A rare clotting disorder may cloud the world's hopes for AstraZeneca's COVID-19 vaccine - Science Magazine | Canada News Media
Connect with us

Business

A rare clotting disorder may cloud the world's hopes for AstraZeneca's COVID-19 vaccine – Science Magazine

Published

 on



<!–

–>

A man receives a dose of AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine at a conference center in Rome on 24 March. Italy halted use of the vaccine on 15 March but resumed immunizations four days later.

Antonio Masiello/Getty Images

Science’s COVID-19 reporting is supported by the Heising-Simons Foundation.

In the tumultuous rollout of AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine, all eyes were on the United States this week, where the company had a highly public communication breakdown over the vaccine’s efficacy with an expert panel overseeing a large study in the Americas. But on the other side of the Atlantic, the vaccine faces new concerns about safety as an explanation gains ground for the unusual strokes and clotting disorders recorded in at least 30 recipients.

Many European countries suspended use of AstraZeneca’s vaccine earlier this month following initial reports of the symptoms, which have led to at least 15 deaths. Most resumed vaccinations after the European Medicines Agency (EMA) recommended doing so on 18 March, saying the benefits of the vaccine outweigh any risks. EMA is continuing to investigate the matter and will convene a wideranging committee of experts on 29 March.

Now, a group of researchers led by German clotting specialist Andreas Greinacher of the University of Greifswald says the highly unusual combination of symptoms—widespread blood clots and a low platelet count, sometimes with bleeding—resembles a rare side effect of the blood thinner heparin, called heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT).

The scientists, who first described their findings during a 19 March press conference, recommend a way to test for and treat the disorder and say this can help ease worries about the vaccine. “We know what to do: how to diagnose it, and how to treat it,” says Greinacher, who calls the syndrome vaccine-induced prothrombotic immune thrombocytopenia, or VIPIT. Greinacher says he has submitted a manuscript to the preprint server Research Square.

Even if Greinacher’s mechanism isn’t the whole story, multiple researchers told Science they were convinced that the vaccine was causing the rare set of symptoms. If that turns out to be true, it could have major consequences for the vaccine, which is one of the cornerstones of the World Health Organization’s push to immunize the world. AstraZeneca is working with partners around the globe to make and distribute billions of doses in low- and middle-income countries, which might have a harder time identifying and treating rare side effects.

Europe is relying heavily on the vaccine as well; the European Union bought 400 million doses. The company’s failure to deliver on time has delayed vaccine rollouts on the continent, but now, dented confidence is exacerbating the delays. And even if the risk is very low, it may make sense to use the vaccine only in those who also stand to gain the most from it: elderly people at high risk of dying from COVID-19. Several European countries have started to do this. The situation has scientists walking a tightrope: They want to make the medical profession aware of their concerns without sowing panic.

But Greinacher’s hypothesis is being taken seriously. Two German medical societies put out press releases lauding him for solving the issue. In the Netherlands, the Dutch Internal Medicine Society urged internists to be aware of the symptoms and the recommended course of action. The United Kingdom has officially reported only 5 cases—despite administering 11 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine—but the British Society of Haematology has urged its members to be aware of “an important and emerging area of haemostasis and thrombosis practice” and to report any possible cases. The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation has recommended against giving any COVID-19 vaccine to people with a history of HIT.

It is not yet clear how the vaccine could trigger VIPIT, and not everyone thinks the case is closed. “It’s intriguing, but I am not entirely convinced,” says Robert Brodsky, a hematologist at Johns Hopkins University. AstraZeneca, meanwhile, has not directly responded to the reports of the rare constellation of symptoms except to say that they did not appear in any of the company’s clinical trials.

“People are absolutely working like crazy behind the scenes to provide more clarity,” says Saskia Middeldorp, a vascular internist at Radboud University Medical Center in the Netherlands, who disagreed with the temporary halt of the vaccine because she says the benefits clearly outweigh the risks.

