AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and rare blood clots

AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and rare blood clots

Someone wearing rubber gloves pulling a bottle of AstraZeneca vaccine from its boxShare on Pinterest
Do COVID-19 vaccines increase blood clot risk? HANNIBAL HANSCHKE/Getty Images
  • Two large studies have found a small increase in the absolute risk of rare types of blood clot in the head following a first dose of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine.
  • An increased risk of a type called intracranial venous thrombosis only applied to individuals under 70 years of age.
  • The benefits of vaccination to protect against severe COVID-19 far outweigh the risks that the researchers identified.
  • They found no evidence of increased risks following a first dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.

In late February 2021, several reports emerged of rare types of “thromboses” — blood clots that block veins or arteries — after the AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1-S) COVID-19 vaccine.

The clots were in unusual locations, such as the veins in the head, and often accompanied by low platelet levels in the blood.

However, because the number of reported cases was so small, it has been difficult to estimate the increased risk for populations as a whole.

Scientists were also unsure whether the risk of common types of thrombosis also increases.

Part of the problem was that when COVID-19 vaccines became widely available, governments prioritized clinically vulnerable and older people, who are already more prone to thromboses.

In addition, publicity about the risk of blood clots after vaccination may have made doctors more likely to diagnose thromboses. This would give a false impression that they had become more common.

Two studies that pooled data for millions of patients in the United Kingdom have now found a small increase in the absolute risk of rare types of blood clot in the head. There was no evidence of any increased risk of more common types of blood clot.

“We were worried that there might be more thromboses diagnosed in people after the complications of the AstraZeneca vaccine had been reported,” explained Dr. William Whiteley, Ph.D., of the Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences at the University of Edinburgh in the U.K., and the lead author of one of the studies.

“This was the reason we did the study using data from before the date the thrombotic complications of the AstraZeneca vaccine were widely reported,” he told Medical News Today.

“But our estimates [of the frequency of blood clots], and those done afterward are similar, so this may not be such a concern,” he added.

In the U.K., a vaccination program that employed the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine began on December 8, 2020, with the AstraZeneca vaccine added on January 4, 2021.

The program prioritized extremely clinically vulnerable individuals and those over 70 years, followed by people with chronic illnesses, such as diabetes and high blood pressure, and those over 65 years.

In the first study, researchers led by Dr. Whiteley analyzed the electronic health records of 46 million adults in England, 21 million of whom had their first vaccine dose between December 2020 and March 2021.

Overall, 79{cfdf3f5372635aeb15fd3e2aecc7cb5d7150695e02bd72e0a44f1581164ad809} of the participants were white, 51{cfdf3f5372635aeb15fd3e2aecc7cb5d7150695e02bd72e0a44f1581164ad809} female, and 84{cfdf3f5372635aeb15fd3e2aecc7cb5d7150695e02bd72e0a44f1581164ad809} under 70 years.

The researchers compared the incidence of thromboses before and after the first dose of vaccine. They then adjusted the figures to account for other factors that might affect the incidence of blood clots, including age, sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, existing medical conditions, and medications.

After adjustments, the overall risk of thromboses was lower in the 28 days after the first dose of either the AstraZeneca or Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, compared with before vaccination.

For AstraZeneca, the risk of thromboses in veins was 3{cfdf3f5372635aeb15fd3e2aecc7cb5d7150695e02bd72e0a44f1581164ad809} and 42{cfdf3f5372635aeb15fd3e2aecc7cb5d7150695e02bd72e0a44f1581164ad809} lower in those under 70 and those 70 years or older, respectively. The risk of thromboses in arteries was 10{cfdf3f5372635aeb15fd3e2aecc7cb5d7150695e02bd72e0a44f1581164ad809} and 24{cfdf3f5372635aeb15fd3e2aecc7cb5d7150695e02bd72e0a44f1581164ad809} lower, respectively, in these age groups.

