There has been a lot of talk about microthrombosis (“microclots”) in #LongCOVID, along with the usual knee-jerk reactions about anticoagulation. But that may be mistaking effects for causes. A thread theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
Note the author states: “We found high levels of various inflammatory molecules trapped in the persistent microclots, including clotting proteins like plasminogen, fibrinogen and Von Willebrand factor (VWF), and also Alpha-2 antiplasmin” ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
In the immunothrombosis world, we have known for a long time that thrombosis is an ancient form of innate immunity. Molluscs use coagulation to barricade off pathogens. In this 2011 talk, Prof Esmon says: “coagulation is part of the innate immune response” academy.isth.org/isth/2011/kyot…
This slide from Chuck Esmon's 2011 @ISTH talk remains just as current today. Thrombosis is such an inherent part of the immune response, we now use the term “immunothrombosis” or “thromboinflammation” to emphasise their profound unity
And no, this ancient immune response isn't just seen in molluscs. If you give healthy human volunteers an immune challenge (LPS), you immediately see molecular signals of coagulation activation (eg TAT complexes, TF mRNA) ashpublications.org/blood/article/…
If the immune response is overwhelming, it can even lead to catastrophic hyperactivation of immunothrombosis pathways leading to disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC). [BTW I studied this in response to islet cell and kidney xenotransplants]
Treating immunothrombosis with anticoagulants works poorly (and causes bleeding) because you are mopping the floor without turning off the tap. The tap is the source of inflammation. You must go upstream to turn off the tap to stop the thromboinflammation
When treating microthrombosis in #longCOVID, I agree with @fearnley_k that if the source of the thromboinflammation is persistent infection, then we must first treat that to turn off the tap at the source, rather than just mopping the floor
There is some suggestion that chronic infection is the source of the inflammatory signalling in many or perhaps most #longCOVID cases, in which case immunothrombosis is more of an effect rather than a cause assets.researchsquare.com/files/rs-14433…
And no, you don't want to rush in with immunosuppression either because that may make the infection worse (opening the tap while mopping the floor). You need to exclude chronic infection first before considering post-infectious autoimmunity as a driver of immunothrombosis
Autoimmune diseases that cause immunothrombosis (thrombotic microangiopathy, antiphospholipid syndrome) are horrid to treat. Proving infection-induced autoantibodies are pathogenic is very difficult. It would be far better to switch off immunothrombosis by treating an infection
Beware the false prophets who say that plasmapheresis/apheresis/PLEX to wash off autoantibodies is a cure-all. This happens with every novel disease, and it invariably tends to fail. It would be impossible to scale the service up to treat millions of #longCOVID sufferers
If it turns out that apheresis or even IVIg turns out to be the treatment for #longCOVID, consider that more an abject disaster than a breakthrough because it would be impossible to treat anything but a tiny minority of sufferers
This is not to deny the possibility that once chronic infection is excluded, some may have post-infectious autoimmune conditions. If we're forced to immunosuppress them, it might leave them vulnerable to another COVID infection, leaving them worse off. Catch-22
But there has always been this theory that autoimmune conditions like SLE, AAV and anti-GBM disease are induced by viruses. The new evidence that MS is caused by EBV makes it more suspicious. So maybe COVID is inducing POST-infectious autoimmune disease? Let's hope not
ADDIT: note I divide between infection-associated autoimmune disease (eg chronic Hep C induced cryoglobulinaemia) and POST-infectious autoimmune disease (virus has gone but autoimmunity persists). The former is treatable with antivirals but the latter needs immunotherapy🧐

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Dr Satoshi Akima FRACP 『秋間聰』

Dr Satoshi Akima FRACP 『秋間聰』 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ToshiAkima

