-
1.
Sex-specific disparities in COVID-19 outcomes
Rafique, Z., Durkalski-Mauldin, V., Peacock, W. F., Yadav, K., Reynolds, J. C., Callaway, C. W.
Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open. 2024;5(1):e13110
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Sex-specific disparities in morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 illness are not well understood. Neutralizing antibodies (Ab) may protect against severe COVID-19 illness. We investigated the association of sex with disease progression and SARS-CoV-2 Ab response. METHODS In this exploratory analysis of the phase 3, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled Convalescent Plasma in Outpatients (C3PO) trial, we examined whether sex was associated with progression to severe illness, defined as a composite of all-cause hospitalization, emergency/urgent care visit, or death within 15 days from study enrollment. Patients had a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test, symptom onset within 7 days, stable condition for emergency department discharge, and were either ≥50 years old or had at least one high-risk feature for disease progression. Patients received blinded convalescent plasma or placebo in a 1:1 fashion and were evaluated on days 15 and 30 after infusion. Blood samples were collected on day 0 (pre-/post-infusion), 15, and 30 to measure Ab levels with the Broad Institute using the Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test assay. RESULTS Of 511 patients enrolled (median age 54 [Iinterquartile range 41-62] years, 46% male, 66% white, 20% black, 3.5% Asian), disease progression occurred in 36.7% of males and 25.9% of females (unadjusted risk difference 10.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8-18.8%). Sex-disparities did not persist when adjusted for treatment group, age, viremic status, symptom onset, and tobacco use (adjusted risk difference 5.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.2% to 13.4%), but were present in the subgroup presenting 3 or more days after symptom onset (adjusted risk difference 12.6%, 95% CI, 3.4% to 21.9%). Mean baseline Ab levels (log scale) available for 367 patients were similar between sexes (difference 0.19 log units, 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.46). The log-scale mean increase from baseline to day 15 after adjusting for treatment assignment and baseline levels was larger in males than females (3.26 vs. 2.67). A similar difference was noted when the groups were subdivided by outcome. CONCLUSIONS Progression of COVID-19 was similar in males and females when adjusted for age, tobacco use, and viremia status in this study. However, in the cohort presenting 3 or more days after symptom onset, COVID-19 outcomes were worse in males than females. Neutralizing Ab levels increased more in males but did not correlate with sex differences in outcomes.
-
2.
COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma Therapy: Long-term Implications
Yoon, H., Li, Y., Goldfeld, K. S., Cobb, G. F., Sturm-Reganato, C. L., Ostrosky-Zeichner, L., Jayaweera, D. T., Philley, J. V., Desruisseaux, M. S., Keller, M. J., et al
Open forum infectious diseases. 2024;11(1):ofad686
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND The long-term effect of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute treatments on postacute sequelae of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (PASC) is unknown. The CONTAIN-Extend study explores the long-term impact of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) therapy on postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) symptoms and general health 18 months following hospitalization. METHODS The CONTAIN-Extend study examined 281 participants from the original CONTAIN COVID-19 trial (CONTAIN-RCT, NCT04364737) at 18 months post-hospitalization for acute COVID-19. Symptom surveys, global health assessments, and biospecimen collection were performed from November 2021 to October 2022. Multivariable logistic and linear regression estimated associations between the randomization arms and self-reported symptoms and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores and adjusted for covariables, including age, sex, race/ethnicity, disease severity, and CONTAIN enrollment quarter and sites. RESULTS There were no differences in symptoms or PROMIS scores between CCP and placebo (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] of general symptoms, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.54-1.67). However, females (aOR, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.73-5.34), those 45-64 years (aOR, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.14-6.23), and April-June 2020 enrollees (aOR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.10-5.19) were more likely to report general symptoms and have poorer PROMIS physical health scores than their respective reference groups. Hispanic participants (difference, -3.05; 95% CI, -5.82 to -0.27) and Black participants (-4.48; 95% CI, -7.94 to -1.02) had poorer PROMIS physical health than White participants. CONCLUSIONS CCP demonstrated no lasting effect on PASC symptoms or overall health in comparison to the placebo. This study underscores the significance of demographic factors, including sex, age, and timing of acute infection, in influencing symptom reporting 18 months after acute hypoxic COVID-19 hospitalization.