A ‘very striking’ disorder

The VIPIT story began on 27 February, when Sabine Eichinger, a hematologist at Medical University Vienna, was confronted with an unusual patient. A 49-year old nurse had sought help at a local hospital the day before, suffering from nausea and stomach discomfort, and was transferred to Eichinger’s hospital. She had a low platelet count and computed tomography scans found thromboses—blood clots—in the veins in her abdomen and later in arteries as well. “There was little we could do at this stage,” says Eichinger. The patient died the next day.

The combination of low platelet count, or thrombocytopenia, and clots kept Eichinger thinking, however. “It’s very striking,” she says. Platelets, also known as thrombocytes, help to form blood clots, so low levels usually lead to bleeding, not clotting. “You would think that low platelets and thromboses are opposites really.” One condition where they occur together is called disseminated intravascular coagulation, when severe infection, injury, or cancer trigger clotting so widespread it uses up all the platelets, “but she had none of these things,” Eichinger says.

The unusual combination also appears in HIT, which can occur in patients given heparin as a drug. Heparin binds to a protein called platelet factor 4 (PF4), forming a complex. For reasons that aren’t understood, some people produce antibodies against the complex, setting off an out-of-control clotting reaction. Eichinger’s patient had not received heparin, but she had gotten a shot of the AstraZeneca vaccine 5 days before her symptoms began. “I thought maybe this is some kind of immune reaction,” Eichinger says.

She reached out to Greinacher, who had studied HIT for decades. “Then things started happening thick and fast,” she says, as multiple countries responded to reports of clotting by suspending use of the AstraZeneca vaccine.

Greinacher says he contacted other colleagues who had studied HIT in Canada and Germany and asked the Paul Ehrlich Institute (PEI), which oversees vaccine safety in Germany, if they had seen any cases. They had. PEI recommended that Germany pause use of the vaccine as well and asked Greinacher to help investigate. He soon received blood samples from eight additional patients. All had both low platelets and unusual clotting, he says. In four samples, the researchers also found evidence for antibodies against PF4, a hallmark of HIT. He and his colleagues are now checking whether other vaccine recipients and former COVID-19 patients have similar antibodies.

People are absolutely working like crazy behind the scenes to provide more clarity.

Saskia Middeldorp, Radboud University Medical Center

Brodsky says it isn’t clear whether VIPIT explains all of the cases. He agrees that the PF4 antibodies and the clotting seen in patients resemble HIT, but the link has not been proven, he says: “I’m convinced that these patients have platelet factor 4 antibodies, at least four of them. But I’m not convinced that those … antibodies are explaining the thrombocytopenia or the clotting.”

Treatable condition

Greinacher agrees on the need for more data. But he says it’s crucial to alert doctors to the potential complication. When recognized in time, HIT can be treated with immunoglobulins—nonspecific antibodies from blood donors—that help put the brakes on platelet activation. Non-heparin blood thinners can help dissolve the clots. VIPIT should be treated in a similar way, he says. In at least one case, Greinacher says, a doctor sought the group’s advice and the patient recovered. The German Society for the Study of Thrombosis and Hemostasis, of which Greinacher is a member, has issued a set of recommendations for diagnosing and treating VIPIT. Greinacher says he has also been in touch with safety representatives at AstraZeneca.

Nigel Key, a hematologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, agrees on the need to alert doctors. “Maybe it is too much to expect at this point that there would be a very detailed molecular mechanism,” he says, but the advice to physicians who may encounter patients is crucial.

Brodsky and Key say the cases are striking enough that they probably represent a real side effect. “I think the vaccine is mostly safe. I think the benefits probably outweigh the risk for a general population,” Brodsky says. “But these cases raise concern that this vaccine is potentially life-threatening in a small subset of patients.”

Scientists are now scrambling to understand how big that subset is and who’s in it. So far, most cases have been observed in women under 65. But that could be because of the vaccinated population: Many countries initially used AstraZeneca only in people under 65 because early clinical trials included few older recipients. That meant the vaccine was used in priority groups such as health care workers and teachers, a majority of whom are women. In Norway, for example, 78% of the AstraZeneca doses went to women, says Sara Viksmoen Watle, chief physician at the Norway Institute of Public Health. The United Kingdom, however, used the vaccine first in older people, which may explain why fewer unusual clotting events have been spotted there.

