Abstract

Convalescent plasma is an old treatment for a new disease. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused the analysis of convalescent plasma to reemerge as a possible treatment. First, a systematic review summarizes the available research examining the use of convalescent plasma for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. Second, we describe our experience in establishing a single-center convalescent plasma donation program.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Despite scientific advances, there is no effective medical therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy in COVID-19. METHODS This review was carried out in accordance with Cochrane methodology including risk of bias assessment and grading of the quality of evidence. Only prospective clinical trials randomly assigning COVID-19 patients to convalescent plasma plus standard of care therapy (test arm) versus placebo/standard of care (control arm) were included. Two reviewers independently read each preprint/publication and extracted relevant data from individual studies. Data were pooled using the random-effects model and expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS A total of 13 206 patients from 12 randomised controlled trials were included. There was no significant difference in clinical improvement rate (RR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.98-1.02, p = 0.96) or time to clinical improvement (median difference of 1.08 days with 95% CI ranging from -0.15 to +2.30 days) between convalescent plasma versus placebo/standard of care therapy. The use of convalescent plasma was not associated with significantly reduced risk of death (RR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.65-1.02, p = 0.08). Reassuringly, overall incidence of infusion-related serious adverse events was low (3.25%) and not significantly different (RR = 1.14, 95% CI: 0.93-1.40, p = 0.22) for convalescent plasma transfusion compared to placebo/standard of care therapy. CONCLUSIONS There is low to moderate certainty evidence that the addition of convalescent plasma to current standard of care therapy is generally safe but, does not result in any significant clinical benefit or reduction of mortality in COVID-19.

Abstract

Convalescent plasma is an old treatment for a new disease. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused the analysis of convalescent plasma to reemerge as a possible treatment. First, a systematic review summarizes the available research examining the use of convalescent plasma for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. Second, we describe our experience in establishing a single-center convalescent plasma donation program.

Abstract

The treatment of COVID-19 is particularly critical in pregnant women, considering the potential teratogenic effects of antiviral agents and the immune-depression related with pregnancy. The aim of this review is to systematically examine the current evidence on the clinical use of convalescent plasma during pregnancy. The electronic databases Medline PubMed Advanced Search Builder, Scopus, Web Of Science and Google Scholar were searched (until 1 January 2021). Inclusion criteria were pregnant women with COVID-19 (or SARS-CoV-2 infection), in whom convalescent plasma (or hyperimmune plasma) was used as treatment. We searched clinical trial registries (censored 5 January 2021) for eligible studies under way. After elimination of duplications, the initial search yielded 79 potentially relevant records, of which 67 were subsequently excluded. The 12 remaining records were case reports involving 12 pregnancies. Six of the mothers were reported to be well, two were reported to have preeclampsia, and in one case each the maternal outcome was described as survival, clinical improvement, discharged with oxygen and rehabilitation. With regard to the neonates, two were declared to be well, four had transient morbidity, two were critically ill and one died; normal ongoing pregnancies, but no post-delivery information, were reported for the remaining three cases. Clinical trials under way or planned to investigate the use of convalescent plasma for COVID-19 during pregnancy are lacking. This is the first systematic review of the literature regarding the treatment of COVID-19 in pregnancy. The published literature data seem to indicate that convalescent plasma administered to pregnant women with severe COVID-19 provides benefits for both the mother and the fetus. The quality of the available studies is, however, very limited since they are all case reports and thus suffer from relevant reporting bias.

Abstract

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/25500.].

Abstract

Introduction: Convalescent plasma is a form of passive immunotherapy which has been used for the treatment and prevention of many infectious diseases for more than one century Given the absence of a specific treatment for the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, convalescent plasma is a potential therapeutic alternative against COVID-19 Objective: Carry out a review about the use of convalescent plasma as a therapeutic alternative against COVID-19 Discussion: A search was conducted about the topic in the databases Pubmed, SciELO, Lilacs, Cochrane Library and Web of Science Convalescent plasma has been shown to be effective in the treatment of several viral diseases However, evidence of its use in COVID-19 patients is scant Promising results have been obtained, though, but they are not conclusive due to the need of a larger number of clinical trials In Cuba this treatment is included among the clinical management protocols for COVID-19 Conclusions: This alternative is an immunotherapeutic tool for the treatment of COVID-19 patients, since it improves their clinical status and reduces lethality rates However, more controlled and randomized clinical trials are required confirming its effectiveness and safety © 2021, Editorial Ciencias Medicas All rights reserved