-
3.
Symptom duration and resolution with early outpatient treatment of convalescent plasma for COVID- 19: a randomized trial
Baksh S, Heath SL, Fukuta Y, Shade D, Meisenberg B, Bloch EM, Tobian AAR, Spivak ES, Patel B, Gerber J, et al
The Journal of infectious diseases. 2023
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) reduces hospitalizations among outpatients treated early after symptom onset. It is unknown if CCP reduces time to symptom resolution among outpatients. METHODS We evaluated symptom resolution at day 14 by trial arm using an adjusted sub-distribution hazard model, with hospitalization as a competing risk. Additionally, we assessed prevalence of symptom clusters at day 14 between treatments. Clusters were defined based on biologic clustering, impact on ability to work, and an algorithm. RESULTS Among 1,070 outpatients followed after transfusion, 381 of 538 (70.8%) receiving CCP and 381 of 532 (71.6%) receiving control plasma were still symptomatic (p = 0.78) at day 14. Associations between CCP and symptom resolution by day 14 were not statistically different from those in controls after adjusting for baseline characteristics (adjusted sub-distribution hazard ratio: 0.99; p = 0.62). The most common cluster consisted of cough, fatigue, shortness of breath, and headache, found in 308 (57.2%) and 325 (61.1%) of CCP and control plasma recipients, respectively (p = 0.16). CONCLUSIONS In this trial of outpatients with early COVID-19, CCP was not associated with faster resolution of symptoms compared to control. Overall, there were no differences in the prevalence of each symptom or symptom clusters at day 14 by treatment.
-
4.
Efficacy of combined COVID-19 convalescent plasma with oral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase inhibitor treatment versus neutralizing monoclonal antibody therapy in COVID-19 outpatients: a multi-center, non-inferiority, open-label randomized controlled trial (PlasMab)
Siripongboonsitti, T., Nontawong, N., Tawinprai, K., Suptawiwat, O., Soonklang, K., Poovorawan, Y., Mahanonda, N.
Microbiology spectrum. 2023;:e0325723
Abstract
This pivotal study reveals that high neutralizing titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) combined with favipiravir (FPV) is non-inferior to sotrovimab in preventing hospitalization and severe outcomes in outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and high-risk comorbidities. It underscores the potential of CPT-FPV as a viable alternative to neutralizing monoclonal antibodies like sotrovimab, especially amid emerging variants with spike protein mutations. The study's unique approach, comparing a monoclonal antibody with CPT, demonstrates the efficacy of early intervention using high neutralizing antibody titer CPT, even in populations with a significant proportion of elderly patients. These findings are crucial, considering the alternative treatment challenges, especially in resource-limited countries, posed by the rapidly mutating SARS-CoV-2 virus and the need for adaptable therapeutic strategies.
-
5.
