Available via license: CC BY
Content may be subject to copyright.
Review Not peer-reviewed version
Vaccine-Induced Immune Thrombotic
Thrombocytopenia
—
Clinicopathologic
Features and New Perspectives on Anti-
PF4 Antibody-Mediated Disorders
Yi Zhang , Anna-Lise Bissola , Jared Treverton , Michael Hack , Mark Lychacz , Sarah Kwok , Addi Arnold ,
Ishac Nazy *
Posted Date: 20 December 2023
doi: 10.20944/preprints202312.1578.v1
Keywords: vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia; adenoviral-vector based COVID-19
vaccines; platelet-factor 4; anti-PF4 antibody-mediated disorders; platelet; SARS-CoV-2
Preprints.org is a free multidiscipline platform providing preprint service that
is dedicated to making early versions of research outputs permanently
available and citable. Preprints posted at Preprints.org appear in Web of
Science, Crossref, Google Scholar, Scilit, Europe PMC.
Copyright: This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons
Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Review
Vaccine-Induced Immune Thrombotic
Thrombocytopenia—Clinicopathologic Features and
New Perspectives on Anti-PF4 Antibody-Mediated
Disorders
Yi Zhang 1,2, Anna-Lise Bissola 1, Jared Treverton 1,2, Michael Hack 1,2, Mark Lychacz 1, Sarah Kwok 1,2,
Addi Arnold 3 and Ishac Nazy 1,4
1 Faculty of Medicine, Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario,
Canada
2 Department of Biochemistry and Biomedical Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
3 Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
4 Michael G. DeGroote Centre for Transfusion Research, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
* Correspondence: nazyi@mcmaster.ca
Abstract: Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) is a rare but severe
adverse event that was first observed during the global vaccination campaign against SARS-CoV-2
infection, specifically in those receiving adenoviral vector-based vaccines for Coronavirus disease
2019 (COVID-19). VITT develops 4 to 42 days post-vaccination and is characterized by the
development of platelet-activating anti-platelet factor 4 (PF4) antibodies, leading to
thrombocytopenia and thrombosis at unusual sites. The rise in awareness and subsequent prompt
recognition of VITT was paramount in reducing mortality. Moreover, as vaccination campaigns
around the world continue, a better understanding of VITT not only has important clinical
implications but is also crucial for future vaccine development. In this review, we summarize the
clinical features, pathophysiology, and incidence rates of VITT as well as highlight other anti-PF4
antibody-mediated disorders of growing clinical significance.
Keywords: vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia; adenoviral-vector based
COVID-19 vaccines; platelet-factor 4; anti-PF4 antibody-mediated disorders; platelet; SARS-CoV-2
1. Introduction
Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) has received significant
attention from the hematology community. As global vaccination efforts persist, gaining an in-depth
understanding of VITT is not only vital for clinical management but also holds crucial implications
for future vaccine developments, and furthering our understanding about the pathophysiology of
immune-mediated platelet disorders. The purpose of this literature review is to provide a
comprehensive overview of the current research on VITT, including its epidemiology, clinical
presentation, and management, as well as its pathophysiology and characteristics shared with other
anti-PF4 antibody-mediated disorders. By providing an overview of VITT, we seek to identifying
knowledge gaps in our current understanding and provide an outline for future investigations.
2. Clinical presentation and management of VITT
The earliest cases of thrombocytopenia and thrombosis in otherwise healthy individuals after
receiving a dose of the ChAdOx1-S vaccine were documented in April 2021 by Greinacher et al.,[1]
Scully et al.,[2] and Schultz et al.[3] The index patient reported by Greinacher et al.,[1] was hospitalized
10 days after vaccination and received various treatments, including anticoagulation (enoxaparin),
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions, and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and
contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting
from any ideas, methods, instructions, or products referred to in the content.
Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 20 December 2023 doi:10.20944/preprints202312.1578.v1
© 2023 by the author(s). Distributed under a Creative Commons CC BY license.
2
transfusions of red blood cells and platelets, prothrombin complex concentrate and recombinant
Factor VIIa.[1] Despite these interventions, this patient passed away 11 days post-vaccination.[1] The
clinical resemblance of unexplainable thrombocytopenia and thrombosis to spontaneous heparin-
induced thrombocytopenia (spHIT) prompted investigators to test patient serum for antibodies
against platelet factor 4 (PF4/CXCL4),[1] a protein extensively studied for its role in the pathogenesis
of HIT.[4] This unique clinical presentation[5] led to the first of many reported cases of thrombotic
events caused by adenoviral vector-based vaccines, herein known as VITT.
VITT is a rare but life-threatening disorder characterized by the onset of arterial and venous
thromboembolisms, often at unusual sites.[1,2] Current evidence suggests that VITT is induced by
pathogenic antibodies that mediate platelet activation in the presence PF4, which is a chemokine
released from activated platelets and is involved in normal coagulation and inflammatory
processes.[6] VITT predominantly manifests following primary administration of certain replication-
deficient adenoviral vector-based COVID-19 vaccines, namely the ChAdOx1-S (Oxford-AstraZeneca)
and Ad26.CoV2.S vaccines (Johnson & Johnson/Janssen).[1,7] Despite its rarity, studies have also
indicated the occurrence of VITT following subsequent booster doses of COVID-19 vaccines.[8] A
recent case series in Brazil documented 11 VITT patients following either the third or fourth vaccine
dose of ChAdOx1-S, with an incidence rate of 0.33 per million dose following these later doses,
despite none of the patients having received an adenoviral vector-based vaccine but rather Sinovac
or BNT162b2 as their primary dose.[8]
According to guidelines from the American Society of Hematology, a diagnosis of VITT should
be made according to the following criteria: 1) COVID-19 vaccination 4 to 42 days prior to symptom
onset; 2) thrombosis (evidence of venous or arterial thrombosis); 3) thrombocytopenia (platelet count
below 150109/L); 4) positive for anti-PF4 antibodies in immunoassays; and 5) significantly elevated
D-dimer (exceeding 4 times the upper limit of normal).[9] When 1 or 2 of these criteria are unmet,
“probable VITT” and “possible VITT” are ascribed, respectively.[9]
Advances in early diagnosis and enhanced treatment strategies have contributed to a notable
reduction in its mortality rate of VITT, decreasing from 47% to 22% in cases with symptom onset after
March 28, 2021, since the initial identification of VITT.[10] Moreover, due to its clinical similarities,
insights into managing HIT have been instructive for the treatment of VITT.[5,11] Administration of
high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin at 1g/kg daily for two days along with non-heparin-based
anticoagulants is recommended for VITT management.[5,9] Although heparin is known to promote
platelet activation in HIT, therapeutic doses of heparin have been found to inhibit VITT serum-
induced platelet activation in vitro.[5,12–14] However, a clinical study involving 220 VITT patients