Apr 16
The problem with RCTs is that they are not valid outside of the cohort tested by the RCT. An RCT is strictly speaking valid only for the participants of the RCT. Is an RCT from 1, 50 or 100 years ago still applicable to present-day humans?
If you think RCTs are the scientific Gold Standard, then by applying the conclusions of an RCT outside of the study cohort, you are extrapolating by induction. You can't strictly do that without subjecting those outside the study population to an RCT. And so on ad infinitum
So Vinay Prasad is absolutely correct in saying that you cannot apply the conclusions of any RCT to the population outside of the RCT participants without conducting another RCT. And so on ad infinitum
Read 8 tweets
Apr 6
1. The biomedical sciences need to look once more to physics and engineering as a model of scientific rationalism to follow. We have been led down the false path of excessive reliance on statistically-based empiricism. Of lies, damned lies and then statistics. #COVIDisAirborne
2. Bench science is, and remains, the foundation of all biomedical research. The trend in recent decades to devalue this in favour of statistical number fiddling must come to an end. A positive RCT on a drug without a sound mechanistic foundation is just a dubious statistic freak
3. The aim of biomedical scientific research is to make our laboratory bench modelling so good that the need to run RCTs—where we watch people die in the experiment—is gradually eliminated and becomes a relic of the Dark Ages
Read 7 tweets
Apr 2
There is now little doubt that SARS-CoV-2 is neurotrophic. It infects the brain: “neuroinflammation, microhemorrhages, brain hypoxia…including neuron degeneration and apoptosis [is] seen among animals that do not develop severe respiratory disease” nature.com/articles/s4146…
This study corroborates human pathological studies that show viral persistence up to 230 days following symptom onset in subjects who had recovered from acute illness. It is not just in animal studies researchsquare.com/article/rs-113…
Nor is direct infection of the brain by SARS-CoV-2 the only mechanism of neuronal injury. The spike protein probably directly poisons brain cells, leading to neuronal death nature.com/articles/s4159…
Read 9 tweets
Feb 24
It is no coincidence that Putin has launched his invasion of Ukraine at the worst peak of the Russian COVID pandemic, with deaths there still on the unrelenting rise. Image
Pandemic management has not been Putin's forte, so to regain lost popularity, he needed a distraction, but in an area that played to his strengths. Through a display of bare-chested brute force theglobeandmail.com/opinion/articl…
By allowing news coverage of Putin's horrendous invasion to totally eclipse coverage of the impending disaster arising from the West pretending that “COVID is over…time to move onto the next disaster story” we are letting Putin and his hoards of populist COVID minimisers win.
Read 5 tweets
Feb 16
How mild can smoking be? If my obese/hypertensive/diabetic packet-a-day smoker patient dies of a heart attack, do I write they died “WITH tobacco use” or “OF tobacco use”? The Big Cigarette mildologists wants you to know they died “WITH” it! Because it's just gotta be mild Image
The point is that death is not a monocausal event. It's not that black-and-white. The heart attack was the end-stage product of genetics, cholesterol, smoking, diabetes, obesity, socioeconomics, age etc. Complex events are multicausal, and we need to accept that as a fact of life
Once we accept that death is often multicausal, the question becomes why downplay the role of COVID if a positive person dies of a heart attack? Why blame diabetes or smoking when we know that COVID causes heart attacks? Why say “died of a heart attack”—“WITH”, not “FROM COVID”?
Read 6 tweets
Feb 13
An apologetic corrective thread on a now deleted earlier one. Why is it important to have national mask standards for biosecurity and national sovereignty reasons? S Korea has the KF94 standard and PRC has the KN95. Other nations must follow their examples. 🧵
Prime Minister Kishida has been spotted wearing a “JN95 mask” and I mistook it for a JP national standard—equivalent to a KF94 or KN95. It turns out “JN95” is just a commercial brand name, not a national manufacturing standard
When you look carefully at the details, the JP95 conforms to the JIS T 9001 standard. This makes it below the standard of an N95 mask. For that, it has to conform to JIS T 9002, only then can it be used in a healthcare setting note.com/yama_dere/n/nb…
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(