Data from Norway—whose extensive health registries make this type of research easier—suggests previous COVID-19 infection does not predispose vaccinees to a severe reaction, Watle says. Alerting clinicians will help ensure that fewer cases are missed for analysis, Key says. A global database of cases may be helpful too.

Many countries are, for now, accept the risk that the AstraZeneca may carry, but several have restricted its use to people who are at the highest risk of dying from COVID-19: those aged 55 or older in France, 65 or older in Sweden and Finland, and 70 or older in Iceland. That approach makes sense, says Sandra Ciesek, a virologist at Goethe University Frankfurt. “The argument I keep hearing is that the risk-benefit ratio is still positive. But we do not have just one vaccine, we have several. So restricting the AstraZeneca vaccine to older people makes sense to me, and it does not waste any doses.”

Denmark and Norway are waiting for more data. Norway, which has administered the AstraZeneca vaccine to 130,000 people under 65, has reported five patients who had low platelets, hemorrhage, and widespread thromboses, three of whom died. That’s about one case in 25,000 vaccinees, “a high number with a very critical outcome in previously healthy, young individuals,” says Watle. The country hopes to make a decision on the vaccine within 3 weeks. It can afford to hold off: COVID-19 cases are relatively low and AstraZeneca is delivering so few doses that the extended pause won’t make a big difference in the short-term.

Middeldorp says she expects more clarity after Monday’s meeting of EMA’s expert group, which includes clotting experts, neurologists, virologists, immunologists and epidemiologists. The agency says it will issue an update on the vaccine during the next meeting of its safety committee, being held from 6 to 9 April. Ideally that meeting will help clarify how frequently the condition occurs and whether the risk varies by age or sex, Middeldorp says. The world needs AstraZeneca’s vaccine, she says—but that means it is crucial to fully understand its benefits and its risks.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

CANADIAN ACCOUNTANTS TELL ALL ON STATE OF SMB FINANCES IN NEW SURVEY

Published

 on

CANADIAN ACCOUNTANTS TELL ALL ON STATE OF SMB FINANCES IN NEW SURVEY
Accountants “open the books” on inflation, interest rates, technology, and lack of SMB support

TORONTO – Nov. 19, 2024 – A recent survey of 500 Canadian accountants has revealed several surprising conclusions about their frustrations, fears, thoughts on provincial support for SMBs, the investments that make them wary, and how many clients are actually using the financial technology they need.

And for a little fun, the survey even identified which Canadian celebrity they would back as an SMB CEO.

The survey conducted on behalf of Plooto, a leading payment automation solution for small-to-midsize businesses (SMBs), asked accountants, bookkeepers, and finance professionals a series of revealing questions that provide a snapshot of the current state of Canada’s accounting industry.

Key Findings of the Survey:

  1. IT’S HARD OUT THERE FOR AN SMB

    Asked what they think are the biggest financial threats to Canadian SMBs, more than half of Canadian accountants (54.5%) said ‘inflation increasing their own costs.’ This was followed by interest rates making borrowing rates more expensive (46.1%); staff turnover (41.2%); lower prices offered by larger corporations in the same space (39%); interest rates cooling on consumer spending (34.1%) and foreign competition (32%).

 

  1. ACCOUNTANTS CALL OUT ONTARIO’S SMB SUPPORT

    Asked which province they think is doing the least to help SMBs succeed, a definitive quarter (24.5%) of accountants cited Ontario. Quebec was a distant second at 15%; followed by Alberta (13.3%);  BC (11.4%); Manitoba and Newfoundland and Labrador (tied at 7.25%); Saskatchewan (5.9%); and New Brunswick and PEI (tied at 4.9%). Accountants considered Nova Scotia as the province doing the most for SMBs, with the lowest vote of 4%.