Use of covid-19 convalescent plasma to treat patients admitted to hospital for covid-19 with or without underlying immunodeficiency: open label, randomised clinical trial
Lacombe, K., Hueso, T., Porcher, R., Mekinian, A., Chiarabini, T., Georgin-Lavialle, S., Ader, F., Saison, J., Martin-Blondel, G., De Castro, N., et al
BMJ medicine. 2023;2(1):e000427
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy of covid-19 convalescent plasma to treat patients admitted to hospital for moderate covid-19 disease with or without underlying immunodeficiency (CORIPLASM trial). DESIGN Open label, randomised clinical trial. SETTING CORIMUNO-19 cohort (publicly supported platform of open label, randomised controlled trials of immune modulatory drugs in patients admitted to hospital with moderate or severe covid-19 disease) based on 19 university and general hospitals across France, from 16 April 2020 to 21 April 2021. PARTICIPANTS 120 adults (n=60 in the covid-19 convalescent plasma group, n=60 in the usual care group) admitted to hospital with a positive SARS-CoV2 test result, duration of symptoms <9 days, and World Health Organization score of 4 or 5. 49 patients (n=22, n=27) had underlying immunosuppression. INTERVENTIONS Open label randomisation to usual care or four units (200-220 mL/unit, 2 units/day over two consecutive days) of covid-19 convalescent plasma with a seroneutralisation titre >40. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Primary outcomes were proportion of patients with a WHO Clinical Progression Scale score of ≥6 on the 10 point scale on day 4 (higher values indicate a worse outcome), and survival without assisted ventilation or additional immunomodulatory treatment by day 14. Secondary outcomes were changes in WHO Clinical Progression Scale scores, overall survival, time to discharge, and time to end of dependence on oxygen supply. Predefined subgroups analyses included immunosuppression status, duration of symptoms before randomisation, and use of steroids. RESULTS 120 patients were recruited and assigned to covid-19 convalescent plasma (n=60) or usual care (n=60), including 22 (covid-19 convalescent plasma) and 27 (usual care) patients who were immunocompromised. 13 (22%) patients who received convalescent plasma had a WHO Clinical Progression Scale score of ≥6 at day 4 versus eight (13%) patients who received usual care (adjusted odds ratio 1.88, 95% credible interval 0.71 to 5.24). By day 14, 19 (31.6%) patients in the convalescent plasma group and 20 (33.3%) patients in the usual care group needed ventilation, additional immunomodulatory treatment, or had died. For cumulative incidence of death, three (5%) patients in the convalescent plasma group and eight (13%) in the usual care group died by day 14 (adjusted hazard ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.10 to 1.53), and seven (12%) patients in the convalescent plasma group and 12 (20%) in the usual care group by day 28 (adjusted hazard ratio 0.51, 0.20 to 1.32). In a subgroup analysis performed in patients who were immunocompromised, transfusion of covid-19 convalescent plasma was associated with mortality (hazard ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 1.10). CONCLUSIONS In this study, covid-19 convalescent plasma did not improve early outcomes in patients with moderate covid-19 disease. The efficacy of convalescent plasma in patients who are immunocompromised should be investigated further. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04345991.
-
6.
Convalescent Plasma for Covid-19-Induced ARDS in Mechanically Ventilated Patients
Misset, B., Piagnerelli, M., Hoste, E., Dardenne, N., Grimaldi, D., Michaux, I., De Waele, E., Dumoulin, A., Jorens, P. G., van der Hauwaert, E., et al
The New England journal of medicine. 2023;389(17):1590-1600
-
-
-
Free full text
-
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
BACKGROUND Passive immunization with plasma collected from convalescent patients has been regularly used to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Minimal data are available regarding the use of convalescent plasma in patients with Covid-19-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). METHODS In this open-label trial, we randomly assigned adult patients with Covid-19-induced ARDS who had been receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for less than 5 days in a 1:1 ratio to receive either convalescent plasma with a neutralizing antibody titer of at least 1:320 or standard care alone. Randomization was stratified according to the time from tracheal intubation to inclusion. The primary outcome was death by day 28. RESULTS A total of 475 patients underwent randomization from September 2020 through March 2022. Overall, 237 patients were assigned to receive convalescent plasma and 238 to receive standard care. Owing to a shortage of convalescent plasma, a neutralizing antibody titer of 1:160 was administered to 17.7% of the patients in the convalescent-plasma group. Glucocorticoids were administered to 466 patients (98.1%). At day 28, mortality was 35.4% in the convalescent-plasma group and 45.0% in the standard-care group (P = 0.03). In a prespecified analysis, this effect was observed mainly in patients who underwent randomization 48 hours or less after the initiation of invasive mechanical ventilation. Serious adverse events did not differ substantially between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS The administration of plasma collected from convalescent donors with a neutralizing antibody titer of at least 1:160 to patients with Covid-19-induced ARDS within 5 days after the initiation of invasive mechanical ventilation significantly reduced mortality at day 28. This effect was mainly observed in patients who underwent randomization 48 hours or less after ventilation initiation. (Funded by the Belgian Health Care Knowledge Center; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04558476.).
PICO Summary
Population
Adult patients with Covid-19-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (n= 475).
Intervention
Convalescent plasma (n= 237).
