Use of convalescent plasma therapy in SARS patients in Hong Kong

Convalescent plasma for the treatment of patients with COVID-19: the Singapore experience and lessons learnt

INTRODUCTION

We report Singapore's convalescent plasma (CP) programme during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on historical data and its potential therapeutic promise, CP was offered as an experimental treatment option for severe or high-risk COVID-19 patients when established therapeutics were lacking.

METHODS

The CP programme was implemented under monitored expanded access approved by Singapore's Ministry of Health. CP donors were primarily selected based on specific antibody titres, while suitable recipients were chosen based on risk factors and disease severity. Operational protocols and logistical considerations are discussed in-depth.

RESULTS

Between April 2020 and September 2020, the CP donor programme successfully collected 33 plasma units from 27 qualified donors. Seven patients received CP treatment under this programme. Six of the seven recipients of CP survived for more than 28 days post-transfusion and were discharged alive. Given the availability of other validated therapeutic options, the CP programme was officially suspended in September 2021.

CONCLUSION

This study provides a comprehensive overview of the intricacies of Singapore's CP programme, from its operational challenges to the observed clinical outcomes, while highlighting the potential benefits and complexities of CP as a therapeutic option. Successful implementation of the CP programme requires robust collaboration across multidisciplinary teams. Access to serological tests was crucial for donor selection. Both the selection of CP with high neutralising antibodies and careful selection of appropriate recipients are key aspects to optimise the therapeutic success of CP. A meticulous approach is warranted if CP were to be used in future pandemics.

Estimates of actual and potential lives saved in the United States from the use of COVID-19 convalescent plasma

In the Spring of 2020, the United States of America (USA) deployed COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) to treat hospitalized patients. Over 500,000 patients were treated with CCP during the first year of the pandemic. In this study, we estimated the number of actual inpatient lives saved by CCP treatment in the United States of America based on CCP weekly use, weekly national mortality data, and CCP mortality reduction data from meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials and real-world data. We also estimate the potential number of lives saved if CCP had been deployed for 100% of hospitalized patients or used in 15 to 75% of outpatients. Depending on the assumptions modeled in stratified analyses, we estimated that CCP saved between 16,476 and 66,296 lives. The CCP ideal use might have saved as many as 234,869 lives and prevented 1,136,133 hospitalizations. CCP deployment was a successful strategy for ameliorating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA. This experience has important implications for convalescent plasma use in future infectious disease emergencies.

Convalescent anti-SARS-CoV-2 plasma for the treatment of patients with COVID-19: a retrospective study RESCOVID-19

PURPOSE

Convalescent plasma (CP) collected from people who recovered from COVID-19 became a rapidly available treatment modality in numerous countries, including the Czech Republic. The aims of our study were to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of CP in the treatment of COVID-19.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study involved six Czech hospitals. This study enrolled patients with and without CP treatment who were hospitalized between April 2020 and April 2021. Propensity score matching and logistic regression analysis were performed to evaluate the influence of CP administration and its timing on the in-hospital survival of COVID-19 patients.

RESULTS

A total of 1,498 patients were enrolled in the study; 406 (27%) were administered CP, and 1,092 (73%) were not treated with CP. The propensity score-matched control group consisted of 1,218 subjects. The survival of patients treated with CP was 79%, while that of patients in the matched control group was 62% (P<0.001). Moreover, the chance of survival was significantly greater when CP was administered within three days after the onset of COVID-19 symptoms than when CP was administered after four or more days (87% vs. 76%, P <0.001). In addition, adverse effects related to CP administration were recorded in only 2% of patients and were considered mild in all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated that the administration of CP was safe and possibly associated with positive effects that were more pronounced if CP was administered within the first three days after the onset of COVID-19 symptoms.

The role of convalescent plasma and hyperimmune immunoglobulins in the COVID-19 pandemic, including implications for future preparedness

Introduction

When Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) struck the world in December 2019, initiatives started to investigate the efficacy of convalescent plasma, a readily available source of passive antibodies, collected from recovered patients as a therapeutic option. This was based on historical observational data from previous virus outbreaks.

Methods

A scoping review was conducted on the efficacy and safety of convalescent plasma and hyperimmune immunoglobulins for COVID-19 treatment. This review included the latest Cochrane systematic review update on 30-day mortality and safety. We also covered use in pediatric and immunocompromised patients, as well as the logistic challenges faced in donor recruitment and plasma collection in general. Challenges for low resource countries were specifically highlighted.

