Most of the samples in clivarin group were found to be SRA negative, suggesting the presence of AHPF4 antibodies that did not activate platelets (nonfunctional). Within the UFH arm, the relative prevalence/functionality of AHPF4 antibodies was much higher (p<0.002) in knee group compared to the corresponding hip group. This study, for the first time, reports on the elevated levels of AHPF4 antibodies generated by heparin associated with the pathogenesis of knee surgery. Clinical significance of the differential generation of HIT-associated antibodies remains unexplored at this time.

[Delayed hypersensitivity to heparins and heparinoids]

Delayed hypersensitivity to heparins and heparinoïd is a problem for prophylaxis of thrombo embolic diseases. The hirudins did not seem to have any cross-reactivity with the two others groups of anticoagulants. We present two clinical cases of delayed type reactions to heparins and heparinoïd and we reviewed the literature about adverse reactions to low molecular weight heparins and the alternative possibilities.

Comparing the antithrombotic efficacy of a humanized anti-factor IX(a) monoclonal antibody (SB 249417) to the low molecular weight heparin enoxaparin in a rat model of arterial thrombosis

A humanized inhibitory anti-factor IX(a) antibody (SB 249417) has been compared to enoxaparin (Lovenox) in a rat model of arterial thrombosis. Pretreatment of rats with either SB 249417 (3.0 mg/kg, i. v.) or enoxaparin (30.0 mg/kg, i.v. or s.c.) resulted in comparable and significant reductions in thrombus formation. However, the efficacious dose of enoxaparin resulted in >30-fold increase in the aPTT over baseline, while the efficacious dose of SB 249417 prolonged the aPTT by only approximately 3-fold. Additionally, pretreatment with SB 249417 resulted in sustained blood flow and arterial patency throughout the experiment in >80% of rats treated. In contrast, <30% of rats pretreated with enoxaparin remained patent throughout the experiment. The data in this report indicate that the selective inhibition of factor IX(a) with the monoclonal antibody SB 249417 produces a superior antithrombotic profile to that of the low molecular weight heparin enoxaparin.

Impact of the patient population on the risk for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

The frequency of immune heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) varies among prospective studies. It is unknown whether this is caused by differences in the heparin preparations, the patient populations, or the types of serologic assay used to confirm the diagnosis. Seven hundred forty-four patients were studied from 3 different clinical treatment settings, as follows: unfractionated heparin (UFH) during or after cardiac surgery (n = 100), UFH after orthopedic surgery (n = 205), and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) after orthopedic surgery (n = 439). Both an activation assay and an antigen assay were used to detect heparin-dependent IgG (HIT-IgG) antibodies. By activation assay, the frequency of HIT-IgG formation ranged from a low of 3.2% in orthopedic patients receiving LMWH to a high of 20% in cardiac patients receiving UFH; by antigen assay, the corresponding frequencies ranged from 7.5% to 50%. Both UFH use (P =.002) and cardiac surgery (P =.01) were more likely to be associated with HIT-IgG formation. However, among patients in whom HIT-IgG formed and who were administered UFH, the probability for HIT was higher among orthopedic patients than among cardiac patients (by activation assay: 52.6% compared with 5%; odds ratio, 21.1 [95% CI, 2.2-962.8]; P =.001; by antigen assay: 34.5% compared with 2.0%; odds ratio, 25.8 [95% CI, 3.2-1141]; P <.001). It is concluded that there is an unexpected dissociation between the frequency of HIT-IgG formation and the risk for HIT that is dependent on the patient population. HIT-IgG antibodies are more likely to form in patients who undergo cardiac surgery than in orthopedic patients, but among patients in whom antibodies do form, orthopedic patients are more likely to develop HIT. (Blood. 2000;96:1703-1708)

Anti Xa monitoring during treatment with low molecular weight heparin or danaparoid: inter-assay variability

