Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) have a suboptimal humoral response to vaccination. Recently, a BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was introduced with a high efficacy of 95% in immunocompetent individuals. We investigated the safety and efficacy of BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 vaccine in patients with CLL from nine medical centers in Israel, In total 400 patients were included, of which 373 were found to be eligible for the analysis of antibody response. The vaccine appeared to be safe and only grade 1-2 adverse events were seen in 50% of the patients. Following the second dose, antibody response was detected in 43% of the cohort. In treatment- naïve patients 61% responded to the vaccine, while only 18%, 37% and 5% of patients with CLL ongoing, previously treated with BTKi, or recent anti CD20 antibody developed responses respectively. 62% and 14% of patients treated with BCL2 monotherapy or combined with anti CD20 developed immune response respectively. Neutralizing antibodies demonstrated high concordance with positive serologic response to spike (S) protein. Based on our results a simple scoring model including recent treatment with anti-CD20, age younger than 70 years, treatment naïve status, and normal IGG, IGA, IGM and hemoglobin levels. The sum of all the above parameters can serve as a possible estimate to predict whether a given CLL patient will develop sufficient antibodies. In conclusion, the vaccine was found to be safe in patients with CLL, but its efficacy is limited particularly in treated patients.

These results show that PS expression increases after preparation of PCs from platelet-rich plasma and rises progressively during platelet storage under blood bank conditions. Furthermore, the greater PS expression is associated with increased platelet- dependent thrombin-generating capacity.

Low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) are a rapidly growing class of anticoagulant drug. Their efficacy has been demonstrated in several clinical settings where they are rapidly becoming the anticoagulant of choice. Controlled clinical studies in patients with deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and unstable angina have documented that the frequency of major hemorrhage is 0.5-4%. The purpose of the study was to determine the frequency of minor and major hemorrhage occurring in patients receiving anticoagulant doses of an LMWH (enoxaparin) during routine clinical practice. A prospective, observational study of consecutive patients receiving enoxaparin 1 mg/kg twice daily for at least 24 hours in five internal medicine wards of a university teaching hospital was performed. Five hundred forty-nine patients were studied. The mean age was 67.5+/-15.5 years and the mean duration of enoxaparin therapy was 3.8+/-1.5 days. Hemorrhage was documented in a total of 94 patients (17.3%). Major hemorrhage occurred in 14 patients (2.6%), injection-site hemorrhage occurred in 55 patients (10%), and minor hemorrhage (noninjection site) was documented in 25 patients (4.7%). There were two deaths attributed to hemorrhage. Patients with major hemorrhage were older than patients with minor or no hemorrhage (75.5+/-10.4 versus 66.8+/-15.2 years; p=0.03) and occurred in patients receiving enoxaparin for a longer period (5.14+/-3.8 days) than those with minor (4+/-2.5 days) or no hemorrhage (2.9+/-2.1 days). Major hemorrhage was significantly associated with impaired renal function, chronic liver disease, and concomitant treatment with warfarin or a proton pump inhibitor. Enoxaparin used in anticoagulant doses in unselected medical patients is not associated with more major hemorrhagic complications than observed in controlled clinical trials. Major hemorrhage may be more likely in older patients, in patients with chronic liver disease and impaired renal function, in patients receiving prolonged enoxaparin therapy, and in patients receiving warfarin or proton pump inhibitors.

Background Erdheim–Chester disease (ECD), a rare inflammatory myeloid neoplasm, is known to be fundamentally reliant on the constitutive activation of the MAPK signaling pathway in the majority of patients. Consequently, inhibition of the V600E-mutant BRAF kinase has proven to be a safe and efficacious long-term therapeutic strategy for BRAF-mutant ECD patients. Nevertheless, in a subset of patients with CNS disease, the efficacy of long-term treatment may diminish, facilitating suboptimal responses or disease progression. Methods We retrospectively describe 3 BRAF-mutant ECD patients whose treatment with Vemurafenib was upgraded to Vemurafenib/Cobimetinib due to either disease progression, insufficient response, or unacceptable toxicity. CNS response to therapy was evaluated using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and extra-cranial disease was monitored using 18F-fludeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT). Results Three patients with a mean age of 52.6 years were treated with Vemurafenib for a mean duration of 26.6 months (range: 6–52). Monotherapies were upgraded to Vemurafenib/Cobimetinib dual therapy. The combination therapy was administered for a mean duration of 21 months (range: 19–23). All patients exhibited clinical and neurological improvement. Regression of lesions on MRI was noted in 2 patients. Both patients characterized by a PET-avid disease responded to the biological treatment regimen with complete metabolic remissions. Conclusion Dual inhibition of BRAF and downstream MEK may be a safe and effective therapeutic strategy for BRAF-mutant ECD patients for whom BRAF inhibitor therapy proved insufficient and as such appropriate for the long-term management of CNS disease in ECD.