indicated higher mortality rates among those treated with unfractionated heparin (20%) as compared
to those administered non-heparin-based anticoagulants (16%).[15] For refractory cases of VITT,
plasma exchange, corticosteroids, and monoclonal antibodies targeting CD20 on B-cells and
complement protein C5 have been utilized, as reviewed in detail by Nadia et al.[12]
3. Incidence rate for VITT
Over 50 million doses of Ad26.COV2.S and 240.3 million doses of ChAdOx1-S have been
administered globally as of April 2022 and August 2021, respectively.[16,17] The World Health
Organization has documented a total of 109 cases of Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia Syndrome,
which includes VITT, following vaccination.[18] Of these, 70 were reported in the U.S. (3.7 per million
doses), 35 were from Europe (1.7 per million doses), and 2 were from Brazil and South Africa (0.4 and
0.23 cases per million doses, respectively).[18] The incidence rate of VITT following ChAdOx1-S vary
substantially by region: 17.6 cases per million doses in Nordic countries, and 10 cases per million
doses in the UK, compared to 0.2 cases per million doses in Asian countries.[18] Despite the
suspension of adenoviral vector-based vaccines by numerous countries, including Canada, United
States, and multiple European nations,[19–21] as of September 2022, ChAdOx1-S and Ad26.COV2.S
remain in active use as primary immunization options for adults in a considerable number of
countries around the world.[22] This ongoing administration involves nine countries in Latin
America, eight in Africa and the Middle East, and five in Asia.[22]
Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 20 December 2023 doi:10.20944/preprints202312.1578.v1
3
Initially considered a risk factor for VITT, the higher incidence of VITT in females was later
attributed to the demographic bias in early vaccine recipients, who were primarily healthcare
professionals – a group that skews towards females in many countries and was given vaccination
priority.[23] Subsequent analyses have identified age as a more relevant risk factor of VITT.[23] A
meta-analysis of data from 10 countries showed VITT incidence was lowest at 1 in a million people
over 65, increased to 1 in 300,000 among those aged 55 to 64, and peaked in the under-55 age group
with a range from 1 in 20,000 to 1 in 60,000.[24] Geographic location may also represent another
possible risk factors for developing VITT. Notably, countries in Asia, such as South Korea exhibit
substantially lower incidence rates of VITT than Western countries; although, stronger investigations
of this potential relationship are required.[25] The observed variation in VITT incidence rates across
countries emphasizes the imperative for ongoing, vigilant monitoring and management of vaccine-
associated complications, particularly as countries continue the administration of adenoviral-vector
based vaccines.[22]
4. Mechanisms of VITT pathogenesis
VITT exhibits pathophysiological similarities to HIT, as both are pro-thrombotic disorders
characterized by a pronounced decline in platelet count (relative to baseline platelet levels) and an
elevated risk of thrombosis.[4,15] HIT is primarily attributed to the formation of antibodies directed
against PF4 complexed with heparin (PF4/heparin), with symptom onset 5 to 10 days after initial
heparin administration.[4] Conversely, VITT generally presents 4 to 42 days following the primary
dose of adenoviral vector-based COVID-19 vaccine, with anti-PF4 specific antibodies directed against
the heparin-binding site.[6,9,26] Given that symptoms in VITT can present as early as four days
following vaccination, which is a timeframe insufficient for antibody class switching to IgG to take
place, the rapid IgG-specific response seems to suggest a secondary immune reaction, a pattern also
observed in HIT.[9,27] However, the onset time of VITT may be less precise as compared to HIT due
to the reliance on self-reporting upon symptom development for VITT patients, as opposed to the
routine monitoring conducted in hospital settings post-heparin administrations in HIT patients.
The prevailing theories behind VITT antibody development are based on immunogen formation
caused by PF4 interaction with polyanionic vaccine constituents or induced by vaccination, drawing
parallels with HIT pathogenesis. Several studies have demonstrated complex formation between PF4
and ChAdOx1-S, including free hexon proteins, and have been observed to associate with VITT anti-
PF4 antibodies, supporting this proposed mechanism.[28–30] However, a study by Michalik et al.[30]
indicates that while an interaction was observed with PF4 and the vaccine preparation of ChAdOx1-
S, PF4 did not show binding to the purified virions of either ChAdOx1-S or Ad26.COV2.S.[30]
Considering that ChAdOx1-S contains up to three-fold higher level of unassembled viral proteins
than Ad26.COV2.S, the reactivity of PF4 may be associated with free hexon components rather than
assembled virions.[30] It has been hypothesized that upon vaccine injection, the immunogenic
PF4/polyanionic complexes may form and circulate systemically, engaging monocytes and
neutrophils via FcγIIa receptor-dependent mechanisms.[31,32] Subsequently, these complexes could
drive the differentiation of anti-PF4 B cells into plasma cells, a process proposed to be facilitated by
a prior B-cell pre-priming event resulting from previous bacterial or viral exposure.[29,33] The
formation of spHIT antibodies is believed to follow a similar process involving an incompletely
understood seroconversion mechanism, which continues to be a subject of investigation.[34]
Complex formation between PF4 with vaccine excipients was also suggested to induce
neoepitopes and anti-PF4 antibody generation, which include extracellular nucleic acids and proteins
from human cell lines used for propagating the adenoviruses.[35] Proteomic analysis via liquid
chromatography-mass spectrometry and subsequent bioinformatics assessments conducted by
Krutzke et al. revealed substantial levels of proteins from human origin in ChAdOx1-S (44.3%-70.8%)
as compared to Ad26.COV2.S (0.5%), perhaps explaining the different incident rates associated with
the two vaccines.[36] Although aggregate formation was significant between PF4 and ChAdOx1-
S,[30] Michalik et al. found no significant aggregation between PF4 and Ad26.COV2.S despite its
implication in VITT.[30] Alternatively, Nicolai et al. suggested the potential occurrence of unintended
Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 20 December 2023 doi:10.20944/preprints202312.1578.v1
4
intravenous vaccine injection, which resulted in direct adenovirus to platelet interaction and
activation in mice treated with ChAdOx1-S, culminating in thrombocytopenia.[37] However,
Azzarone et al. argues that viral load of COVID-19 adenoviral vector-based vaccines is not sufficient
to cause coagulation in non-human primates.[38] Concerns have also been raised regarding the
possibility of VITT antibody cross-reactivity due to sequence homologies between SARS-CoV-2 spike
protein and two consecutive epitopes on PF4, intrinsic to the heparin-binding region.[39] Despite
these homologies, Greinacher et al.[39] identified distinct immune pathways for the production of
post-vaccination anti-spike antibodies and VITT-related anti-PF4 antibodies, as their investigation
found no interaction between the spike protein and VITT antibodies.[39]
Beyond the initial role of neoepitope formation, studies also suggest the contribution of certain
vaccine excipients in facilitating proinflammatory responses and promoting site-specific thrombosis.