Comparison
Standard care (n= 238).
Outcome
At day 28, mortality was 35.4% in the convalescent-plasma group and 45.0% in the standard-care group. In a prespecified analysis, this effect was observed mainly in patients who underwent randomization 48 hours or less after the initiation of invasive mechanical ventilation. Serious adverse events did not differ substantially between the two groups.
-
7.
Efficacy of COVID convalescent plasma therapy in hospitalized moderate coronavirus disease 2019 patients
Irawan C, Rumende CM, Sukrisman L, Pitoyo CW, Suwarto S, Susilo A, Mulansari NA, Harahap AT, Priantono D, Syafitri R, et al
Journal of infection in developing countries. 2023;17(1):43-51
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Covid Convalescent Plasma (CCP) failed to demonstrate its efficacy in severe and life-threatening coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. However, the role of CCP in hospitalized moderate cases is unclear. This study aims to examine the efficacy of administering CCP to hospitalized moderate coronavirus disease 2019 patients. METHODOLOGY An open-label randomized controlled clinical trial design was used from November 2020 - August 2021 at two referral hospitals in Jakarta, Indonesia, and the primary outcome was mortality at 14 days. The secondary outcomes were mortality at 28 days, the time-to-discontinuation of supplemental oxygen, and the time-to-hospital discharge. RESULTS This study recruited 44 subjects, and the intervention arm consisted of 21 respondents who received CCP. The control arm consisted of 23 subjects who received standard-of-care treatment. All subjects survived during the fourteen-day follow-up period, and the 28-day mortality rate in the intervention group was lower than the control (4.8% vs 13.0%; p = 0.16, HR = 4.39 (95% CI = 0.45-42.71). There was no statistically significant difference in the time-to-discontinuation of supplemental oxygen and time-to-hospital discharge. During the total follow-up period (41 days), the mortality rate in the intervention group was also lower than the control (4.8% vs 17.4%, p = 0.13, HR = 5.47, 95% CI = 0.60-49.55). CONCLUSIONS This study concluded that in hospitalized moderate COVID-19 patients, CCP did not reduce 14-day mortality compared to the control. Mortality during 28 days and total length of stay (41 days) were lower in the CCP group compared to the control, although they did not reach statistical significance.
-
8.
Effects of 12 mg vs. 6 mg dexamethasone on thromboembolism and bleeding in patients with critical COVID-19 - a post hoc analysis of the randomized, blinded COVID STEROID 2 trial
Jonmarker S, Alarcón F, Litorell J, Granholm A, Alm EJ, Chew M, Russell L, Weihe S, Madsen EK, Meier N, et al
Annals of intensive care. 2023;13(1):12
Abstract
BACKGROUND Thromboembolism is more common in patients with critical COVID-19 than in other critically ill patients, and inflammation has been proposed as a possible mechanism. The aim of this study was to investigate if 12 mg vs. 6 mg dexamethasone daily reduced the composite outcome of death or thromboembolism in patients with critical COVID-19. METHODS Using additional data on thromboembolism and bleeding we did a post hoc analysis of Swedish and Danish intensive care unit patients enrolled in the blinded randomized COVID STEROID 2 trial comparing 12 mg vs. 6 mg dexamethasone daily for up to 10 days. The primary outcome was a composite outcome of death or thromboembolism during intensive care. Secondary outcomes were thromboembolism, major bleeding, and any bleeding during intensive care. RESULTS We included 357 patients. Whilst in intensive care, 53 patients (29%) in the 12 mg group and 53 patients (30%) in the 6 mg group met the primary outcome with an unadjusted absolute risk difference of - 0.5% (95% CI - 10 to 9.5%, p = 1.00) and an adjusted OR of 0.93 (CI 95% 0.58 to 1.49, p = 0.77). We found no firm evidence of differences in any of the secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with critical COVID-19, 12 mg vs. 6 mg dexamethasone daily did not result in a statistically significant difference in the composite outcome of death or thromboembolism. However, uncertainty remains due to the limited number of patients.
-
9.
Effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma on post-COVID chronic olfactory dysfunction
Evman, M. D., Cetin, Z. E.
Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992). 2023;69(11):e20230666
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma injection on the olfactory cleft of patients with post-COVID olfactory dysfunction lasting over 1 year, who were unresponsive to common treatments. METHODS Patients over 18 years of age with post-COVID olfactory dysfunction over 1 year whose complaints did not improve with intranasal steroids and D-panthenol/vitamin A combination nasal sprays with olfactory rehabilitation training for 1 month were prospectively collected and randomized into two groups: intranasal platelet-rich plasma group and control group. At the end of 1 month, Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center olfaction test scores of smell detection threshold and smell identification test were compared accordingly. RESULTS A total of 25 patients were randomized into platelet-rich plasma (n=12) and control (n=13) groups. In the platelet-rich plasma group, the mean smell detection threshold score increased from 5.63 (SD 0.68) to 6.46 (SD 0.45), and the mean smell identification test score increased from 11.42 (SD 1.17) to 15.17 (SD 0.39). In the control group, the mean smell detection threshold score changed from 5.69 (SD 0.66) to 5.77 (SD 0.70), and the mean smell identification test score changed from 11.20 (SD 1.12) to 11.85 (SD 1.57). Post-hoc analysis revealed that similar mean smell detection threshold (mean difference 0.07; p=0.994) and smell identification test (mean difference -0.50; p=0.703) scores were transformed into a significant difference between groups (smell detection threshold mean difference 0.69; p=0.037; smell identification test mean difference 3.32; p<0.001). CONCLUSION At the end of the first month, there was a significant improvement in olfactory threshold values in the platelet-rich plasma group compared to the control group. No side effect or adverse event related to platelet-rich plasma injection was observed.
-
10.
Efficacy and safety of convalescent plasma administration in patients with COVID-19
Escobedo-Sánchez, P. E., de la Cruz-Hernández, I., Ramos-García, M., Sánchez-Yedra, I., García-Vázquez, C., Guzmán-Priego, C. G., García-Vidrios, M. V., Olvera-Hernández, V., Mendoza-García, Y., Ble-Castillo, J. L.
Medicina clinica. 2023
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
INTRODUCTION During the COVID-19 pandemic, several strategies were suggested for the management of the disease, including pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments such as convalescent plasma (CP). The use of CP was suggested due to the beneficial results shown in treating other viral diseases. OBJECTIVE To determine the efficacy and safety of CP obtained from whole blood in patients with COVID-19. METHODS Pilot clinical trial in patients with COVID-19 from a general hospital. The subjects were separated into three groups that received the transfusion of 400ml of CP (n=23) or 400ml of standard plasma (SP) (n=19) and a non-transfused group (NT) (n=37). Patients also received the standard available medical treatment for COVID-19. Subjects were followed up daily from admission to day 21. RESULTS The CP did not improve the survival curve in moderate and severe variants of COVID-19, nor did it reduce the degree of severity of the disease evaluated with the COVID-19 WHO and SOFA clinical progression scale. No patient had a severe post-transfusion reaction to CP. CONCLUSIONS Treatment with CP does not reduce the mortality of patients even when its administration has a high degree of safety. Introduction: During the COVID-19 pandemic, several strategies were suggested for the management of the disease, including pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments such as convalescent plasma (CP). The use of CP was suggested due to the beneficial results shown in treating other viral diseases. Objective: To determine the efficacy and safety of CP obtained from whole blood in patients with COVID-19. Methods: Pilot clinical trial in patients with COVID-19 from a general hospital. The subjects were separated into three groups that received the transfusion of 400 ml of CP (n= 23) or 400 ml of standard plasma (SP) (n= 19) and a non-transfused group (NT) (n= 37). Patients also received the standard available medical treatment for COVID 19. Subjects were followed up daily from admission to day 21. Results. CP did not improve the survival curve in moderate and severe variants of COVID-19, nor did it reduce the degree of severity of the disease evaluated with the COVID-19 WHO and SOFA clinical progression scale. No patient had a severe post-transfusion reaction to CP. Conclusions: Treatment with CP does not reduce the mortality of patients even when its administration has a high degree of safety. eng