The corresponding figures for the Pfizer vaccine were 19{cfdf3f5372635aeb15fd3e2aecc7cb5d7150695e02bd72e0a44f1581164ad809} and 43{cfdf3f5372635aeb15fd3e2aecc7cb5d7150695e02bd72e0a44f1581164ad809} lower for thromboses in veins, and 6{cfdf3f5372635aeb15fd3e2aecc7cb5d7150695e02bd72e0a44f1581164ad809} and 28{cfdf3f5372635aeb15fd3e2aecc7cb5d7150695e02bd72e0a44f1581164ad809} lower for thromboses in arteries.

The researchers believe that the most likely explanation for these improvements is that vaccination substantially reduced the likelihood of COVID-19, which can itself cause thromboses, especially in the lungs.

In people under 70 years of age, the rates of intracranial venous thromboses — blood clots in a vein in the head — or hospitalization with low platelet levels were roughly twice as high in the 28 days after a first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine.

However, because these events are extremely rare, the absolute increase in the number of events was very small.

The scientists estimate that after adjustments for other risk factors, the AstraZeneca vaccine may cause between 0.9 and 3 extra cases, depending on age and sex, for every million people vaccinated.

This small increase in risk is easily offset by the reduced risk of becoming sick or dying from COVID-19 that the vaccine provides.

“Most people want accurate information about the pros and cons of the treatments that they take, and we are providing information for them,” said Dr. Whiteley.

“The overwhelming majority of people in the U.K. decide to be vaccinated against COVID-19 when offered a vaccine, and because of this COVID-19 is less of a threat to us all,” he added.

After a first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine, the study found no increase in the risk of intracranial thromboses among people 70 years or older.

Following a first dose of the Pfizer vaccine, there was no increased risk either for people older or younger than 70.

The results of the study appear in PLOS Medicine.

The authors concluded:

“For older populations, who are most vulnerable to COVID-19, we found no evidence of increased risk of any event with ChAdOx1-S. In younger populations, who have a lower morbidity and mortality due to COVID-19, other available vaccines might be prioritized, especially when the risk of COVID-19 is otherwise low.”

The scientists plan to publish results of their analyses of blood clots after second vaccine doses, and after COVID-19 infections, in future papers.

In the second study, scientists led by the University of Edinburgh in the U.K. investigated the incidence of a rare type of blood clot in the brain called cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST).

In 2021, several countries withdrew the AstraZeneca vaccine or restricted its use to older people following initial reports of a possible link between the vaccine and CVST.

The background incidence of CVST is only 3 to 4 per million person-years in adults, but the chances of dying for someone with a CVST is around 4{cfdf3f5372635aeb15fd3e2aecc7cb5d7150695e02bd72e0a44f1581164ad809}.

Dr. Steven Kerr, Ph.D., a senior data scientist at the University of Edinburgh, and his colleagues linked electronic medical information from primary care and secondary care, plus mortality and virological test data.

The study encompassed data from more than 11 million people in England, Scotland, and Wales who received their first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine from December 2020 through June 2021.

The researchers compared the rate of CVST events for individuals during a 90-day period before their vaccination with the 4 weeks afterward.

This is known as a self-controlled case series, where individuals act as their own control to account for other possible risk factors that they might have that are unchanging over time.

There were 201 CVSTs in total. Out of these, 81 CVSTs occurred in the follow-up period after the first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine, or 16.34 events per million doses.

This represents a doubling of the very low initial incidence of CVST, which equates to one extra event for every 4 million people vaccinated.

There were 40 CVSTs among those who received a first dose of the Pfizer vaccine, or 12.6 events per million doses.

This suggests that there is no link between the Pfizer vaccine and CVST.

The study appears in PLOS Medicine.

“It is important to understand that CVST is an extremely rare event, which typically only occurs a handful of times per million people per year,” Dr. Kerr told MNT.

“This should be weighed up against the risk associated with contracting COVID and the level and duration of protection that vaccines offer,” he said.