If laboratory monitoring of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) therapy is required the test of choice is the anti Xa activity assay. The relationship between anti Xa results obtained using different techniques is unknown. The aim of the present study was to compare anti Xa results obtained with eight different commercially available anti Xa activity assays (five chromogenic and three clotting based assays) in samples from patients receiving either therapeutic or prophylactic LMWH (enoxaparin or dalteparin) or danaparoid. We have demonstrated that highly significant differences exist between results obtained using different techniques. The mean anti Xa activity in patients receiving treatment or prophylaxis with enoxaparin ranged from 0.28 to 0.64 iu/ml. A similar relationship was present in samples from patients treated with dalteparin, mean anti Xa results ranging from 0.43 to 0.69 iu/ml. The Heptest clotting assay as used here in combination with the Automated Coagulation Laboratory instrument, was associated with lower results than other clotting or chromogenic techniques. In patients receiving danaparoid for heparin induced thrombocytopaenia (HIT) mean results with three clotting based assays were 0.30 to 0.36 u/ml, compared to mean results of 0.47 to 0.65 u/ml for chromogenic assays. Our data clearly indicate that the selection of anti Xa assay method could influence patient management since the dose required to achieve the therapeutic range would differ according to the assay employed. This is particularly important since the frequency of haemorrhagic side effects has been shown by others to be dose dependent, irrespective of the concomitant anti Xa activity results. In danaparoid therapy the clotting assays studied here should not be employed for monitoring without a modified target range, unless it can be demonstrated that the higher doses required to achieve the therapeutic range are safe.

Association of heparin-induced skin lesions, intracutaneous tests, and heparin-induced IgG

BACKGROUND

Cutaneous heparin-induced allergic reactions to subcutaneous heparin may begin 2-5 days after administration. The relation of the delayed-type hypersensitivity and a systemic immunologic response is controversial. The present investigation aimed to analyze the occurrence of thromboembolic complication, pathologic heparin-induced platelet activation (HIPA), and the presence of circulating heparin-induced IgG in patients with heparin-induced skin reactions.

METHODS

Intracutaneous tests, HIPA assay, and heparin-heparin IgG antibodies were performed in nine patients with heparin-induced skin lesions.

RESULTS

Six of eight patients showed positive intracutaneous tests to heparin and to four low-molecular-weight heparins. Three of six heparin-positive patients presented hypersensitivity to a heparinoid, too. Two of three patients had a positive HIPA test and elevated heparin-induced IgG antibodies. Both patients developed complications presenting as heparin-induced skin necrosis or arterial thrombosis. Two of nine patients were treated with danaparoid, 4/9 patients received r-hirudin, and 1/9 received oral coumarin. In 2/9 patients, anticoagulant therapy was stopped, but these patients will receive r-hirudin if indicated.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the coincidence of local and systemic hyperreactivity to heparin and danaparoid, patients with heparin-induced skin lesions should receive r-hirudin, a nonheparin compound, for anticoagulant treatment.

Determination of heparin-induced IgG antibody in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia type II

BACKGROUND

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is a relatively uncommon but severe side-effect of heparin therapy. Heparin-induced IgG antibody has been elucidated to be the main isotype and the most pathogenic antibody in the pathophysiology. As affected patients are at high risk of developing thrombotic events, confirmation of the clinical diagnosis and avoidance of heparin re-exposure are important and desirable.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In the present study, heparin-induced IgG was measured by the binding of neoantigens, which were prepared by incubating FITC-heparin with platelet factor 4 present in normal serum. The cross-reactivities of heparin-induced IgG with low-molecular-weight heparin and danaparoid were analysed by competitive binding.

RESULTS

A total of 81 clinically suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia type II patients were analysed. Thirty-seven of 38 heparin-induced thrombocytopenia type II patients, in whom thromboembolism was confirmed by objective methods, had elevated relative fluorescence intensity ratios (patient normal control) and 36 had positive heparin-induced platelet activation results. The prevalence of heparin-induced IgG in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia type II patients was 97.4%. Positive heparin-induced IgG results were: 0/319 healthy volunteers, 0/38 other thrombo-cytopenia and 2/56 heparin/low-molecular-weight heparin-receiving patients without thrombocytopenia, 2/41 hyperbilirubinaemic patients and 2/50 hyperlipidaemic patients. A small amount of cross-reaction assays showed similar results as obtained in heparin-induced platelet activation.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that a very high frequency of heparin-induced IgG in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia type II patients can be detected using a novel antigen assay. The rapid determination of pathogenic heparin-induced IgG may be a useful tool for the rapid diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia type II that could facilitate further management of the patients.