 

  1. ACCOUNTANTS SHINE THE LIGHT ON COSTLY SMB MISTAKES

    Asked what the biggest financial mistake they see Canadian SMBs make on a regular basis, 21% of Canadian accountants said ‘not implementing the proper technology.’ This was followed by ‘not paying enough attention to cash flow’ (19%); investing in elaborate and expensive workplaces (12.2%); hiring too quickly (10.6%);   buying rather than leasing equipment (10%); overpaying to attract a top-tier executive (9.8%); hiring too slowly (9.2%);  and funding the first year with non-submitted HST payments (8.0%).

 

  1. ACCOUNTANTS HESITATE TO ADVISE INVESTMENT IN ENTERTAINMENT AND EDUCATION

    Based on the profitability of their current clients, accountants said they would NEVER invest in:  arts, entertainment and recreation (32.2%), educational services (24.5%), travel and hospitality (22.9%), agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting (19.8%) and; finance and insurance (19.6%).

 

  1. THE ECONOMY IS CLEARLY KEEPING ACCOUNTANTS UP AT NIGHT

    Asked to choose the factors that are keeping them up at night, 48.8% said ‘current interest rates,’ followed by ‘fear of a recession’ (46.7%); ‘worry that their SMB clients will go under’ (29.6%); the current Federal Government (27.3%); ‘another pandemic’ (26.9%); the 2024 U.S. elections (25.3%.) and; ‘a different Federal Government coming into power’ (25.1%).

 

  1. ACCOUNTANT IRRITATIONS UP CLOSE

    Asked what the most irritating things their clients do on a regular basis are, Canadian accountants said ‘not sending required information’ (64.7%); not reading financial reports (50.2%); not making time to discuss financial reports (48.4%); not paying invoices on time (47.8%); submitting information with ‘bad math’ (44.5%) and; not listening to recommendations (44.3%).

 

  1. SMBs DON’T HAVE ALL OF THE TECH RESOURCES THEY NEED

Accountants say less than a third (31.4%) of clients have all of the tech in place that they need, despite its far-reaching benefits.
When their clients use fintech, 65.1% of clients can reconcile their books faster, and 56% can make and receive payments faster.

Bonus Insight:

RYAN REYNOLDS COULD RULE THE C-SUITE

Asked which Canadian celebrity they thought would be the most effective in running a SMB, nearly a quarter of Canadian accountants said Ryan Reynolds (27.1%). Reynolds edged out business celebrity Kevin O’Leary (22%) and left Keanu Reeves (15.3%), Drake (12.6%), Arlene Dickenson (8.6%), and Michele Romano (4.1%) as distant alternatives.

PLEASE REFER TO THIS AS A SURVEY BY PLOOTO IN ANY MEDIA MENTIONS

Continue Reading

Business

Which Candidate Would You Hire? A or B?

Published

 on

Speaking from personal experience, a bad hire isn’t a good look. The last thing you want is to hear, “Who the hell hired Bob?” and have your hiring judgment questioned.

The job seeker who’s empathetic to the employer’s side of the hiring desk, which controls the hiring process, is rare.

One of the best things you can do to enhance your job search is to practice perspective-taking, which involves seeing things from a different perspective.

It’s natural for employers to find candidates who have empathy and an understanding of their challenges and pain points more attractive. Candidates like these are seen as potential allies rather than individuals only looking out for themselves. Since most job seekers approach employers with a ‘what’s in it for me’ mindset, practicing perspective-taking sets you apart.

“If there is any one secret of success, it lies in the ability to get the other person’s point of view and see things from that person’s angle as well as from your own.” – Henry Ford.

Perspective-taking makes you realize that from an employer’s POV hiring is fraught with risks employers want to avoid; thus, you consider what most job seekers don’t: How can I present myself as the least risky hiring option?

Here’s an exercise that’ll help you visualize the employer’s side of the hiring process.

 

Candidate A or B?

Imagine you’re the Director of Customer Service for a regional bank with 85 branches. You’re hiring a call centre manager who’ll work onsite at the bank’s head office, overseeing the bank’s 50-seat call centre. In addition to working with the call centre agents, the successful candidate will also interact with other departments, your boss, and members of the C-suite leadership team; in other words, they’ll be visible throughout the bank.

