Convalescent plasma to treat critically ill patients with COVID-19: framing the need for randomised clinical trials.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Shankar-Hari M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7370253 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a pandemic with no specific therapeutic agents and substantial mortality. It is critical to find new treatments.ObjectiveTo determine whether convalescent plasma transfusion may be beneficial in the treatment of critically ill patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.Design, setting, and participantsCase series of 5 critically ill patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) who met the following criteria: severe pneumonia with rapid progression and continuously high viral load despite antiviral treatment; Pao2/Fio2 <300; and mechanical ventilation. All 5 were treated with convalescent plasma transfusion. The study was conducted at the infectious disease department, Shenzhen Third People's Hospital in Shenzhen, China, from January 20, 2020, to March 25, 2020; final date of follow-up was March 25, 2020. Clinical outcomes were compared before and after convalescent plasma transfusion.ExposuresPatients received transfusion with convalescent plasma with a SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody (IgG) binding titer greater than 1:1000 (end point dilution titer, by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]) and a neutralization titer greater than 40 (end point dilution titer) that had been obtained from 5 patients who recovered from COVID-19. Convalescent plasma was administered between 10 and 22 days after admission.Main outcomes and measuresChanges of body temperature, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (range 0-24, with higher scores indicating more severe illness), Pao2/Fio2, viral load, serum antibody titer, routine blood biochemical index, ARDS, and ventilatory and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) supports before and after convalescent plasma transfusion.ResultsAll 5 patients (age range, 36-65 years; 2 women) were receiving mechanical ventilation at the time of treatment and all had received antiviral agents and methylprednisolone. Following plasma transfusion, body temperature normalized within 3 days in 4 of 5 patients, the SOFA score decreased, and Pao2/Fio2 increased within 12 days (range, 172-276 before and 284-366 after). Viral loads also decreased and became negative within 12 days after the transfusion, and SARS-CoV-2-specific ELISA and neutralizing antibody titers increased following the transfusion (range, 40-60 before and 80-320 on day 7). ARDS resolved in 4 patients at 12 days after transfusion, and 3 patients were weaned from mechanical ventilation within 2 weeks of treatment. Of the 5 patients, 3 have been discharged from the hospital (length of stay: 53, 51, and 55 days), and 2 are in stable condition at 37 days after transfusion.Conclusions and relevanceIn this preliminary uncontrolled case series of 5 critically ill patients with COVID-19 and ARDS, administration of convalescent plasma containing neutralizing antibody was followed by improvement in their clinical status. The limited sample size and study design preclude a definitive statement about the potential effectiveness of this treatment, and these observations require evaluation in clinical trials.
| S-EPMC7101507 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The collection and clinical use of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) as a therapy for COVID-19 infection is under development and early use in many centers worldwide. We conducted an international survey of centers undertaking studies of CCP to provide understanding of the common themes and differences between them. Sixty-four studies in 22 countries were identified from clinical trial registries and personal contacts of the authors. Twenty of the 64 centers (31%) from 12 of 22 countries (55%) responded to the survey. Of the 20 studies, 11 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 9 were case series. Only 4 of the RCTs plan to recruit 400 patients or more, and only 3 RCTs were blinded. The majority of studies will study the effect of CCP on sick patients requiring hospitalization and those requiring critical care, and none is examining the role of CCP in non-infected at-risk individuals. A wide variety of primary and secondary outcomes are being used. The donor eligibility criteria among the studies are very similar, and the use of plasmapheresis for the collection of CCP is almost universal. The planned dose of CCP ranges from as little as 200 mL to well over 1 L, but is 400 to 800 mL or 4 mL/kg or greater in all the RCTs. There is considerable variability in donor antibody testing with no consistency regarding the cut-off for antibody titer for acceptance as CCP or the use of pathogen-inactivation. Our survey provides an understanding of the similarities and differences among the studies of CCP, and that by virtue of their design some studies may be more informative than others.
| S-EPMC7320682 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe management of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by a new human virus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is challenging. Recently, there have been several reports with inconsistent results after treatment with convalescent plasma (CP) on critically ill patients with COVID-19, which was produced with a neutralizing antibody titer and tested in a P3 or P4 laboratory. However, due to the limitation of the conditions on mass production of plasma, most producers hardly had the capability to isolate the neutralizing antibody. Here, we report the clinical courses of three critically ill patients with COVID-19 receiving CP treatments by total immunoglobulin G (IgG) titer collection.MethodsThree patients with COVID-19 in this study were laboratory confirmed to be positive for SARS-CoV-2, with radiographic and clinical features of pneumonia. CP was collected by total IgG titer of 160 (range, 200-225 mL), and patients were transfused between 20 and 30 days after disease onset at the critical illness stage as a trial in addition to standard care. The clinical courses of these patients, including laboratory results and pulmonary functional and image studies after receiving convalescent plasma infusions, were reviewed.ResultsNo therapeutic effect of CP was observed in any of the patients; instead, all three patients deteriorated and required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation treatment. A potential cytokine storm 4 hours after infusion of CP in Patient 2 was observed. No more patients were put on the trial of CP transfusion.ConclusionsWe recommend extreme caution in using CP in critically ill patients more than 2 weeks after the onset of COVID-19 pneumonia.