For instance, presence of ATPase activity in ChAdOx1-S, which could be due to the considerable
amounts of heat shock proteins and chaperones, may also induce localized ADP production and
subsequent platelet activation at the vaccine injection site.[36] EDTA found in ChAdOx1-S has also
been shown to induce vascular hyperpermeability,[28,30] and the non-ionic surfactant polysorbate
80 found in both adenoviral vector-based vaccines has the capability to traverse the blood–brain
barrier when complexed with nanoparticles.[40] Subsequent to gaining access to the brain, Kowarz
et al. suggested that soluble spike protein variants produced by alternative splicing from DNA-based
vaccines plus a lack of dural venous sinuses valves may increase spike protein variants' residence
time at this site.[41] This extended presence might increase their likelihood of binding endothelial
cells expressing angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, thereby elevating the risk of thrombi development
in the cerebral sinuses[41] and potentially contributing to the overall immune responses observed in
VITT. However, Eichinger et al.[42] noted that VITT onset occurs at a time when the adenovirus and
vaccine excipients are likely absent from circulation, making these unlikely contributors of VITT.[42]
Alternatively, recombinant monoclonal VITT antibodies reverse-engineered using mass
spectrometry have been helpful in expanding our mechanistic understanding of VITT.[43] Sequence
analysis revealed a high concentration of acidic/negatively charged amino acids in the VITT paratope
(antibody region involved in antigen binding), facilitating interactions with the heparin binding site
on PF4 driven by electrostatic forces.[43] This electrostatic nature of epitope-paratope interactions
plus the presence of an equatorial ring of cationic charges on PF4 allows one molecule of PF4 to link
multiple VITT antibodies together, forming pathogenic complexes capable of inducing platelet
activation without requiring a polyanionic scaffold.[43] While this behaviour deviates from the well-
documented dependency of classical HIT antibodies on heparin, a similar model has been proposed
for the atypical presentations of HIT (such as spHIT).[4,44] From these findings, Ivanov et al.[43]
questioned the involvement of PF4 in initially triggering the formation of VITT antibodies, or whether
it may merely contribute to the subsequent thrombi generation, potentially due to an induction of
PF4 levels as a result of vaccination.[43] Despite being monoclonal, the charge-dependent binding
behavior of these antibodies indicates a broad specificity, implying that they may associate with
rather than specifically recognize PF4 as the antigen, whereas their initial target might still remain
unidentified.[43]
5. Characterization of VITT antibodies
Central to gaining an understanding of the functional dynamics and pathophysiological roles in
this rare condition is the characterization of these pathogenic anti-PF4 antibodies. Epitope specificity
studies conducted by Huynh et al. have identified a restricted epitope of eight surface residues on
PF4 critical for the binding of VITT antibodies, suggesting a limited B cell clonality in VITT.[6]
Incorporating mass spectrometry analyses, Kanack et al. showed that anti-PF4 antibodies display
either a monoclonal or oligoclonal profile,[45] standing in contrast to the polyclonal nature of
antibodies associated with HIT, thus highlighting the distinct immunological profile of VITT.[46]
Building upon these findings, Huynh et al.[6,26] have further revealed two distinct patterns of VITT
antibody binding, potentially indicative of a two-site targeting on PF4.[6,26] The first involves
antibodies binding to residues within the well-known heparin-binding site of PF4[5] and
Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 20 December 2023 doi:10.20944/preprints202312.1578.v1
5
demonstrates PF4-dependent binding[26] while the second shows antibodies engaging additional
residues recognized by HIT antibodies thus demonstrating PF4-indepentent binding.[26] This
observation indicates immune responses heterogeneity in VITT patients, with variability in antibody
binding to PF4 possibly influenced by genetic or physiological factors. However, the mechanisms
underlying the development of one-site versus two-site binding is yet to be determined.[26]
To further investigate the molecular profile of VITT antibodies, two complementary studies
employed mass spectrometry to sequence the variable region of VITT antibodies, with Wang et al.[52]
analyzing the samples from five Australian VITT patients and Ivanov et al.[37] examining those from
a Canadian VITT patient. Focusing on the third complementarity-determining regions (CDR3),
known for embedding high level of diversity from somatic hypermutation and shaped by the unique
immune histories of each individual, both groups identified a pattern of consensus sequence within
the heavy chains of the CDR3 of these antibodies across six patients.[43,47] While the exact mutation
may vary among individuals, the presence of this consensus sequence suggests the selection of
specific clonotypes across various individuals in response to an immunogenic stimulus.[43,47]
Furthermore, both studies consistently identified that the lambda light chain in VITT antibodies from
all six patients was encoded by the same allele, pointing to a uniform antigen-binding
specificity.[43,47] The sequence and structure uniformity likely contribute to the development of
these pathogenic antibodies, implying a common immune response pathway consistently inducing
a similar immune response amongst VITT patients, potentially indicative of a genetic
predisposition.[43,47] Moreover, the epitope of reverse-engineered recombinant VITT antibodies
from the five Australian patients[48] overlaps with the heparin-binding site, aligning with analyses
conducted by Huynh et al. on antibodies isolated from VITT patient sera.[6] These studies highlight
the importance of recombinant VITT antibodies with oligoclonal binding profiles as tools to
investigate the underlying genetic makeup of clinical manifestations in these patients.[26]
6. Drivers of Thrombosis in VITT
Although the precise mechanism of thrombi formation in VITT remains unclear, recent evidence
suggests that it may involve activated neutrophils via a process known as NETosis.[49] Upon
activation, neutrophils release decondensed DNA coated with histones and various bactericidal
proteins, forming structures known as neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs).[50] NETs serve an
immunological role in capturing and destroying pathogens but have also been implicated in the
development of thrombosis.[50] In fact, the role of neutrophils and thrombogenicity of NETs has been
well characterized in HIT. Previous reports have shown that HIT antibody immune complexes can
directly engage with FcγRIIa receptors on neutrophils, triggering their activation and the release of
NETs.[32,51] Indirect pathways to NETosis in HIT can also be initiated through platelet-neutrophil
interactions mediated by P-selectin and P-selectin glycoprotein ligand-1.[32,51,52] Consequently,
NETs can significantly contribute to thrombi development by both trapping platelets within growing
thrombi and by facilitating fibrin deposition.[32,51] Recent studies have demonstrated a consistent
elevation in markers characteristic of NETosis in VITT patient sera, including levels of citrullinated
histone H3, myeloperoxidase, and cell-free DNA, highlighting the critical role of NETs in thrombi
formation, as evidenced in both in vitro assays and VITT mouse models.[28,49] As seen with HIT
antibodies, VITT antibodies have also been shown to trigger neutrophil activation via FcγRIIa
receptors, suggesting that the underlying process of thrombi development in VITT may be driven by
similar mechanisms.[49,53]
Perhaps most importantly, recent evidence has implicated NETosis in the development of
cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) in VITT patients. CVST is a rare cerebrovascular condition
affecting ~3 per 100,000 in the general population, which can be accompanied by intracranial
hemorrhaging, severe neurological dysfunction, and a high mortality.[54–56] Despite its rarity, CVST
is found more frequently in VITT[57] and is associated with a 2.7-fold higher risk of mortality
compared to patients presenting without CVST.[2] In a study by Jin et al.,[56] a high concentration of
NETs were found both plasma and thrombi of CVST patients through examination of CVST tissue
sections and quantifying plasma NETosis markers.[56] NETs not only contribute to thrombi
Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 20 December 2023 doi:10.20944/preprints202312.1578.v1
6
formation, but were also shown to compromise the endothelial barrier and induce a procoagulant
state in endothelial cells, possibly intensifying CVST pathogenesis.[56] Moreover, CVST patients
were found to have enhanced platelet-neutrophil aggregation at thrombus sites, similarly to what is
seen in HIT.[56] Released PF4 from activated platelets can subsequently induce NETosis through
activating neutrophil autophagy pathways in a in a dose-depend manner,[56] which may hold
further implications for anti-PF4 disorders such as VITT. Subsequent studies support these findings
by demonstrating elevated NETosis markers in tissue sections obtained from VITT patients who
developed CVST.[28,58]
Aside from the involvement of neutrophils and NETosis, there may be other factors contributing
to CVST development in VITT. Expanding on the earlier mentioned binding patterns of VITT
antibodies on PF4, Huynh et al.[26] found that PF4-independent antibodies, which exhibit a two-site
binding profile, have a stronger association with the occurrence of CVST compared to PF4-dependent
antibodies, which exhibit a single-site binding affinity.[26] This distinction is evident by a CVST
incidence rate of 50.0% in VITT patients whose sera contained both PF4-dependent and -independent
antibodies, compared to 5.9% in those whose sera contained PF4-dependent antibodies alone.[26]
Based on both cellular and humoral findings, a more comprehensive understanding of CVST in VITT,
one that encompasses pan-cellular activation, systemic inflammation, extensive neutrophil priming
and activation, and various other novel mechanisms such as the potential role of antibody clonality
and epitope specificity on PF4 in exacerbating NETosis may better explain the frequency of CVST
development in VITT.
7. VITT-mimicking anti-PF4 antibodies in HIT and other disorders
As mentioned earlier in this review, evidence suggests a degree of resemblance between anti-
PF4 antibodies in VITT and those identified in patients with atypical presentations of HIT, such as
spHIT.[44] Despite the distinct antibody profiles and clinical presentations associated with HIT, it is
a disorder involving anti-PF4 IgG antibodies that activate platelets by engaging FcγRIIa receptors
and bind to residues in the heparin-binding region on PF4, a site known to be recognized by VITT
antibodies.[6,59,60] The occurrence of spHIT is often observed post-infection or total knee
arthroplasty without proximate exposure to heparin and associated with a high frequency of
CVST.[61] Warkentin et al. have recently demonstrated that HIT antibodies exhibit an analogous
reactivity profile to VITT antibodies in solid-phase laboratory diagnostic assays, while displaying a
degree of variable reactivities in the recognitions of PF4 alone versus PF4/heparin complexes.[62]
However, in fluid-phase EIAs where complexes of anti-PF4 IgG and PF4 with or without heparin are
pre-formed before immobilization, spHIT antibodies exhibited a heparin-enhanced binding behavior
while VITT antibodies display a significant heparin-inhibitory behavior, potentially elucidating the
laboratory and clinical differences between these disorders.[62]
VITT-mimicking anti-PF4 antibodies were also found in two patients with monoclonal
gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS), which is a neoplastic condition thought to be
related to abnormal growth and proliferation of plasma cells in the bone marrow.[63] In both reported
patients, the MGUS antibodies were produced from single clone of anti-PF4 plasma cells, and
resulted in recurrent thrombosis and thrombocytopenia despite having no previous exposure to
heparin.[64,65] However, the case reported by Kanack et al.[65] may represent an even more complex
scenario: the patient has received an initial dose of Ad26.COV2.S followed by two doses of BNT162b2
mRNA vaccines.[65] Subsequent treatment via intravenous heparin administration led to a
significant drop in platelet counts, though the timing of heparin administration relative to
vaccinations was not indicated.[65] While no adverse effects were observed subsequent to these
vaccinations, the precise impact of the adenoviral vector-based vaccine on the condition of the patient
remains undetermined.[65] On the other hand, the patient documented by Greinacher et al.[64] had
not received any COVID-19 vaccines at the time of reporting nor been given heparin in subsequent
treatments, attributing their symptoms to pre-existing underlying conditions.[64]
Although no strong genomic link associated with the development of HIT, it may be possible
that VITT is a result of genetic predisposition triggered by the administration of virus-based vaccines.
Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 20 December 2023 doi:10.20944/preprints202312.1578.v1
7
For instance, three cases of VITT have been reported following vaccination with the mRNA-1273
(Moderna) vaccine, and another with the virus-like particle vaccine for nine-valent HPV (Gardasil-
9).[66,67] The latter patient presented with platelet-activating anti-PF4 antibodies without history of
thrombosis or exposure to heparin, nor had she received any COVID-19 vaccines.[67] A concurrent
HPV infection, however, may have contributed to the formation of PF4/polyanionic complexes.[67]
As such, anti-PF4 antibody-mediated hypercoagulability may also go beyond heparin and vaccine
exposure. Warkentin et al.[60] recently reported two patients presenting with a VITT-like anti-PF4
disorder associated with adenovirus infection.[60] Both patients tested positive for adenovirus
infection via nasopharyngeal swabs; one patient received two doses of Moderna COVID-19 vaccines
15 months earlier, while the other patient experienced a mild case of SARS-CoV-2 infection 16 months
prior.[60] Serum samples from these two patients were positive for anti-PF4 antibodies in both solid
and fluid phases assays, PF4-enhanced platelet-activation assays, and demonstrated binding to the
heparin-binding region on PF4.[60] A similar finding was also reported by Schönborn et al.,[68] who
identified nine patients with VITT-like clinical and humoral profiles from a retrospective analysis of
repository serum samples dated before 2020.[68] These individuals experienced acute
thrombocytopenia, significantly elevated D-dimer, and severe thrombotic events, including arterial
strokes and CVST, without recent exposure to heparin or adenoviral vector-based vaccines.[68] Thus,
the association of pro-thrombotic anti-PF4 antibodies with disorders showing clinical and/or
pathological similarities to VITT may be indicative of an unknown trigger for pathogenic antibody
production beyond our current scoop of understanding.
8. Longitudinal symptoms
While the acute clinical manifestations demand urgent attention, it is also critical to examine
longitudinal characteristics of VITT, which could provide insights on long-term patient management
strategies. Comparison to HIT often offers an invaluable perspective for the understanding of VITT
due their clinical similarities. Unlike classical immunological memory, which leads to long-lasting
heightened immunity upon re-exposure to an antigen, the development of anti-PF4/heparin
antibodies in HIT is typically transient, only lasting a median of 50 – 80 days,[69,70] and lose their
ability to activate platelets before becoming undetectable in serum.[71] HIT patients generally have
no observed immune response following subsequent heparin treatments, suggesting the lack of
immune memory from a clinical perspective.[70,72] The consensus recommendation suggests that
for patients with a history of HIT who no longer have circulating platelet-activating anti-PF4/heparin
antibodies, it is advisable to use heparin during surgical procedures and switch to an alternative
anticoagulant post-operatively.[73] Interestingly, while HIT patients exhibit a higher propensity
(8/17, 47%) for re-developing platelet-activating anti-PF4/heparin antibodies upon subsequent intra-
operative heparin re-exposure, subsequent non-surgical heparin treatment does not appear to cause
antibody redevelopment.[73] Warkentin et al.[73] report only 1 patient (1/17; 5%) who developed
recurrent HIT (heparin-independent platelet activating HIT antibodies; thrombosis and
thrombocytopenia) following intra-operative re-exposure to heparin.[73] Despite the higher-than-
expected rate of seroconversion in patients with a history of HIT, the redevelopment of HIT is
relatively rare.[73]
Like HIT antibodies, VITT antibodies lose their ability to activate platelets before becoming
undetectable in serum.[74,75] However, preliminary evidence suggests that VITT may involve a more
durable antibody response, potentially leading to prolonged clinical symptoms.[76–78] In a 6-month
study conducted by Kanack et al.,[78] nine patients with VITT following Ad26.COV2.S vaccination
showed no subsequent thrombosis and 78% did not experience thrombocytopenia after the acute
phase.[78] Similarly, in a longitudinal study consisting of 71 VITT patients, Schӧnborn et al.[76] found
that platelet-activating anti-PF4 antibodies became undetectable in 87% of patients over a mean of 79
weeks following initial symptom onset, with no further episodes of thrombosis or thrombocytopenia
observed in 93% of patients, suggesting a generally low risk of VITT recurrence after the initial stage
of symptom onset.[76]
Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 20 December 2023 doi:10.20944/preprints202312.1578.v1
8
Antibody persistence was observed in a subset of patients. A case report by Roberge and Carrier
describes a VITT patient who continues to exhibit persistent thrombocytopenia and tests positive for
platelet-activating antibodies for more than 18 months following the initial VITT diagnosis.[77]
Kanack et al., also observed seven patients with antibodies persisting after 181 days; however, only
one exhibited platelet-activating properties and two experienced mild thrombocytopenia recurrence
related to VITT.[78] Schӧnborn et al.[76] found half (39/31; 55%) of all VITT patients exhibited EIA
detectable anti-PF4 antibodies and 6/71 (8.5%) continued to produce platelet-activating anti-PF4
antibodies for greater than 18 months.[76] Moreover, the authors noted 2/71 patients (2.8%) with
recurrent thrombocytopenia and 2/71 patients (2.8%) with recurrent thrombosis.[76] Patients with
thrombocytopenia alone were receiving proper anticoagulation, while patients with thrombosis
alone were not properly anticoagulated.[76] Only 1/71 (1.4%) patient in this study experienced
recurrent thrombocytopenia and thrombosis despite anticoagulation, and they also tested positive
for platelet-activating anti-PF4 antibodies, likely representing a case of persisting VITT.[76]
It remains unclear why some VITT patients exhibit persistent symptoms while others do not.
One hypothesis is the involvement of long-lived plasma B cells and/or the development of immune
memory, which could contribute to this persistence, contrast with the observations made in HIT,[72]
although this remains speculative. As such, longitudinal follow-up and consistent anticoagulation
for VITT patients remains of utmost importance. Along with the patient reported by Roberge and
Carrier, 7/9 (77.8%) patients followed by Kanack et al. and 28/64 (43.8%) patients followed by
Schӧnborn et al. have remained on anticoagulants during the study period to mitigate long-term
symptoms.[76–78] While anticoagulation is effective in most cases, evidence suggests some VITT
patients may be at risk of persistent and recurrent thrombocytopenia and/or thrombosis.[76–78]
Based on these studies, there appear to be two antibody profiles of VITT patients: 1) those whose
platelet-activating antibody diminishes over time and 2) those with persistent platelet-activating
antibodies. Although the exact duration of this antibody persistence is still unknown, as there is
drastic variation among individuals, both within and across various longitudinal studies, suggesting
that there may be differences in immune responses between patients.[76–78] Nevertheless, these
observations underscore the necessity to investigate the underlying causes of these persistence and
emphasizes the importance of developing targeted long-term monitoring and management strategies
for VITT patients.
9. Conclusions
The widespread use of adenoviral vector-based COVID-19 vaccines revealed VITT as a rare, yet
significant adverse effect associated with this vaccine delivery platform. The occurrence of VITT
underscores the challenges of monitoring and managing adverse events on a large scale, thus
emphasizing the importance of continuous surveillance and improvement in vaccination strategies.