The job posting resulted in over 400 applications. The bank’s ATS and HR (phone interview vetting, skill assessment testing) selected five candidates, plus an employee referral, for you to interview. You aim to shortlist the six candidates to three, whom you’ll interview a second time, and then make a hiring decision. Before scheduling the interviews, which’ll take place between all your other ongoing responsibilities, you spend 5 – 10 minutes with each candidate’s resume and review their respective digital footprint and LinkedIn activity.

In your opinion, which candidate deserves a second interview?

Candidate A: Their resume provides quantitative numbers—evidence—of the results they’ve achieved. (Through enhanced agent training, reduced average handle time from 4:32 mins. to 2:43 minutes, which decreased the abandon rate from 4.6% to 2.2%.)

 

Candidate B: Their resume offers only opinions. (“I’m detail-oriented,” “I learn fast.”)

 

Candidate A: Looks you in the eye, has a firm handshake, smiles, and exudes confidence.

 

Candidate B: Doesn’t look you in the eye, has a weak handshake.

 

Candidate A: Referred by Ariya, who’s been with the bank for over 15 years and has a stellar record, having moved up from teller to credit analyst and is tracking to become a Managing Director.

 

Candidate B: Applied online. Based on your knowledge, they did nothing else to make their application more visible. (e.g., reached out to you or other bank employees)

 

Candidate A:  Well educated, grew up as a digital native, eager and energetic. Currently manages a 35-seat call center for a mid-size credit union. They mention they called the bank’s call centre several times and suggest ways to improve the caller experience.

 

Candidate B: Has been working in banking for over 25 years, managing the call center at their last bank for 17 years before being laid off eight months ago. They definitely have the experience to run a call centre. However, you have a nagging gut feeling that they’re just looking for a place to park themselves until they can afford to retire.

 

Candidate A: Has a fully completed LinkedIn profile (picture, eye-catching banner) packed with quantifying numbers. It’s evident how they were of value to their employers. Recently, they engaged constructively with posts and comments and published a LinkedIn article on managing Generations Y and Z call centre agents. Their Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter/X accounts aren’t controversial, sharing between ‘Happy Birthday’ and ‘Congratulations’ messages, their love of fine dining, baseball, and gardening.

 

Candidate B: Their LinkedIn profile is incomplete. The last time they posted on LinkedIn was seven months ago, ranting about how the government’s latest interest rate hike will plunge the country into a deep recession. Conspiracy theories abound on their Facebook page.

 

Candidate A: Notices the golf calendar on your desk, the putter and golf balls in the corner, and a photograph of Phil Mickelson putting on the green jacket at the 2010 Masters hanging on your wall. While nodding towards the picture, they say, “Evidently, you golf. Not being a golfer myself, what made you take up golf, which I understand is a frustrating sport?”

 

Candidate B: Doesn’t proactively engage in small talk. Waits for you to start the interview.

 

Which of the above candidates presents the least hiring risk? Will likely succeed (read: achieve the results the employer needs)? Will show your boss, upper management, and employees you know how to hire for competence and fit?

_____________________________________________________________________

 

Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers “unsweetened” job search advice. You can send Nick your questions to artoffindingwork@gmail.com.

Continue Reading

Business

Job Seekers’ Trinity Focus, Anger and Evidence

Published

 on

Though I have no empirical evidence to support my claim, I believe job search success can be achieved faster by using what I call “The Job Seekers’ Trinity” as your framework, the trinity being:

 

  1. The power of focus
  2. Managing your anger
  3. Presenting evidence

Each component plays a critical role in sustaining motivation and strategically positioning yourself for job search success. Harnessing your focus, managing your anger, and presenting compelling evidence (read: quantitative numbers of achieved results) will transform your job search from a daunting endeavour into a structured, persuasive job search campaign that employers will notice.

 

The Power of Focus

Your job search success is mainly determined by what you’re focused on, namely:

 

  • What you focus on.