| S-EPMC7436937 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundConvalescent plasma treatment for severe and critically ill Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients remains controversial.ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical improvement and mortality risk of convalescent plasma treatment in patients with severe and critically ill COVID-19 patients.MethodsA literature search was conducted in the electronic databases for the randomized controlled studies about convalescent plasma therapy in severe and critically ill COVID-19 patients. Two reviewers independently extracted relevant data. The primary outcomes were clinical improvement and mortality risk of severe and critically ill COVID-19 patients that were therapied by convalescent plasma.ResultsA total of 14 randomized controlled trials with 4543 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared to control, no significant difference was observed for either clinical improvement (6 studies, RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.17, p = 0.16, moderate certainty) or mortality risk (14 studies, RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.03, p= 0.18, low certainty) in patients of convalescent plasma therapy group.ConclusionConvalescent plasma did not increase the clinical improvement or reduce the mortality risk in the severe and critically ill COVID-19 patients.
| S-EPMC8806131 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The recent outbreak of COVID-19 in the world is currently a big threat to global health and economy. Convalescent plasma has been confirmed effective against the novel corona virus in preliminary studies. In this paper, we first described the therapeutic schedule, antibody detection method, indications, contraindications of the convalescent plasmas and reported the effectiveness of convalescent plasma therapy by a retrospective cohort study.
| S-EPMC8034927 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8426852 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Total plasma IgA glycosylation was compared between healthy volunteers and volunteers suffering fromo infections with either the influenza A virus or the severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2. Data from functional assays of the same plasma samples, such as neutrophil extracellular trap formation is also available.
2024-10-22 | PXD057019 | Pride
Project description:This SuperSeries is composed of the SubSeries listed below.
2022-02-28 | GSE197259 | GEO
Project description:Therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) has been proposed as a rescue therapy in critically ill COVID-19 patients. The aim of the present study was to determine whether combining TPE with convalescent plasma (CVP) transfusion early in the intensive care unit (ICU) stay improves survival among this heterogeneous population. The primary endpoint was survival at 30 days. Secondary endpoints included assessing the evolution of biomarkers, such as the partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fractional inspired oxygen ratio, and C reactive protein (CRP), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and ferritin levels at the 7-day follow-up. This single centre, prospective, non-randomized controlled trial was conducted in an 8-bed COVID-19 ICU and included patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring intensive care treatment. A total of 19 patients were treated by performing TPE followed by CVP transfusion, in addition to standard treatment, while for another 19 patients, only standard treatment according to hospital protocols was used. TPE was initiated during the first 24 h after ICU admission, followed immediately by transfusion of CVP. Survival at 30 days was 47.37% in the TPE CVP group and 26.32% in the control group (P=0.002). Patients in the TPE CVP group also showed better oxygenation and a reduction in inflammation, with decreased CRP, LDH and ferritin levels compared with those in the control group. Overall, the study indicated that early initiation of TPE followed by CVP transfusion may be a valid rescue therapy in severe and critically ill COVID-19 patients, with a statistically significant survival benefit, improved oxygenation and a reduction in inflammatory markers. The trial was registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov database (trial registration number: NCT04973488) on July 22, 2021 (retrospectively registered).
| S-EPMC8652389 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe evidence for benefit of convalescent plasma for critically ill patients with COVID-19 is inconclusive.ObjectiveTo determine whether convalescent plasma would improve outcomes for critically ill adults with COVID-19.Design, setting, and participantsThe ongoing Randomized, Embedded, Multifactorial, Adaptive Platform Trial for Community-Acquired Pneumonia (REMAP-CAP) enrolled and randomized 4763 adults with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 between March 9, 2020, and January 18, 2021, within at least 1 domain; 2011 critically ill adults were randomized to open-label interventions in the immunoglobulin domain at 129 sites in 4 countries. Follow-up ended on April 19, 2021.InterventionsThe immunoglobulin domain randomized participants to receive 2 units of high-titer, ABO-compatible convalescent plasma (total volume of 550 mL ± 150 mL) within 48 hours of randomization (n = 1084) or no convalescent plasma (n = 916).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary ordinal end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of intensive care unit-based organ support) up to day 21 (range, -1 to 21 days; patients who died were assigned -1 day). The primary analysis was an adjusted bayesian cumulative logistic model. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio (OR) greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Futility was defined as the posterior probability of an OR less than 1.2 (threshold for trial conclusion of futility >95%). An OR greater than 1 represented improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both. The prespecified secondary outcomes included in-hospital survival; 28-day survival; 90-day survival; respiratory support-free days; cardiovascular support-free days; progression to invasive mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal mechanical oxygenation, or death; intensive care unit length of stay; hospital length of stay; World Health Organization ordinal scale score at day 14; venous thromboembolic events at 90 days; and serious adverse events.ResultsAmong the 2011 participants who were randomized (median age, 61 [IQR, 52 to 70] years and 645/1998 [32.3%] women), 1990 (99%) completed the trial. The convalescent plasma intervention was stopped after the prespecified criterion for futility was met. The median number of organ support-free days was 0 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the convalescent plasma group and 3 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the no convalescent plasma group. The in-hospital mortality rate was 37.3% (401/1075) for the convalescent plasma group and 38.4% (347/904) for the no convalescent plasma group and the median number of days alive and free of organ support was 14 (IQR, 3 to 18) and 14 (IQR, 7 to 18), respectively. The median-adjusted OR was 0.97 (95% credible interval, 0.83 to 1.15) and the posterior probability of futility (OR <1.2) was 99.4% for the convalescent plasma group compared with the no convalescent plasma group. The treatment effects were consistent across the primary outcome and the 11 secondary outcomes. Serious adverse events were reported in 3.0% (32/1075) of participants in the convalescent plasma group and in 1.3% (12/905) of participants in the no convalescent plasma group.Conclusions and relevanceAmong critically ill adults with confirmed COVID-19, treatment with 2 units of high-titer, ABO-compatible convalescent plasma had a low likelihood of providing improvement in the number of organ support-free days.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707.
| S-EPMC8491132 | biostudies-literature