Collaborative efforts within the scientific community are crucial to put forward guidelines to ensure
safety during vaccine formulation, testing, and administration. Further research to provide evidence
of adenoviral-vector or non-viral constituents involvement beyond preliminary studies to confirm
these proposed mechanisms is therefore required. The sequence of events leading to VITT, reasons
behind the differences in incidence rate of ChAdOx1-S and Ad26.CoV2.S, whether some individuals
are predisposed to develop VITT IgG antibodies, persistence of VITT antibodies, as well as the
prevalence of thrombi at specific sites, such as CVST, are questions that remain unanswered.
Additionally, the identification of various VITT-like syndromes caused by antibodies in the absence
of heparin or vaccine exposure represents a key area of future research that may provide us with
novel insights into other anti-PF4 antibody-mediated disorders.
Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 20 December 2023 doi:10.20944/preprints202312.1578.v1
9
Table 1. Proposed mechanism of VITT pathogenesis.
VITT antibody
formation
Mechanism
Literature
The formation of neoantigens by adenovirus capsid hexon proteins or
vaccine excipients (protein impurities or extracellular DNA) binding
to PF4 triggers VITT antibodies production by anti-PF4 B cells.
Although PF4 binding was not observed with puried vaccine virions.
Baker et
al.[29]
Greinacher
et al.[28]
Michalik et
al.[30]
Direct platelet activation and thrombocytopenia were observed in
mice following intravenous injection of ChAdOx1-S.
However, even if all the vaccine contents spill over into the
bloodstream, viral load of COVID-19 adenoviral vector-based vaccines
is unlikely to trigger such a response.
Nicolai et
al.[37]
Azzarone et
al.[38]
Proinammatory and
thrombotic events
contributing to
pathogenesis
ChAdOx1-S contains substantial amounts of human cell line impurities,
including heat-shock proteins, that may mediate platelet activation at the
injection site.
Kruke et
al.[36]
DNA-based COVID-19 vaccines can lead to the production of soluble
spike protein variants via splicing events. Due to the absence of dural
venous sinus valves, prolonged exposure to spike protein variants may
contribute to the development of thrombi in the cerebral sinuses.
Kowarz et
al.[41]
ChAdOx1-S stabilized with EDTA may increase vascular permeability
and cause dermal vessel leakage, enhancing the spread of
proinammatory factors. Additionally, the surfactant polysorbate 80 in
both ChAdOx1-S and Ad26.CoV2.S can cross the blood-brain barrier and
enter brain endothelial cells when complexed with nanoparticles,
possibly localizing thrombosis to the cerebral sinuses.
However, the replication-decient adenovirus and other vaccine
excipients are unlikely to be still circulating given the timing of VITT
symptom onset.
Greinacher
et al.[28]
Kowarz et
al.[41]
Choi et
al.[40]
Eichinger et
al.[42]
Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 20 December 2023 doi:10.20944/preprints202312.1578.v1
10
VITT antibodies were shown to activate neutrophils, leading to NETosis,
which is the major driver of thrombosis in VITT, but does not
signicantly contribute to thrombocytopenia.
NETosis has also been implicated in CVST, potentially inuencing its
prevalence in VITT, although direct evidence of this connection is
limited.
Leung et
al.[49]
Jin et al.[56]
Greinacher
et al.[28]
References
1. Greinacher A, Thiele T, Warkentin TE, Weisser K, Kyrle PA, Eichinger S. Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia
after ChAdOx1 nCov-19 Vaccination. N Engl J Med 2021; 384(22): 2092-101.
2. Scully M, Singh D, Lown R, et al. Pathologic Antibodies to Platelet Factor 4 after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19
Vaccination. N Engl J Med 2021; 384(23): 2202-11.
3. Schul NH, Sorvoll IH, Michelsen AE, et al. Thrombosis and Thrombocytopenia after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19
Vaccination. N Engl J Med 2021; 384(22): 2124-30.
4. Warkentin TE. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia: pathogenesis and management. Br J Haematol 2003;
121(4): 535-55.
5. Bourguignon A, Arnold DM, Warkentin TE, et al. Adjunct Immune Globulin for Vaccine-Induced Immune
Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia. N Engl J Med 2021; 385(8): 720-8.
6. Huynh A, Kelton JG, Arnold DM, Daka M, Nazy I. Antibody epitopes in vaccine-induced immune
thrombotic thrombocytopaenia. Nature 2021; 596(7873): 565-9.
7. See I, Lale A, Marquez P, et al. Case Series of Thrombosis With Thrombocytopenia Syndrome After COVID-
19 Vaccination-United States, December 2020 to August 2021. Ann Intern Med 2022.
8. Mendes-de-Almeida DP, Mouta Nunes de Oliveira P, Bertollo Gomes Porto V, et al. Vaccine-induced
immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia post COVID-19 booster vaccination in Brazil: a case series. Research
and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2023; 7(8).
9. Bussel J, Cines D, Dunbar C, et al. Vaccine-induced Immune Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia. 2022.
hps://www.hematology.org/covid-19/vaccine-induced-immune-thrombotic-thrombocytopenia (accessed
7 December 2023).
10. van de Munckhof A, Krzywicka K, Aguiar de Sousa D, et al. Declining mortality of cerebral venous sinus
thrombosis with thrombocytopenia after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Eur J Neurol 2022; 29(1): 339-44.
11. Warkentin TE. High-dose intravenous immunoglobulin for the treatment and prevention of heparin-
induced thrombocytopenia: a review. Expert Rev Hematol 2019; 12(8): 685-98.
12. Gabarin N, Arnold DM, Nazy I, Warkentin TE. Treatment of vaccine-induced immune thrombotic
thrombocytopenia (VITT). Semin Hematol 2022; 59(2): 89-96.
13. Smith CW, Montague SJ, Kardeby C, et al. Antiplatelet drugs block platelet activation by VITT patient
serum. Blood 2021; 138(25): 2733-40.
14. Arnold DM. Heparin or nonheparin anticoagulants for VITT. Blood 2022; 139(23): 3358-9.
15. Pavord S, Scully M, Hunt BJ, et al. Clinical Features of Vaccine-Induced Immune Thrombocytopenia and
Thrombosis. N Engl J Med 2021; 385(18): 1680-9.
16. The Janssen Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccine: What you need to know. 2022. hps://www.who.int/news-
room/feature-stories/detail/the-j-j-covid-19-vaccine-what-you-need-to-know. (accessed 23 October 2023).
17. Soboleva K, Shankar NK, Yadavalli M, et al. Geographical distribution of TTS cases following AZD1222
(ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) vaccination. Lancet Glob Health 2022; 10(1): e33-e4.