Results

A major challenge is the high donation frequency required from first-time donors to ensure a safe product, which minimizes the risk of transfusion-transmitted infectious. This is particularly difficult in low- and middle- income countries due to inadequate infrastructure and insufficient blood product supplies. High-certainty evidence indicates that convalescent plasma does not reduce mortality or significantly improve clinical outcomes in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 infection. However, CCP may provide a viable treatment for patients unable to mount an endogenous immune response to SARS-CoV-2, based on mostly observational studies and subgroup data of published and ongoing randomized trials. Convalescent plasma has been shown to be safe in adults and children with COVID-19 infection. However, the efficacy in pediatric patients remains unclear.

Discussion

Data on efficacy and safety of CCP are still underway in ongoing (randomized) studies and by reporting the challenges, limitations and successes encountered to-date, research gaps were identified to be addressed for the future.

Conclusion

This experience serves as a valuable example for future pandemic preparedness, particularly when therapeutic options are limited, and vaccines are either being developed or ineffective due to underlying immunosuppression.

A Brief History of Polyclonal Antibody Therapies Against Bacterial and Viral Diseases Before COVID-19

The use of the serum or plasma of patients or animals who have recovered from an infectious disease, or had been immunized with a relevant antigen, to treat or prevent the same infection in others began in the late 1880s when French and German scientists uncovered, one step at a time, several of the elements of the immune system's response to infection. A key finding was that the damage caused by some bacteria depends upon their secreted toxins which can be neutralized by biologic agents. Antitoxins to diphtheria and tetanus began to be manufactured in large animals in France, Germany, and the US in the 1890s and were soon being used worldwide. The impact of diphtheria antitoxin on childhood mortality was profound. Shortly after the development of antitoxins, convalescent serum began to be used for its anti-bactericidal properties thus addressing serious infections caused by non-toxin-producing organisms. The effectiveness of antitoxins and antisera was demonstrated by examining mortality rates in hospitals before and after the introduction of antitoxins, by comparisons of treated and untreated patients, by comparing early and late treatment and dosage, by examining vital data mortality trends, and by several randomized and alternate assignment trials. Antitoxins continue to have a role in the rare cases of diphtheria and other conditions largely eradicated by immunization, but serum therapy nearly disappeared from the medical armamentarium with the development of antibiotics in the 1940s. Inasmuch as new human pathogens are now emerging with unprecedented regularity as seen in the recent COVID-19 pandemic, and because specific therapies are unlikely to be available for them, plasma-based antibody therapies are likely to again carve out a niche in infectious disease control.

The effect of convalescent plasma therapy on the rate of nucleic acid negative conversion in patients with persistent COVID-19 test positivity

Objective

This study investigates the association between convalescent plasma therapy and the negative conversion rate in patients with persistent COVID-19 test positivity.

Method

A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with severe or mild to moderate COVID-19 whose viral nucleic acid tests remained positive for over 30 days. Patients were categorized into two groups: those who administered convalescent plasma therapy and those who were not. Data collected included information on therapy strategies used (convalescent plasma, corticosteroids, interferons, etc.), patients' demographic characteristics, comorbidities, therapeutic medications, and nucleic acid testing results. Patients in the convalescent plasma therapy group were matched 1:2 ratio with those in the non-convalescent plasma therapy group. Cumulative negative conversion rates on the fifth, tenth, and fifteenth days post-therapy initiation were analyzed as dependent variables. Independent variables included therapy strategies, demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and therapeutic medication usage. Univariate analysis was conducted, and factors with a p-value (P) less than 0.2 were included in a paired Cox proportional hazards model.

Results

There was no statistically significant difference in the cumulative negative conversion rate between the convalescent plasma therapy group and the non-convalescent plasma therapy group on the fifth, tenth, and fifteenth days. Specifically, on day the fifth, the negative conversion rate was 41.46% in the convalescent plasma therapy group compared to 34.15% in the non-convalescent plasma therapy group (HR: 1.72, 95% CI: 0.82-3.61, P = 0.15). On the tenth day, it was 63.41% in the convalescent plasma therapy group and 63.41% in the non-convalescent plasma therapy group (HR: 1.25, 95% CI: 0.69∼2.26, P = 0.46). On the fifteenth day, the negative conversion rate was 85.37% in the convalescent plasma therapy group and 75.61% in the non-convalescent plasma therapy group (HR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.71-1.97, P = 0.51).