Abstract

Convalescent plasma is currently being used in the treatment of COVID-19. Recommendations regarding use convalescent plasma in COVID-19 requires systematic summaries of available evidence. We searched the databases Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Epistomonikos, Medrxiv and Biorxiv. Title/abstract screening, full text screening and data abstraction were carried out in duplicate by two reviewers. Pooled effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using random effects meta-analysis. GRADE tool was used to rate the certainty of evidence. Twenty two studies were found eligible for inclusion: nine randomized controlled trials and thirteen cohort studies. Low certainty evidence from eight RCTs showed inconclusive effects of convalescent plasma on mortality at 28 days (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.18). Low certainty evidence from thirteen cohort studies showed a reduction in mortality at 28 days (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.82). The pooled OR for clinical improvement was 1.07 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.34) representing low certainty evidence. Evidence from three RCTs showed inconclusive effect of CP on the need for mechanical ventilation (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.98). Four cohort studies reporting unadjusted estimates suggested a reduction in the need for mechanical ventilation with convalescent plasma (OR 0.80 95% CI 0.71 to 0.91, low certainty). Pooled estimates from 2 RCTs showed inconclusive effects of convalescent plasma on the proportion of patients with nondetectable levels of virus in nasopharyngeal specimens on day 3 (OR 3.62, 95% CI 0.43, 30.49, very low-quality evidence). The present review reports uncertain estimates on the efficacy of convalescent plasma in the treatment of COVID-19. There is low certainty evidence of a possible reduction in mortality and mechanical ventilation, a faster viral clearance and the absence of any serious adverse events. However, its efficacy for these outcomes requires evidence from good quality and adequately powered randomized controlled trials. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12288-021-01417-w.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To explore whether convalescent plasma therapy is beneficial to patients with severe acute respiratory infections and gave hints to the management of COVID-19. METHODS A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane library was conducted for all eligible studies range from inception to February 29, 2020. Studies with control group were included. Treatment group received convalescent plasma therapy, and control group may receive any therapy other than convalescent plasma therapy. Odds ratios (ORs), mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled for categorical and continuous outcomes. RESULTS A total of 1997 patients from 13 studies were included, and seven studies were prospectively designed. Pooled analysis indicated convalescent plasma treatment significantly reduced the mortality by 51% (OR=0.49, 95%CI: 0.36 to 0.67). Subgroup analyses by publication time, study design, and influenza A revealed similar results. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the results were stable. In addition, convalescent plasma therapy reduced mechanical ventilation requirement (OR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.59), while it was not associated with less use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (OR: 2.0, 95% CI: 0.83 to 4.83) and shorter length of hospital stay (MD: -2.20, 95% CI: -4.98 to 0.57 days). Pooled estimates showed there was no difference in serious adverse effects between the convalescent plasma treatment and control groups (OR: 0.75, 95%CI: 0.50 to 1.13). CONCLUSION Convalescent plasma therapy significantly reduced the mortality and mechanical ventilation requirements of patients with virus induced severe acute respiratory infections, without serious adverse effects. More studies are needed to explore whether this treatment can be extrapolated into COVID-19.

Abstract

To determine the effect of COVID-19 convalescent plasma on mortality, we aggregated patient outcome data from 10 randomized clinical trials (RCT), 20 matched-control studies, two dose-response studies, and 96 case-reports or case-series Studies published between January 1, 2020 – January 16, 2021 were identified through a systematic search of online PubMed and MEDLINE databases Random-effects analyses of RCT and matched-control data demonstrated that COVID-19 patients transfused with convalescent plasma exhibited a lower mortality rate compared to patients receiving standard treatments Additional analyses showed that early transfusion (within 3 days of hospital admission) of higher-titer plasma is associated with lower patient mortality These data provide evidence favoring the efficacy of human convalescent plasma as a therapeutic agent in hospitalized COVID-19 patients

Abstract

IMPORTANCE Convalescent plasma is a proposed treatment for COVID-19. OBJECTIVE To assess clinical outcomes with convalescent plasma treatment vs placebo or standard of care in peer-reviewed and preprint publications or press releases of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). DATA SOURCES PubMed, the Cochrane COVID-19 trial registry, and the Living Overview of Evidence platform were searched until January 29, 2021. STUDY SELECTION The RCTs selected compared any type of convalescent plasma vs placebo or standard of care for patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 in any treatment setting. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Two reviewers independently extracted data on relevant clinical outcomes, trial characteristics, and patient characteristics and used the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. The primary analysis included peer-reviewed publications of RCTs only, whereas the secondary analysis included all publicly available RCT data (peer-reviewed publications, preprints, and press releases). Inverse variance-weighted meta-analyses were conducted to summarize the treatment effects. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES All-cause mortality, length of hospital stay, clinical improvement, clinical deterioration, mechanical ventilation use, and serious adverse events. RESULTS A total of 1060 patients from 4 peer-reviewed RCTs and 10 722 patients from 6 other publicly available RCTs were included. The summary risk ratio (RR) for all-cause mortality with convalescent plasma in the 4 peer-reviewed RCTs was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.63 to 1.38), the absolute risk difference was -1.21% (95% CI, -5.29% to 2.88%), and there was low certainty of the evidence due to imprecision. Across all 10 RCTs, the summary RR was 1.02 (95% CI, 0.92 to 1.12) and there was moderate certainty of the evidence due to inclusion of unpublished data. Among the peer-reviewed RCTs, the summary hazard ratio was 1.17 (95% CI, 0.07 to 20.34) for length of hospital stay, the summary RR was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.20 to 2.87) for mechanical ventilation use (the absolute risk difference for mechanical ventilation use was -2.56% [95% CI, -13.16% to 8.05%]), and there was low certainty of the evidence due to imprecision for both outcomes. Limited data on clinical improvement, clinical deterioration, and serious adverse events showed no significant differences. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Treatment with convalescent plasma compared with placebo or standard of care was not significantly associated with a decrease in all-cause mortality or with any benefit for other clinical outcomes. The certainty of the evidence was low to moderate for all-cause mortality and low for other outcomes.