[Heparin-induced thrombopenia: significance and difficulties of precise identification of the immunologic mechanism]

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a drug induced immunohematologic adverse reaction which is a rare but potentially very severe accident. Its diagnosis is important for epidemiologic and drug surveillance studies and in order to decide the most appropriate treatment. Its importance is enhanced since there is no gold standard diagnostic criteria. In clinical practice the diagnosis is based on a group of criteria related to clinical events and laboratory tests. We have established a score based on anamnestic criteria which allowed us to evaluate and compare two different laboratory tests: a platelet aggregation test (PAT) and a test for the detection of heparin dependent antibodies (Heparin Platelet Induced Antibodies or HPIA). The functional test PAT which is commonly used in expert laboratories detects antibodies inducing platelet aggregation in the presence of heparin. The HPIA test more recently developed is an ELISA test which detects antibodies directed at heparin-platelet factor 4 complexes. The relative value of theses two methods for the diagnosis of HIT is not well documented. We have analysed the results of these two tests in 273 consecutive patients with a suspicion of HIT. The results were concordant in 70% of patients. In selecting the patients with the lowest and the highest probability of HIT according to the score, PAT was found a more sensitive and HPIA a more specific test than the other. At low probability PAT is more often positive than HPIA 18% and 9% respectively. No test is 100% reliable, the specificity being limited for both tests since in about 20% of cases one or both tests are negative contrasting with a highly probable HIT. In this last group of patients, PAT was more frequently positive (86%) than HPIA (72%). Both tests are negative in 6% of patients suggesting the existence of presently unknown antigenic targets. Considering a group of 19 patients with a high probability of HIT, we have found antibodies against IL-8 or NAP-2 in only 7 patients. The discrepancy between a HPIA positive and a PAT negative encountered in 8% of patients may be explained by the existence of IgA or IgM immunoglobulins since in contrast to IgG they are unable to promote platelet aggregation via the CD32 platelet membrane receptor. This work suggests than neither test is 100% reliable and that they play a complementary role in the diagnosis of HIT. The potential advantage of using both tests should be confirmed in complementary studies

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: IgG binding to PF4-heparin complexes in the fluid phase and cross-reactivity with low molecular weight heparin and heparinoid

Early diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is essential to reduce morbidity and mortality. We report an enzyme immunoassay which detects the binding of HIT IgG to PF4-heparin in the fluid phase. Our fluid phase assay produces consistently low background and can detect low levels of anti-PF4-heparin. It is suited to testing alternative anticoagulants because, unlike in an ELISA, a clearly defined amount of antigen is available for antibody binding. We were able to detect anti-PF4-heparin IgG in 26/28 (93%) HIT patients. We investigated cross-reactivity of anti-PF4-heparin antibodies with PF4 complexed to alternative heparin-like anticoagulants. Low molecular weight heparins cross-reacted with 23/26 (88%) of the sera from HIT patients while half of the HIT sera weakly cross-reacted with PF4-danaparoid (Orgaran). The thrombocytopenia and thrombosis of most of these patients resolved during danaparoid therapy, indicating that detection of low affinity antibodies to PF4-danaparoid by immunoassay may not be an absolute contraindication for danaparoid administration.

Pathogenicity of human anti-platelet factor 4 (PF4)/heparin in vivo: generation of mouse anti-PF4/heparin and induction of thrombocytopenia by heparin

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia/thrombosis (HIT) is a severe thrombotic disorder that occurs in approximately 1% of patients treated with heparin. Affected patients commonly develop antibodies that recognize PF4/heparin complexes that may form on the surface of activated platelets and on the endothelium. However, it has not been established that anti-PF4/heparin antibodies are responsible for the clinical manifestations of HIT. To address this issue, we employed a recently developed model of active immunity to study the effect of IgG anti-PF4/heparin antibody in vivo. In previous studies we have shown that it is possible to induce autoimmune diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), anti-phospholipid syndrome (APS) or vasculitis in naive mice by active immunization with anti-DNA, anti-cardiolipin and anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies, respectively. Immunized animals develop anti-idiotypic antibodies (Ab2) and, after 2-4 months, anti-anti-idiotypic antibodies (Ab3). Ab3s generated in this manner often simulate the binding activity of Ab1 and their expression correlates with the development of specific clinical manifestations typical of the respective human disease. Based on this experience, naive BALB/c mice were immunized with IgG anti-PF4/heparin antibodies isolated from two patients with HIT. The actively immunized mice developed mouse anti-PF4/heparin antibody (Ab3). Administration of unfractionated heparin, but not low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), to the actively immunized animals induced thrombocytopenia by day 4 of drug exposure. There was no evidence of thrombosis. The results of this study support the importance of anti-PF4/heparin antibodies in the pathogenesis of HIT. Further, this model may help to elucidate the factors responsible for thrombosis as well as providing means to assess new treatment options for patients with this disorder.

