Background Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX). Methods In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung–Knapp–Sidik–Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. Results A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. Conclusions Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care.
Background: The use of convalescent plasma (CP) has been considered for its immunological mechanisms that could benefit patients in moderate and severe stages of COVID-19. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of the use of donor CP for COVID-19. Material and methods: A double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted from May to October 2020. Thirty-nine participants with moderate (II) and severe (III) stages of COVID-19 confirmed by RT-PCR were included. The study randomization rate was set at 3:1. CPs were chosen for application with a neutralizing antibody titer of ≥1:32. Results: We observed a significantly lower 21-day post-transfusion mortality HR: 0.17 (95.0% CI [0.07–0.45, p < 0.001]) in the group receiving CP compared with the control group; protective units (PU) in the group receiving convalescent plasma after seven days were significantly higher (512 (32–16,384) vs. 96 (32–256), p = 0.01); the PAO2/FIO2 index showed a significant improvement in the group receiving CP (251.01 (109.4) vs. 109.2 (62.4), p < 0.001, in the control group). Conclusion: CP is safe and effective, as it decreased mortality in the CP group compared with the control group.
To identify this increasingly common pathology, known as multiple myeloma (MM), it is necessary to refer to the specific factors that characterize it; to this end, the classic criteria known as CRAB (hyperkalemia, renal failure, anemia, and lytic lesions) are available, in which renal failure is one of the most frequent complications. Recently, three indisputable biomarkers have been described for the diagnostic support for MM, which are: more than 10% of clonal plasma cells in bone marrow or, a biopsy that corroborates the presence of a plasmacytoma, light chain ratio ≥ 100 mg/dL and more than one focal lesion on magnetic resonance imaging. A differential diagnosis for plasma cell leukemia, solitary bone plasmacytoma, and extramedullary plasmacytoma should always be considered. Being this an incurable disease, a lot of research has been done regarding its therapeutic management, whose main objective is the disappearance of plasma cells and the patient clinical improvement. Melphalan was the first drug that showed a benefit in 1958 and afterward, with the addition of a steroid as a second drug, it was possible to improve response rates. Subsequently, different molecules were studied, forming multiple combinations, and achieving better rates of overall survival and progression-free survival. Years later, with the arrival of proteasome inhibitors such as bortezomib, and immunomodulators such as thalidomide and lenalidomide, an important turnaround in the disease has been seen, as deeper responses, more prolonged remissions, and improvement in the quality of life of patients have been achieved. This consensus has the purpose of integrating a group of Mexican specialists and promoting the updating of this pathology.
In SARS-CoV-2, there is an overactivation of the immune system that triggers systemic hyperinflammation that causes lung damage; therefore, the use of convalescent plasma (CP) has been considered for its immunological mechanisms that could benefit patients in moderate and severe stages of the disease. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of the use of convalescent donor plasma for COVID-19 to reduce mortality in patients with SARS-CoV-2 stage II (moderate) and stage III (severe) disease.Material and methodsA double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted from May 20 to December 10, 2020. Thirty-nine participants with moderate (II) and severe (III) stage COVID-19 confirmed by RT-PCR and tomography were included. The study randomization rate was set at 3:1. Convalescent plasmas were chosen for application with a neutralizing antibody titer of ≥ 1:32. Patient follow-up included assessment by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score and use of the Oxygenation Index (PAO2/FIO2) index and monitoring of blood markers, such as C Reactive Protein (CRP), D-Dimer (DD), ferritin, IgG antibody titers against SARS-COV-2, and inflammatory cytokines at days three and seven post-treatment.ResultsWe observed a significantly lower 21-day post-transfusion mortality HR: 0.17 [95.0% CI 0.07-0.45, p<0.001] in the group receiving convalescent plasma compared to the control group; protective units (PU) in the group receiving convalescent plasma after seven days were significantly higher 512 (32-16384) vs 96 (32-256), p=0.01; the SOFA scale decreased to 3.7 ± 2.02 vs 7.1 ± 2.8, p<0.001 and the PAO2/FIO2 index showed a significant improvement in the group receiving convalescent plasma 251.01 ± 109.4 vs 109.2 ± 62.4, p<0.001, vs the control group. In terms of safety, no adverse events related to the transfusion of convalescent plasma were observed.ConclusionConvalescent plasma is safe and effective, as it decreases mortality in the convalescent plasma group compared to the control group.
Para identificar una patología cada vez más común, conocida como mieloma múltiple, es necesario hacer alusión de los factores específicos que la caracterizan. Para ello existen los clásicos criterios conocidos como CRAB (hipercalcemia, insuficiencia renal, anemia y lesiones líticas), siendo la insuficiencia renal una de sus complicaciones más frecuentes. Recientemente se han descrito tres biomarcadores indiscutibles para el apoyo diagnóstico del mieloma múltiple, que son: más del 10% de células plasmáticas clonales en medula ósea o biopsia que corrobora la presencia de un plasmocitoma, relación de cadenas ligeras ≥ 100 mg/dl y más de una lesión focal en resonancia magnética. Se debe tomar siempre en cuenta el diagnóstico diferencial con leucemia de células plasmáticas, plasmocitoma óseo solitario y plasmocitoma extramedular. Al ser una enfermedad incurable, se ha investigado mucho en cuanto al manejo terapéutico, el cual tiene como objetivo principal la desaparición de las células plasmáticas y la mejoría clínica del paciente. El primer fármaco que demostró algún beneficio fue el melfalán en el año 1958 y posteriormente al adicionar un esteroide como segundo fármaco se logró mejorar las tasas de respuesta. Después se fueron estudiando diferentes moléculas, con las que se han realizado múltiples combinaciones, alcanzando mejores tasas de supervivencia global y supervivencia libre de progresión. Años más tarde, con la llegada de los inhibidores de proteosoma como el bortezomib, así como de los agentes inmunomoduladores como la talidomida y la lenalidomida, se presenta un giro importante en la enfermedad, ya que se logran respuestas más profundas, periodo de remisiones más prolongadas y mejoría en la calidad de vida de los pacientes. Este consenso tiene la finalidad de integrar a un grupo de especialistas mexicanos y promover la actualización de esta patología.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.