This explainer is more than 90 days old. Some of the information might be out of date or no longer relevant. Browse our homepage for up to date content or request information about a specific topic from our team of scientists.
This article has been translated from its original language. Please reach out if you have any feedback on the translation.
A study published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) looks at the clinical features of Vaccine-Induced Immune Thrombocytopenia and Thrombosis (VITT).
A study published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) looks at the clinical features of Vaccine-Induced Immune Thrombocytopenia and Thrombosis (VITT).
In a sense there’s nothing new for the general public here – it was already known that the prognosis for someone with VITT is pretty bad, and it was also already known that it’s not at all common. Though this paper does say something about the incidence rate of VITT in vaccinated people (“Thus, the approximate incidence of VITT was at least 1:100,000 among patients 50 years of age or older and at least 1:50,000 among patients in the younger group (<50 years of age)”), that’s pretty much the same as is said in the weekly coronavirus vaccine adverse effect reports from MHRA at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions/coronavirus-vaccine-summary-of-yellow-card-reporting. So nothing has really changed on the balance of risks and benefits of vaccination.