Dataset Information

Evaluation of Convalescent Plasma for Ebola Virus Disease in Guinea.

ABSTRACT: In the wake of the recent outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD) in several African countries, the World Health Organization prioritized the evaluation of treatment with convalescent plasma derived from patients who have recovered from the disease. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma for the treatment of EVD in Guinea.In this nonrandomized, comparative study, 99 patients of various ages (including pregnant women) with confirmed EVD received two consecutive transfusions of 200 to 250 ml of ABO-compatible convalescent plasma, with each unit of plasma obtained from a separate convalescent donor. The transfusions were initiated on the day of diagnosis or up to 2 days later. The level of neutralizing antibodies against Ebola virus in the plasma was unknown at the time of administration. The control group was 418 patients who had been treated at the same center during the previous 5 months. The primary outcome was the risk of death during the period from 3 to 16 days after diagnosis with adjustments for age and the baseline cycle-threshold value on polymerase-chain-reaction assay; patients who had died before day 3 were excluded. The clinically important difference was defined as an absolute reduction in mortality of 20 percentage points in the convalescent-plasma group as compared with the control group.A total of 84 patients who were treated with plasma were included in the primary analysis. At baseline, the convalescent-plasma group had slightly higher cycle-threshold values and a shorter duration of symptoms than did the control group, along with a higher frequency of eye redness and difficulty in swallowing. From day 3 to day 16 after diagnosis, the risk of death was 31% in the convalescent-plasma group and 38% in the control group (risk difference, -7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -18 to 4). The difference was reduced after adjustment for age and cycle-threshold value (adjusted risk difference, -3 percentage points; 95% CI, -13 to 8). No serious adverse reactions associated with the use of convalescent plasma were observed.The transfusion of up to 500 ml of convalescent plasma with unknown levels of neutralizing antibodies in 84 patients with confirmed EVD was not associated with a significant improvement in survival. (Funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02342171.).

SUBMITTER: van Griensven J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5856332 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of Convalescent Plasma for Ebola Virus Disease in Guinea.

van Griensven Johan J Edwards Tansy T de Lamballerie Xavier X Semple Malcolm G MG Gallian Pierre P Baize Sylvain S Horby Peter W PW Raoul Hervé H Magassouba N'Faly N Antierens Annick A Lomas Carolyn C Faye Ousmane O Sall Amadou A AA Fransen Katrien K Buyze Jozefien J Ravinetto Raffaella R Tiberghien Pierre P Claeys Yves Y De Crop Maaike M Lynen Lutgarde L Bah Elhadj Ibrahima EI Smith Peter G PG Delamou Alexandre A De Weggheleire Anja A Haba Nyankoye N

The New England journal of medicine 20160101 1

<h4>Background</h4>In the wake of the recent outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD) in several African countries, the World Health Organization prioritized the evaluation of treatment with convalescent plasma derived from patients who have recovered from the disease. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma for the treatment of EVD in Guinea.<h4>Methods</h4>In this nonrandomized, comparative study, 99 patients of various ages (including pregnant women) with confirmed EVD receiv ...[more]

PMID: 26735992

Similar Datasets

Project description:The Ebola virus disease outbreak in 2014-2015 led to a huge caseload with a high case fatality rate. No specific treatments were available beyond supportive care for conditions such as dehydration and shock. Evaluation of treatment with convalescent plasma from Ebola survivors was identified as a priority. We evaluated this intervention in an emergency setting, where randomization was unacceptable. The original trial design was an open-label study comparing patients receiving convalescent plasma and supportive care to patients receiving supportive care alone. The comparison group comprised patients recruited at the start of the trial before convalescent plasma became available, as well as patients presenting during the trial for whom there was insufficient blood group-compatible plasma or no staffing capacity to provide additional transfusions. However, during the trial, convalescent plasma was available to treat all new patients. The design was changed to use a comparator group comprising patients previously treated at the same Ebola treatment center prior to the start of the trial. In the analysis, it was planned to adjust for any differences in prognostic variables between intervention and comparison groups, specifically baseline polymerase chain reaction cycle threshold and age. In addition, adjustment was planned for other potential confounders, identified in the analysis, such as patient presenting symptoms and time to treatment seeking. Because plasma treatment started up to 3 days after diagnosis and we could not define a similar time-point for the comparator group, patients who died before the third day after confirmation of diagnosis were excluded from both intervention and comparison groups in a per-protocol analysis. Some patients received additional experimental treatments soon after plasma treatment, and these were excluded. We also analyzed mortality including all patients from the time of confirmed diagnosis, irrespective of whether those in the trial series actually received plasma, as an intention-to-treat analysis. Per-protocol and intention-to-treat approaches gave similar conclusions. An important caveat in the interpretation of the findings is that it is unlikely that all potential sources of confounding, such as any variation in supportive care over time, were eliminated. Protocols and electronic data capture systems have now been extensively field-tested for emergency evaluation of treatment with convalescent plasma. Ongoing studies seek to quantify the level of neutralizing antibodies in different plasma donations to determine whether this influences the response and survival of treated patients.

Project description:UnlabelledEbola virus (EBOV) transmission is currently poorly characterized and is thought to occur primarily by direct contact with infectious material; however transmission from swine to nonhuman primates via the respiratory tract has been documented. To establish an EBOV transmission model for performing studies with statistical significance, groups of six guinea pigs (gps) were challenged intranasally (i.n.) or intraperitoneally (i.p.) with 10,000 times the 50% lethal dose (LD50) of gp-adapted EBOV, and naive gps were then introduced as cage mates for contact exposure at 1 day postinfection (p.i.). The animals were monitored for survival and clinical signs of disease and quantitated for virus shedding postexposure. Changes in the duration of contact of naive gps with infected animals were evaluated for their impact on transmission efficiency. Transmission was more efficient from i.n.- than from i.p.-challenged gps, with 17% versus 83% of naive gps surviving exposure, respectively. Virus shedding was detected beginning at 3 days p.i. from both i.n.- and i.p.-challenged animals. Contact duration positively correlated with transmission efficiency, and the abrogation of direct contact between infected and naive animals through the erection of a steel mesh was effective at stopping virus spread, provided that infectious animal bedding was absent from the cages. Histopathological and immunohistochemical findings show that i.n.-infected gps display enhanced lung pathology and EBOV antigen in the trachea, which supports increased virus transmission from these animals. The results suggest that i.n.-challenged gps are more infectious to naive animals than their systemically infected counterparts and that transmission occurs through direct contact with infectious materials, including those transported through air movement over short distances.ImportanceEbola is generally thought to be spread between humans though infectious bodily fluids. However, a study has shown that Ebola can be spread from pigs to monkeys without direct contact. Further studies have been hampered, because an economical animal model for Ebola transmission is not available. To address this, we established a transmission model in guinea pigs and determined the mechanisms behind virus spread. The survival data, in addition to microscopic examination of lung and trachea sections, show that mucosal infection of guinea pigs is an efficient model for Ebola transmission. Virus spread is increased with longer contact times with an infected animal and is possible without direct contact between an infected and a naive host but can be stopped if infectious materials are absent. These results warrant consideration for the development of future strategies against Ebola transmission and for a better understanding of the parameters involved in virus spread.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of Convalescent Plasma for Ebola Virus Disease in Guinea.

Publications

Evaluation of Convalescent Plasma for Ebola Virus Disease in Guinea.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets