The efficacy of convalescent plasma for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unclear. Although most randomized controlled trials have shown negative results, uncontrolled studies have suggested that the antibody content could influence patient outcomes. We conducted an open-label, randomized controlled trial of convalescent plasma for adults with COVID-19 receiving oxygen within 12 d of respiratory symptom onset (NCT04348656). Patients were allocated 2:1 to 500 ml of convalescent plasma or standard of care. The composite primary outcome was intubation or death by 30 d. Exploratory analyses of the effect of convalescent plasma antibodies on the primary outcome was assessed by logistic regression. The trial was terminated at 78% of planned enrollment after meeting stopping criteria for futility. In total, 940 patients were randomized, and 921 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Intubation or death occurred in 199/614 (32.4%) patients in the convalescent plasma arm and 86/307 (28.0%) patients in the standard of care arm—relative risk (RR) = 1.16 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94–1.43, P = 0.18). Patients in the convalescent plasma arm had more serious adverse events (33.4% versus 26.4%; RR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.02–1.57, P = 0.034). The antibody content significantly modulated the therapeutic effect of convalescent plasma. In multivariate analysis, each standardized log increase in neutralization or antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity independently reduced the potential harmful effect of plasma (odds ratio (OR) = 0.74, 95% CI 0.57–0.95 and OR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.50–0.87, respectively), whereas IgG against the full transmembrane spike protein increased it (OR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.14–2.05). Convalescent plasma did not reduce the risk of intubation or death at 30 d in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Transfusion of convalescent plasma with unfavorable antibody profiles could be associated with worse clinical outcomes compared to standard care.
• Fifty percent of TA-GVHD cases occur in patients who would not be predicted to be at risk for TA-GVHD by current guidelines for blood irradiation.• Donor lymphocytes whose HLA antigens are all shared by the recipient dominate in TA-GVHD cases, particularly in immune-competent recipients.Transfusion-associated graft-versus-host disease (TA-GVHD) is a rare complication of blood transfusion. The clinicolaboratory features of TA-GVHD and the relative contributions of recipient and component factors remain poorly understood. We conducted a systematic review of TA-GVHD reports. The HLA relationship between donor and recipient was classified as D 5 0 when no donor antigens were foreign to the recipient vs D ‡ 1 when ‡1 donor antigen disparity occurred. We identified 348 unique cases. Criteria for component irradiation were met in 48.9% of cases (34.5% immune-compromised, 14.4% related-donor), although nonirradiated components were transfused in the vast majority of these (97.6%). Components were typically whole blood and red cells. When reported, component storage duration was £10 days in 94%, and 23 (6.6%) were leukoreduced (10 bedside, 2 prestorage, and 11 unknown). Among 84 cases with HLA data available, the category of D 5 0 was present in 60 patients (71%) at either HLA class I or II loci and was more common among recipients without traditional indications for component irradiation. These data challenge the historic emphasis on host immune defects in the pathogenesis of TA-GVHD. The dominant mechanism of TA-GVHD in both immunocompetent and compromised hosts is exposure to viable donor lymphocytes not recognized as foreign by, but able to respond against, the recipient. (Blood. 2015;126(3):406-414)
The ability of residents to cope with the stress of the SARS outbreak was enhanced by the communication of relevant information and by the leadership of their supervisors and infection control officers. It is hoped that training programs for health care professionals will be able to implement these tenets of crisis management as they develop strategies for dealing with future health threats.
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.