Type IV hypersensitivity to subcutaneous heparin: a new case

A 71-year-old woman was seen for cutaneous lesions that appeared on her abdomen 15 days after the beginning of subcutaneous injection of nadroparin calcium (Fraxiparina), a low molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). The lesions were very pruriginous, measured 0.5-3 cm, and appeared at and around the point of Fraxiparina injection. Fraxiparina treatment was stopped and the lesions subsided spontaneously in one week. The patient had been treated with intravenous heparin (H) one year before. A 6 mm punch biopsy showed spongiosis and a mild dermal superficial perivascular infiltrate composed of lymphocytes and eosinophils. A challenge test with a therapeutic dose of Fraxiparina produced a lesion similar to those described above. Epicutaneous, prick and intradermal tests with undiluted samples of different H (both preservative-containing and preservative-free) were performed. Patch tests produced a mild erythematous reaction to all H at 48 hours and a (++) reaction at 96 hours. These reactions persisted for one week. Prick tests showed neither an immediate nor a delayed reaction. Intradermal tests with H did not produce an immediate reaction, but induced an infiltrated erythematous reaction at 48 hours that enlarged during the next 2 days and was transformed into pruritic plaques with vesicles. The lesions cleared in two weeks. Our findings confirm a delayed-type hypersensitivity to H and cross-reactivity between unfractioned and LMWH.

Patients treated with unfractionated heparin during open heart surgery are at high risk to form antibodies reactive with heparin:platelet factor 4 complexes

Recent studies have demonstrated a strong association between type II (immunologically mediated) heparin-induced thrombocytopenia/thrombosis (HITP) and antibodies reactive with complexes consisting of heparin and platelet factor 4 (PF4), a heparin-binding protein normally found in platelet-alpha granules. However, the frequency with which such antibodies develop in patients given treatment with heparin has not yet been defined. We studied the development of heparin:PF4-specific antibodies in 51 patients who received a single dose of unfractionated heparin (UFH) during cardiac catheterization and were then given UFH or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) again during and after open heart surgery. Eleven of the 51 patients (22%) had antibodies reactive with heparin:PF4 when they were admitted for cardiac surgery; these antibodies were mainly of the immunoglobulin M (IgM) class and were apparently stimulated by exposure to UFH at cardiac catheterization. Seventeen of 34 patients (50%) without preexisting antibody who were given UFH during and for 1 to 3 days after surgery formed immunoglobulin G antibodies or IgM antibodies (or both) by the sixth postoperative day. Overall, 27 of 44 patients (61%) who were given UFH at surgery had antibodies by the time of hospital discharge. None of 6 patients without preexisting antibody who were given LMWH at surgery formed antibodies (p < 0.03). However, LMWH was given as a single injection only on the day of surgery. The titer of the antibodies formed by patients receiving UFH ranged from 1:10 to 1:200, significantly lower than those in patients with a clinical diagnosis of HITP. Moderate thrombocytopenia was common after open heart surgery, but platelet levels in patients who had preexisting antibodies or formed new antibodies did not differ significantly from those in patients without antibody. Clinically significant thrombosis did not develop in any patient and HITP was not diagnosed in any patient. Antibodies reactive with heparin:PF4 formed in only 3 of 66 patients (4.5%) undergoing other types of surgery. One of these patients had been given UFH 3 months previously; the other 2 may have been exposed to heparin used to flush intravenous lines postoperatively. No antibodies reactive with heparin:PF4 were found in any of 108 normal subjects. We conclude that UFH is more immunogenic than has been thought and that patients exposed to this anticoagulant during open heart surgery are at high risk to form low titer (</= 1:200) antibodies reactive with heparin:PF4. Further studies are needed to determine whether such antibodies are clinically significant--that is, whether sensitized patients are at risk to develop HITP if heparin treatment is continued for more than 1 to 3 days or is reinstituted at a later date.