Conclusion

Our finding does not support the hypothesis that convalescent plasma therapy could accelerate the time to negative conversion in patients who consistently test positive for COVID-19.

In vitro antibody-mediated SARS-CoV-2 infection suppression through human ACE2 receptor blockade

Vaccines and antibodies that specifically target or neutralize components of the SARS-CoV-2 virus are effective in prevention and treatment of human patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, vaccines and SARS-CoV-2 neutralization antibodies target a subset of epitopes of viral proteins, and the fast evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the continuing emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants confer SARS-CoV-2 immune escape from these therapies. ACE2 is the human cell receptor that serves as the entry point for SARS-CoV-2 into human cells and thus is the gatekeeper for SARS-CoV-2 infection of humans. We report here the development of 4G8C11, an anti-human ACE2 receptor monoclonal antibody that recognizes ACE2 on human cell surfaces. We determined that 4G8C11 blocks SARS-CoV-2 and variant infection of ACE2+ human cells. Furthermore, 4G8C11 has minimal effects on ACE2 receptor activity. 4G8C11 is therefore a monoclonal antibody for ACE2 receptor detection and potentially an effective immunotherapeutic agent for SARS-CoV-2 and variants.

From Detection to Protection: Antibodies and Their Crucial Role in Diagnosing and Combatting SARS-CoV-2

Understanding the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19, is crucial to comprehending disease progression and the significance of vaccine and therapeutic development. The emergence of highly contagious variants poses a significant challenge to humoral immunity, underscoring the necessity of grasping the intricacies of specific antibodies. This review emphasizes the pivotal role of antibodies in shaping immune responses and their implications for diagnosing, preventing, and treating SARS-CoV-2 infection. It delves into the kinetics and characteristics of the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 and explores current antibody-based diagnostics, discussing their strengths, clinical utility, and limitations. Furthermore, we underscore the therapeutic potential of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, discussing various antibody-based therapies such as monoclonal antibodies, polyclonal antibodies, anti-cytokines, convalescent plasma, and hyperimmunoglobulin-based therapies. Moreover, we offer insights into antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, emphasizing the significance of neutralizing antibodies in order to confer immunity to SARS-CoV-2, along with emerging variants of concern (VOCs) and circulating Omicron subvariants. We also highlight challenges in the field, such as the risks of antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, and shed light on the challenges associated with the original antigenic sin (OAS) effect and long COVID. Overall, this review intends to provide valuable insights, which are crucial to advancing sensitive diagnostic tools, identifying efficient antibody-based therapeutics, and developing effective vaccines to combat the evolving threat of SARS-CoV-2 variants on a global scale.

Next-generation treatments: Immunotherapy and advanced therapies for COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), emerged in 2019 following prior outbreaks of coronaviruses like SARS and MERS in recent decades, underscoring their high potential of infectivity in humans. Insights from previous outbreaks of SARS and MERS have played a significant role in developing effective strategies to mitigate the global impact of SARS-CoV-2. As of January 7, 2024, there have been 774,075,242 confirmed cases of COVID-19 worldwide. To date, 13.59 billion vaccine doses have been administered, and there have been 7,012,986 documented fatalities (https://www.who.int/) Despite significant progress in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic, the rapid evolution of SARS-CoV-2 challenges human defenses, presenting ongoing global challenges. The emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 lineages, shaped by mutation and recombination processes, has led to successive waves of infections. This scenario reveals the need for next-generation vaccines as a crucial requirement for ensuring ongoing protection against SARS-CoV-2. This demand calls for formulations that trigger a robust adaptive immune response without leading the acute inflammation linked with the infection. Key mutations detected in the Spike protein, a critical target for neutralizing antibodies and vaccine design -specifically within the Receptor Binding Domain region of Omicron variant lineages (B.1.1.529), currently dominant worldwide, have intensified concerns due to their association with immunity evasion from prior vaccinations and infections. As the world deals with this evolving threat, the narrative extends to the realm of emerging variants, each displaying new mutations with implications that remain largely misunderstood. Notably, the JN.1 Omicron lineage is gaining global prevalence, and early findings suggest it stands among the immune-evading variants, a characteristic attributed to its mutation L455S. Moreover, the detrimental consequences of the novel emergence of SARS-CoV-2 lineages bear a particularly critical impact on immunocompromised individuals and older adults. Immunocompromised individuals face challenges such as suboptimal responses to COVID-19 vaccines, rendering them more susceptible to severe disease. Similarly, older adults have an increased risk of severe disease and the presence of comorbid conditions, find themselves at a heightened vulnerability to develop COVID-19 disease. Thus, recognizing these intricate factors is crucial for effectively tailoring public health strategies to protect these vulnerable populations. In this context, this review aims to describe, analyze, and discuss the current progress of the next-generation treatments encompassing immunotherapeutic approaches and advanced therapies emerging as complements that will offer solutions to counter the disadvantages of the existing options. Preliminary outcomes show that these strategies target the virus and address the immunomodulatory responses associated with COVID-19. Furthermore, the capacity to promote tissue repair has been demonstrated, which can be particularly noteworthy for immunocompromised individuals who stand as vulnerable actors in the global landscape of coronavirus infections. The emerging next-generation treatments possess broader potential, offering protection against a wide range of variants and enhancing the ability to counter the impact of the constant evolution of the virus. Furthermore, advanced therapies are projected as potential treatment alternatives for managing Chronic Post-COVID-19 syndromeand addressing its associated long-term complications.