18. Interim recommendations for use of the ChAdOx1-S [recombinant] vaccine against COVID-19
(AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine AZD1222 Vaxzevria™, SII COVISHIELD™). 15 March 2022.
hps://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-2019-nCoV-vaccines-SAGE_recommendation-AZD1222-
2021.1 (accessed 17 July 2023).
19. Wise J. Covid-19: European countries suspend use of Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine after reports of blood
clots. BMJ 2021; 372: n699.
Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 20 December 2023 doi:10.20944/preprints202312.1578.v1
11
20. COVID-19 vaccines: Canadian Immunization Guide. 5 December 2023. hps://www.canada.ca/en/public-
health/services/publications/healthy-living/canadian-immunization-guide-part-4-active-vaccines/page-
26-covid-19-vaccine.html (accessed 8 December 2023).
21. Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine. 22 May 2023. hps://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/coronavirus-
covid-19-cber-regulated-biologics/janssen-covid-19-vaccine (accessed 8 December 2023).
22. Spinardi J, Dantas AC, Carballo C, et al. Narrative Review of the Evolution of COVID-19 Vaccination
Recommendations in Countries in Latin America, Africa and the Middle East, and Asia. Infect Dis Ther 2023;
12(5): 1237-64.
23. Pai M. Epidemiology of VITT. Semin Hematol 2022; 59(2): 72-5.
24. Chan BTB, Bobos P, Odutayo A, Pai M. Meta-Analysis of Risk of Vaccine-Induced Immune Thrombotic
Thrombocytopenia Following ChAdOx1-S Recombinant Vaccine. medRxiv 2021; doi:
10.1101/2021.05.04.21256613.
25. Boonyawat K, Angchaisuksiri P. Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia with ChAdOx1
nCoV-19 is rare in Asia. Res Pract Thromb Haemost 2022; 6(1): e12644.
26. Huynh A, Arnold DM, Ivetic N, et al. Antibodies against platelet factor 4 and the risk of cerebral venous
sinus thrombosis in patients with vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia. Journal of
Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2023.
27. Warkentin TE, Sheppard JA, Moore JC, Cook RJ, Kelton JG. Studies of the immune response in heparin-
induced thrombocytopenia. Blood 2009; 113(20): 4963-9.
28. Greinacher A, Selleng K, Palankar R, et al. Insights in ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine-induced immune
thrombotic thrombocytopenia. Blood 2021; 138(22): 2256-68.
29. Baker AT, Boyd RJ, Sarkar D, et al. ChAdOx1 interacts with CAR and PF4 with implications for thrombosis
with thrombocytopenia syndrome. Sci Adv 2021; 7(49): eabl8213.
30. Michalik S, Siegerist F, Palankar R, et al. Comparative analysis of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and Ad26.COV2.S
SARS-CoV-2 vector vaccines. Haematologica 2022; 107(4): 947-57.
31. McFadyen JD, Sharma P, Moon MJ, et al. Activation of circulating platelets in vaccine-induced thrombotic
thrombocytopenia and its reversal by intravenous immunoglobulin. Br J Haematol 2022; 196(1): 234-7.
32. Perdomo J, Leung HHL, Ahmadi Z, et al. Neutrophil activation and NETosis are the major drivers of
thrombosis in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Nature Communications 2019; 10(1322).
33. Greinacher A, Holtfreter B, Krauel K, et al. Association of natural anti-platelet factor 4/heparin antibodies
with periodontal disease. Blood 2011; 118(5): 1395-401.
34. Warkentin TE, Greinacher A. Spontaneous HIT syndrome: Knee replacement, infection, and parallels with
vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia. Thromb Res 2021; 204: 40-51.
35. Greinacher A, Schonborn L, Siegerist F, et al. Pathogenesis of vaccine-induced immune thrombotic
thrombocytopenia (VITT). Semin Hematol 2022; 59(2): 97-107.
36. Kruke L, Rosler R, Allmendinger E, Engler T, Wiese S, Kochanek S. Process- and product-related
impurities in the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 vaccine. Elife 2022; 11.
37. Nicolai L, Leunig A, Pekayvaz K, et al. Thrombocytopenia and splenic platelet-directed immune responses
after IV ChAdOx1 nCov-19 administration. Blood 2022; 140(5): 478-90.
38. Azzarone B, Veneziani I, Morea L, Maggi E. Pathogenic Mechanisms of Vaccine-Induced Immune
Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia in People Receiving Anti-COVID-19 Adenoviral-Based Vaccines: A
Proposal. Front Immunol 2021; 12: 728513.
39. Greinacher A, Selleng K, Mayerle J, et al. Anti-platelet factor 4 antibodies causing VITT do not cross-react
with SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Blood 2021; 138(14): 1269-77.
40. Choi PY. Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccination. N Engl J Med 2021; 385(3): e11.
41. Kowarz E, Kruke L, Kulp M, et al. Vaccine-induced COVID-19 mimicry syndrome. Elife 2022; 11.
42. Eichinger S, Warkentin TE, Greinacher A. Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19
Vaccination. Reply. N Engl J Med 2021; 385(3): e11.
43. Ivanov DG, Ivetic N, Du Y, et al. Reverse Engineering of a Pathogenic Antibody Reveals the Molecular
Mechanism of Vaccine-Induced Immune Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia. J Am Chem Soc 2023; 145(46): 25203-13.
44. Greinacher A, Selleng K, Warkentin TE. Autoimmune heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. J Thromb
Haemost 2017; 15(11): 2099-114.
45. Kanack AJ, Bayas A, George G, et al. Monoclonal and oligoclonal anti-platelet factor 4 antibodies mediate
VITT. Blood 2022; 140(1): 73-7.
46. Huynh A, Arnold DM, Kelton JG, et al. Characterization of platelet factor 4 amino acids that bind
pathogenic antibodies in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. J Thromb Haemost 2019; 17(2): 389-99.
47. Wang JJ, Armour B, Chataway T, et al. Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia is mediated
by a stereotyped clonotypic antibody. Blood 2022; 140(15): 1738-42.
Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 20 December 2023 doi:10.20944/preprints202312.1578.v1
12
48. Wang JJD, van der Neut Kolfschoten MD, Ruen LD, et al. Characterization of reverse engineered anti-PF4
stereotypic antibodies derived from serum of VITT patients. Blood 2023.
49. Leung HHL, Perdomo J, Ahmadi Z, et al. NETosis and thrombosis in vaccine-induced immune thrombotic
thrombocytopenia. Nat Commun 2022; 13(1): 5206.
