Key PointsQuestionWhat is the effect of convalescent plasma therapy added to standard treatment, compared with standard treatment alone, on clinical outcomes in patients with severe or life-threatening coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)?FindingIn this randomized clinical trial that included 103 patients and was terminated early, the hazard ratio for time to clinical improvement within 28 days in the convalescent plasma group vs the standard treatment group was 1.40 and was not statistically significant.MeaningAmong patients with severe or life-threatening COVID-19, convalescent plasma therapy added to standard treatment did not significantly improve the time to clinical improvement within 28 days, although the trial was terminated early and may have been underpowered to detect a clinically important difference.

BACKGROUND The lack of effective treatments against the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) has led to the exploratory use of convalescent plasma for treating COVID‐19. Case reports and case series have shown encouraging results. This study investigated SARS‐CoV‐2 antibodies and epidemiological characteristics in convalescent plasma donors, to identify criteria for donor selection. METHODS Recovered COVID‐19 patients, aged 18‐55 years, who had experienced no symptoms for more than 2 weeks, were recruited. Donor characteristics such as disease presentations were collected and SARS‐CoV‐2 N‐specific IgM, IgG, and S‐RBD‐specific IgG levels were measured by enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). RESULTS Whereas levels of N‐specific IgM antibody declined after recovery, S‐RBD‐specific and N‐specific IgG antibodies increased after 4 weeks from the onset of symptoms, with no significant correlation to age, sex, or ABO blood type. Donors with the disease presentation of fever exceeding 38.5°C or lasting longer than 3 days exhibited higher levels of S‐RBD‐specific IgG antibodies at the time of donation. Of the 49 convalescent plasma donors, 90% had an S‐RBD‐specific IgG titer of ≥1:160 and 78% had a titer of ≥1:640 at the time of plasma donation. Of the 30 convalescent plasma donors, who had donated plasma later than 28 days after the onset of symptoms and had a disease presentation of fever lasting longer than 3 days or a body temperature exceeding 38.5°C, 100% had an S‐RBD‐specific IgG titer of ≥1:160 and 93% had a titer of ≥1:640. CONCLUSION This study indicates that the S‐RBD‐specific IgG antibody reaches higher levels after 4 weeks from the onset of COVID‐19 symptoms. We recommend the following selection criteria for optimal donation of COVID‐19 convalescent plasma: 28 days after the onset of symptoms and with a disease presentation of fever lasting longer than 3 days or a body temperature exceeding 38.5°C. Selection based on these criteria can ensure a high likelihood of achieving sufficiently high S‐RBD‐specific IgG titers.

Background COVID-19 has caused a global pandemic and the death toll is increasing. However, there is no definitive information regarding the type of clinical specimens that is the best for SARS-CoV-2 detection, the antibody levels in patients with different duration of disease, and the relationship between antibody level and viral load. Methods Nasopharyngeal swabs, anal swabs, saliva, blood, and urine specimens were collected from patients with a course of disease ranging from 7 to 69 days. Viral load in different specimen types was measured using droplet digital PCR (ddPCR). Meanwhile, anti-nucleocapsid protein (anti-N) IgM and IgG antibodies and anti-spike protein receptor-binding domain (anti-S-RBD) IgG antibody in all serum samples were tested using ELISA. Results The positive detection rate in nasopharyngeal swab was the highest (54.05%), followed by anal swab (24.32%), and the positive detection rate in saliva, blood, and urine was 16.22%, 10.81%, and 5.41%, respectively. However, some patients with negative nasopharyngeal swabs had other specimens tested positive. There was no significant correlation between antibody level and days after symptoms onset or viral load. Conclusions Other specimens could be positive in patients with negative nasopharyngeal swabs, suggesting that for patients in the recovery period, specimens other than nasopharyngeal swabs should also be tested to avoid false negative results, and anal swabs are recommended. The antibody level had no correlation with days after symptoms onset or the viral load of nasopharyngeal swabs, suggesting that the antibody level may also be affected by other factors.

Partly as a result of the rapid growth in Chinese higher education, graduate placement has become a critical issue facing colleges and universties. In response, one of the policy initiatives adopted by the Chinese government is for higher education institutions to put an emphasis on entrepreneurship education. In 2002, the Ministry of Education launched a pilot program on carrying out entrepreneurship education in nine prestigious higher education institutions in China. Since then, many colleges and universities have adopted this innovation in education. This study attempts to examine entrepreneurship education as an innovative solution to the challenges facing higher education in China. It first introduces the background for promoting entrepreneurship education in China, analyzes the entrepreneurship education programs and activities in three selected universities, assesses the state of entrepreneurship education both from a student perspective and also through a comparison with developments in the United States, and concludes with recommendations for further developments in entrepreneurship education in China’s colleges and universities

No abstract