He added that the relative increase in the risk of CVST following a first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine may be higher in young people than in older people.

“This is something we may be able to study in the future as we amass data that covers a longer time period,” he added.

The authors say they will use the same methodology to investigate any possible risks of CVST with the Moderna vaccine, which is now also in use in the U.K., and the second and booster doses of all three vaccines.

Prolonged TV watching linked with severe blood clots

Silhouetted person with headphones watching large tv screenShare on Pinterest
New research finds a link between prolonged TV watching and a higher risk of potentially fatal blood clots. Thomas Winz/Getty Images
  • Researchers examined the link between hours spent watching TV and the risk of potentially fatal blood clots.
  • They found that prolonged TV watching is linked to a 35{cfdf3f5372635aeb15fd3e2aecc7cb5d7150695e02bd72e0a44f1581164ad809} higher risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE) than watching TV for shorter periods.
  • The researchers say that their findings do not prove causation and that more research is necessary before making any conclusions.

The hardening or narrowing of arteries — through atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) — and potentially fatal blood clots in the veins called VTE are related and share common risk factors, including obesity and smoking.

Studies have shown that prolonged sedentary behavior, or physical inactivity, is linked to an increased risk of vascular conditions such as CVD and VTE.

Watching TV is a significant part of sedentary leisure time. Research indicates a link between TV watching time and CVD. However, studies on the link between TV watching time and VTE have varied — some support the association, while others negate it.

An analysis of different studies looking at the link between TV watching and VTE could help researchers and the public better understand the risk factors for the condition.

In a recent study, researchers from Finland, Ghana, and the United Kingdom conducted a meta-analysis of three studies examining the link between TV watching time and VTE.

They found that watching TV for longer was associated with a higher risk of developing VTE.

“General findings highlight the need for everybody to be physically active,“ Dr. Setor Kunutsor, lead author of the study, told Medical News Today. “If you want to binge on TV viewing, take breaks in-between. Stand and stretch every 30 mins.”

“For people whose jobs involve sitting for long hours, take regular breaks in-between; they will need to also increase their physical activity levels, as there is evidence showing that higher volumes of moderate and vigorous activity can reduce, or even eliminate, the risks associated with sedentary behavior.”

– Dr. Kunutsor

The study appears in the European Journal of Preventive Cardiology.

Of 28 potential studies examining the relationship between watching TV and the risk of first VTE events, the researchers selected three published between 2016 and 2021.

Altogether, these studies included 131,421 participants from the United States and Japan. At the beginning of the studies, the participants were aged 54–65 years.

Average follow-up times ranged from 5.1 to 19.8 years. Across the studies, there were 964 VTE events.

All of the studies assessed for TV viewing times via self-reported questionnaires and also included information on established VTE risk factors, such as:

After analyzing the data, the researchers found that those who watched TV for more than 4 hours per day had a 35{cfdf3f5372635aeb15fd3e2aecc7cb5d7150695e02bd72e0a44f1581164ad809} higher risk of developing VTE than those who watched TV for less than 2.5 hours per day.

They also report that their results are independent of age, sex, BMI, and physical activity.

To explain their findings, the researchers write that as TV viewing involves immobilization, extended periods of this activity may increase VTE risk factors such as:

  • body weight, hypertension, and lipids
  • systemic inflammation
  • plasma viscosity and platelet aggregation
  • venous stasis, which occurs when prolonged sitting prevents blood from returning to the heart from the lower extremities

They also note that snacking on non-nutritious foods while watching TV may also have contributed to an increased VTE risk, although they did not assess diet in their study.

“There is probably a constellation of factors related to cardiometabolic factors and inflammation,“ Wendy J Brown, Ph.D., who is a professor at the School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences at the University of Queensland, Australia, and was not involved in the study, told MNT.