50. Mutua V, Gershwin LJ. A Review of Neutrophil Extracellular Traps (NETs) in Disease: Potential Anti-NETs
Therapeutics. Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology 2021; 61(2): 194-211.
51. Gollomp K, Kim M, Johnston I, et al. Neutrophil accumulation and NET release contribute to thrombosis
in HIT. JCI Insight 2018; 3(18): e99445.
52. Leung HHL, Perdomo J, Ahmadi Z, Yan F, McKenzie SE, Chong BH. Inhibition of NADPH oxidase blocks
NETosis and reduces thrombosis in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Blood Advances 2021; 5(23): 5439-51.
53. Holm S, Kared H, Michelsen AE, et al. Immune complexes, innate immunity, and NETosis in ChAdOx1
vaccine-induced thrombocytopenia. Eur Heart J 2021; 42(39): 4064-72.
54. Payne AB, Adamski A, Abe K, et al. Epidemiology of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis and cerebral venous
sinus thrombosis with thrombocytopenia in the United States, 2018 and 2019. Research and Practice in
Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2022; 6(2): e12682.
55. Kehr S, Berg P, Müller S, et al. Long-term outcome of patients with vaccine-induced immune thrombotic
thrombocytopenia and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. npj Vaccines 2022; 7(76).
56. Jin J, Qiao S, Liu J, et al. Neutrophil extracellular traps promote thrombogenicity in cerebral venous sinus
thrombosis. Cell & Bioscience 2022; 12(114).
57. Bissola AL, Daka M, Arnold DM, et al. The clinical and laboratory diagnosis of vaccine-induced immune
thrombotic thrombocytopenia. Blood Advances 2022; 6(14): 4228-35.
58. Carnevale R, Leopizzi M, Dominici M, et al. PAD4-Induced NETosis Via Cathepsin G-Mediated Platelet-
Neutrophil Interaction in ChAdOx1 Vaccine-Induced Thrombosis-Brief Report. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol
2023; 43(10): e396-e403.
59. Warkentin TE. Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia and Vaccine-Induced Immune Thrombotic
Thrombocytopenia Antibodies: Fraternal-Not Identical-Twins. Thromb Haemost 2021; 121(12): 1558-61.
60. Warkentin TE, Baskin-Miller J, Raybould AL, et al. Adenovirus-Associated Thrombocytopenia, Thrombosis,
and VITT-like Antibodies. N Engl J Med 2023; 389(6): 574-7.
61. Warkentin TE. Platelet-activating anti-PF4 disorders: An overview. Semin Hematol 2022; 59(2): 59-71.
62. Warkentin TE, Arnold DM, Sheppard JI, Moore JC, Kelton JG, Nazy I. Investigation of anti-PF4 versus anti-
PF4/heparin reactivity using uid-phase enzyme immunoassay for 4 anti-PF4 disorders: classic heparin-
induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), autoimmune HIT, vaccine-induced immune thrombotic
thrombocytopenia, and spontaneous HIT. J Thromb Haemost 2023.
63. Gkalea V, Fotiou D, Dimopoulos MA, Kastritis E. Monoclonal Gammopathy of Thrombotic Signicance.
Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15(2).
64. Greinacher A, Langer F, Schonborn L, et al. Platelet-activating anti-PF4 antibodies mimic VITT antibodies
in an unvaccinated patient with monoclonal gammopathy. Haematologica 2022; 107(5): 1219-21.
65. Kanack AJ, Schaefer JK, Sridharan M, et al. Monoclonal gammopathy of thrombotic/thrombocytopenic
signicance. Blood 2023; 141(14): 1772-6.
66. Padmanabhan A, Kanack AJ, Kaplan RB, Sangli S. COVID-19 mRNA-1273 vaccine induces production of
vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia antibodies. Am J Hematol 2022; 97(6): E223-E5.
67. Johansen S, Laegreid IJ, Ernstsen SL, et al. Thrombosis and thrombocytopenia after HPV vaccination. J
Thromb Haemost 2022; 20(3): 700-4.
68. Schönborn L EO, Wesche J, Dobosz P, Broto M, Puig SR, Fuhrmann J, Torres R, Serra J, Llevadot R, Palicio
M, Wang JJ, Gordon TP, Lindho-Last E, Homann T, Alberio L, Langer F, Boehme C, Biguzzi E, Grosse
L, Endres M, Liman TG, Thiele T, Warkentin TE, Greinacher A. Anti-PF4 immunothrombosis without
proximate heparin or adenovirus vector vaccine exposure. Blood 2023.
69. Keeling D, Davidson S, Watson H, Haemostasis, Thrombosis Task Force of the British Commiee for
Standards in H. The management of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Br J Haematol 2006; 133(3): 259-69.
70. Warkentin TE, Kelton JG. Temporal aspects of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. N Engl J Med 2001;
344(17): 1286-92.
71. Denomme GA. The platelet Fc receptor in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. 6 ed: CRC Press; 2001.
72. Selleng K, Schu A, Selleng S, Warkentin TE, Greinacher A. Studies of the anti-platelet factor 4/heparin
immune response: adapting the enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot assay for detection of memory B cells
against complex antigens. Transfusion 2010; 50(1): 32-9.
73. Warkentin TE, Sheppard JA. Serological investigation of patients with a previous history of heparin-
induced thrombocytopenia who are reexposed to heparin. Blood 2014; 123(16): 2485-93.
Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 20 December 2023 doi:10.20944/preprints202312.1578.v1
13
74. Lee CSM, Clarke LJ, Kershaw GW, et al. Platelet-activating functional assay resolution in vaccine-induced
immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia: dierential alignment to PF4 ELISA platforms. Res Pract Thromb
Haemost 2023; 7(3): 100128.
75. Schonborn L, Thiele T, Kaderali L, et al. Most anti-PF4 antibodies in vaccine-induced immune thrombotic
thrombocytopenia are transient. Blood 2022; 139(12): 1903-7.
76. Schonborn L, Seck SE, Thiele T, et al. Long-term outcome in Vaccine-induced Immune Thrombocytopenia
and Thrombosis. J Thromb Haemost 2023.
77. Roberge G, Carrier M. Long VITT: A case report. Thromb Res 2023; 223: 78-9.
78. Kanack AJ, Singh B, George G, et al. Persistence of Ad26.COV2.S-associated vaccine-induced immune
thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) and specific detection of VITT antibodies. Am J Hematol 2022; 97(5): 519-26.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those
of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s)
disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or
products referred to in the content.
Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 20 December 2023 doi:10.20944/preprints202312.1578.v1