 

Your life is controlled by what you focus on; thus, focusing on the positives shapes your mindset for positive outcomes. Yes, layoffs, which the media loves to report to keep us addicted to the news, are a daily occurrence, but so is hiring. Don’t let all the doom and gloom talk overshadow this fact. Focus on where you want to go, not on what others and the media want you to fear.

 

Bonus of not focusing on negatives: You’ll be happier.

 

  • Focus on how you can provide measurable value to employers.

 

If you’re struggling with your job search, the likely reason is that you’re not showing, along with providing evidence, employers how you can add tangible value to an employer’s bottom line. Business is a numbers game, yet few job seekers speak about their numbers. If you don’t focus on and talk about your numbers, how do you expect employers to see the value in hiring you?

 

Managing Your Anger

Displaying anger in public is never a good look. Professionals are expected to control their emotions, so public displays of anger are viewed as unprofessional.

LinkedIn has become a platform heavily populated with job seekers posting angry rants—fueled mainly by a sense of entitlement—bashing and criticizing employers, recruiters, and the government, proving many job seekers think the public display of their anger won’t negatively affect their job search.

When you’re unemployed, it’s natural to be angry when your family, friends, and neighbours are employed. “Why me?” is a constant question in your head. Additionally, job searching is fraught with frustrations, such as not getting responses to your applications and being ghosted after interviews.

The key is acknowledging your anger and not letting it dictate your actions, such as adding to the angry rants on LinkedIn and other social media platforms, which employers will see.

 

Undoubtedly, rejection, which is inevitable when job hunting, causes the most anger. What works for me is to reframe rejections, be it through being ghosted, email, a call or text, as “Every ‘No’ brings me one step closer to a ‘Yes.'”

 

Additionally, I’ve significantly reduced triggering my anger by eliminating any sense of entitlement and keeping my expectations in check. Neither you nor I are owed anything, including a job, respect, empathy, understanding, agreement, or even love. A sense of entitlement and anger are intrinsically linked. The more rights you perceive you have, the more anger you need to defend them. Losing any sense of entitlement you may have will make you less angry, which has no place in a job search.

 

Presenting Evidence

As I stated earlier, business is a numbers game. Since all business decisions, including hiring, are based on numbers, presenting evidence in the form of quantitative numbers is crucial.

Which candidate would you contact to set up an interview if you were hiring a social media manager:

 

  • “Managed Fabian Publishing’s social media accounts, posting content daily.”
  • “Designed and executed Fabian Publishing’s global social media strategy across 8.7 million LinkedIn, X/Twitter, Instagram and Facebook followers. Through consistent engagement with customers, followers, and influencers, increased social media lead generation by 46% year-over-year, generating in 2023 $7.6 million in revenue.”

 

Numerical evidence, not generic statements or opinions, is how you prove your value to employers. Stating you’re a “team player” or “results-driven,” as opposed to “I’m part of an inside sales team that generated in 2023 $8.5 million in sales,” or “In 2023 I managed three company-wide software implementations, all of which came under budget,” is meaningless to an employer.

Despite all the job search advice offered, I still see resumes and LinkedIn profiles listing generic responsibilities rather than accomplishments backed by numbers. A statement such as “managed a team” doesn’t convey your management responsibilities or your team’s achievements under your leadership. “Led a team of five to increase sales by 20%, from $3.7 million to $4.44 million, within six months” shows the value of your management skills.

Throughout your job search, constantly think of all the numbers you can provide—revenue generated, number of new clients, cost savings, reduced workload, waste reduction—as evidence to employers why you’d be a great value-add to their business.

The Job Seekers’ Trinity—focusing on the positive, managing your anger and providing evidence—is a framework that’ll increase the effectiveness of your job search activities and make you stand out in today’s hyper-competitive job market, thus expediting your job search to a successful conclusion.

_____________________________________________________________________

 

Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers “unsweetened” job search advice. You can send Nick your questions to artoffindingwork@gmail.com.

Continue Reading

Trending