Cross-reactivity study of low molecular weight heparins and heparinoid in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Previous studies suggested that the cross-reactivity rates of low molecular weight (LMW) heparins with the antibody in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) are more than 80%, whilst that of the LMW heparinoid (Orgaran) is relatively low at about 10%. These earlier studies were limited either in the number of patients studied, or in investigating only a single drug. They were also inadequate due to non-standardisation of testing conditions. This study compares three LMW heparins (Fragmin, Clexane, Fraxiparin) and a heparinoid (Orgaran) in their cross-reactivity rates with the HIT antibody. The sera of 45 HIT patients were tested using platelet aggregometry under standardised conditions. The cross-reactivity rates are: 7% (Orgaran), 89% (Fragmin), 83% (Clexane) and 86% (Fraxiparin). Although there are no controlled trials to determine the in vivo cross-reactivity rates of LMW heparins and heparinoid, the low in vitro cross-reactivity rate of the latter favours its use in HIT. Nevertheless, the therapeutic use of these drugs in HIT should be preceded by exclusion of in vitro cross-reactivity.

Delayed hypersensitivity to one low-molecular-weight heparin with tolerance of other low-molecular-weight heparins

We report a patient who developed infiltrated plaques at the sites of subcutaneous injection of a low-molecular-weight heparin. Skin tests and a lymphocyte transformation test revealed hypersensitivity to sandoparin and heparin sodium. The low-molecular-weight heparins nadroparin and dalteparin were subsequently tolerated without adverse effects. Possible risk factors for sensitization are discussed.

Comparison of three heparin bovine serum albumin binding methods for production of antiheparin antibodies

IgG antiheparin antibody secreting hybrid cells have not been successfully raised so far. Therefore, we compared three different conjugating procedures for preparation of LMMH-protein conjugates. Albumin was chosen as carrier protein. Only the conjugate prepared by reductive amination induced antiheparin antibody production in mice. Conjugates prepared by the carbodiimide method and Mannich reaction did not induce heparin immunogenicity and did not induce antibody production in mice. Antiheparin antibody production in mice and by hybrid cells was detected by assaying serum and culture supernatant. LMMH-tyramine, labeled with 125I, was bound by the antibodies and immunoprecipitated by goat anti-mouse IgG antibodies. The tracer was competitively inhibited by nonlabeled heparin for binding to the heparin antibodies. Hybridoma cells producing the specific antiheparin antibody were cloned and subcloned up to monoclonality. Six hybrids were selected and designated H1.18, H1.21, H3.1, H3.17, H3.18, H4.24. In conclusion, six monoclonal antiheparin antibodies were raised using a LMMH-albumin conjugate prepared by reductive amination.

[Re-examination of the role of mast cells, mediators of inflammation and heparin]

Mast cells contain proteoglycans, e.g. heparin, which manifest potent anti-inflammatory features. Mast cell degranulation could eventually result in self limiting inflammation with shortened course due to heparin release. The recent availability of low molecular weight heparins will allow for clinical studies in allergic/inflammatory syndromes, e.g. asthma.

Heparin-associated thrombocytopenia: successful therapy with the heparinoid Org 10172 in a patient showing cross-reaction to LMW heparins

A patient suffering from heparin-associated thrombocytopenia (HAT), recurrent arteriothromboses, and acute renal failure after treatment with standard heparin is described. He failed to improve when therapy was continued with low-molecular-weight (LMW) heparin (Fragmin, Kabi Pfrimmer, Erlangen, FRG). By means of the in vitro heparin-induced platelet activation (HIPA) assay it was shown that standard heparin and the LMW heparins Fragmin and Fraxiparin (Sanofi Labaz, Munich, FRG), as well as the enoxaparine Clexane (Nattermann, Cologne, FRG), all induced platelet activation with the patient's serum. In contrast, the LMW heparinoid Org 10172 (Organon, Oss, The Netherlands) did not cause platelet activation. When the patient was subsequently treated by parenteral administration of Org 10172 as anticoagulant over a period of several weeks the number of platelets rapidly increased and the patient almost completely recovered. This case shows that strong in vivo and in vitro cross-reactivity between standard heparin and LMW heparins may occur, but can be avoided by the use of a novel heparinoid, Org 10172. The HIPA assay provides a simple and sensitive laboratory method for the choice of an innocuous heparin or heparinoid for continued parenteral anticoagulation.