“But I guess that venous pooling, i.e., stasis, might be important — except that decreased venous return is more likely if people are sitting with feet on the ground and not lying down with feet up (but you can get venous pooling when standing still as well). Note too that a single episode of ‘prolonged’ sitting — such as we see in long haul flights — is also reported to be associated with VTE,” she added.

“The study by Kunutsor and colleagues suggests that the link between TV viewing and blood clots might be […] due to being immobilized, i.e., sitting for long periods of time,” said Dr. Aviroop Biswas, Ph.D., who is assistant professor in social and behavioral health sciences at the University of Toronto and was also not involved in this study.

“This might be possible as TV viewing habits might reflect most of a person’s daily sitting time, and sitting for long periods of time has been linked with inflamed blood vessels, reduced blood flow, and vascular dysfunction — all of which are linked to a higher risk of stroke. These links are likely to be stronger among people with low levels of physical activity (PA), as PA can reduce risks of inflammation and other stroke risk factors — though, the study did not examine this relationship.”

When MNT asked whether these findings might apply to being stationary in a more general sense, Dr. Kunutsor said: “[These results also apply] to people whose jobs involve being stationary for a long time — jobs that involve sitting for a long time. This is the reason why some employers encourage employees to stand and move about more regularly. The use of standing desks is very useful for such jobs. Even standing, which is the least active behavior, has been reported to be associated with health benefits compared with sitting.”

“I guess the issue of being sedentary for long periods is a hazard — there need not be a screen necessarily,” added Prof. Brown. “Some people sit for very long hours at work without interruption, [such as in factories], but we tend to think more about office and call center workers who sit in front of screens. Drivers of trains, buses, etc., also sit for long periods without interruption.”

“But I think prolonged and uninterrupted TV time might be a proxy for a different kind of lifestyle with many unmeasured confounders [such as diet]. In any case, it need not be TV. I think that, especially in COVID times, people may have been watching a lot of movies through channels other than TV,” she explained.

The authors conclude that prolonged TV watching might be linked to an increased risk of VTE.

The authors note that the study had limitations. Due to its observational nature, they say that their results do not prove cause and effect. Furthermore, as their analysis was only based on three studies, they recognize the need for further research in this area. They also say that the data on TV watching times may not be fully accurate, as they were self-reported.

“The study has a lot of limitations, and frankly, is not convincing evidence for a link between prolonged TV time and blood clots,” said Dr. Biswas. “All three studies also sampled older participants — age range 40+. As age is a risk factor for stroke, and participants were followed for 5 up to 20 years, it’s possible that there would have been a higher number of stroke cases than studies examining younger participants — and so the risks for blood clots might have been lower.”

“The three studies explored in the review did not consider important risk factors for stroke. For example, diet or blood sugar levels are not measured in the three studies. Diet, especially a diet that increases blood sugars, can negatively influence how our body breaks down blood sugars, which increases inflammation and risk of blood clots,” he explained.

“This is particularly important to examine, as one study is from Japan, and two are from the U.S. People from these countries have different diets, and we have no idea about how these differences contribute to their risks. There is also evidence of different risk of blood clots/stroke for men and women, though these were not factored into any of the studies or the review,“ he pointed out.

Prof. Brown agreed that there are limitations to the research. She said, “The most important concern [for me] is that although the three studies ‘adjusted for’ physical activity, this does not mean the effects are ‘independent’ of physical activity — so we don’t know if these effects were attenuated or eliminated in those who were highly active in leisure time.”

“And none of the studies considered what the participants were doing when they not engaged in ‘prolonged’ TV time. There are 24 hours in a day. If prolonged TV was 4 hours, then what the people were doing in the other 12 hours of ‘wake time’ is very important. Prolonged TV time may be a proxy for a generally sedentary lifestyle.”

– Prof. Brown

“I would guess that people who do at least 1 hour of at least moderate intensity physical activity each day might not be at increased risk of VTE! This was not adequately examined in the studies included here,” she concluded.