Global Perspective on COVID-19 Therapies, Cardiovascular Outcomes, and Implications for Long COVID: A State-of-the-Art Review

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in many therapies, of which many are repurposed and used for other diseases in the last decade such in Influenza and Ebola. We intend to provide a robust foundation for cardiovascular outcomes of the therapies to better understand the rationale for the clinical trials that were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to gain more clarity on the steps moving forward should the repurposing provide clinical benefit in pandemic situations. With this state-of-the-art review, we aim to improve the understanding of the cardiovascular involvement of the therapies prior to, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic to provide meaningful findings to the cardiovascular specialists and clinical trials for therapies, moving on from the period of pandemic urgency.

A mass cytometry approach to track the evolution of T cell responses during infection and immunotherapy by paired T cell receptor repertoire and T cell differentiation state analysis

T cell receptor (TCR) recognition followed by clonal expansion is a fundamental feature of adaptive immune responses. Here, we developed a mass cytometric (CyTOF) approach combining antibodies specific for different TCR Vα- and Vβ-chains with antibodies against T cell activation and differentiation proteins to identify antigen-specific expansions of T cell subsets and assess aspects of cellular function. This strategy allowed for the identification of expansions of specific Vβ and Vα chain expressing CD8+ and CD4+ T cells with varying differentiation states in response to Listeria monocytogenes, tumors, and respiratory influenza infection. Expanded Vβ chain expressing T cells could be directly linked to the recognition of specific antigens from Listeria, tumor cells, or influenza. In the setting of influenza infection, we showed that the common therapeutic approaches of intramuscular vaccination or convalescent serum transfer altered the clonal diversity and differentiation state of responding T cells. Thus, we present a new method to monitor broad changes in TCR specificity paired with T cell differentiation during adaptive immune responses.

The Effect of COVID Convalescent Plasma on Hospital Stay: A Retrospective Observational Study from a Tertiary Care Hospital in North India

INTRODUCTION

COVID convalescent plasma (CCP) has been used as standard of care in patients all over the world. CCP is plasma collected from recently infected and currently recovered COVID-19 patients, which contains antiviral antibodies that can be used to treat patients with COVID-19. Several studies have shown a shorter hospital stay and lower mortality in patients treated with convalescent plasma in comparison with those not treated with it.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to determine the effect of COVID convalescent plasma (CCP) on the length of hospital stay in symptomatic patients and to determine outcome of the disease in patients who were administered CCP.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study done at a tertiary health care centre from July 2020 to May 2021, including patients who received CCP during the course of their stay in the hospital.

RESULTS

Among 257 participants, the patients with multiple comorbidities who were administered CCP had the longest average length of stay in the hospital which was 15 days, out of which, 92 (35.8%) patients were discharged while 9 (3.5%) patients died. Also, the maximum number of deaths was observed in those patients who had no associated comorbidity, being 11 (4.3%). It was observed that earlier administration of CCP in patients (< 5 days from symptom onset) was associated with a higher number of discharges as compared to deaths.

CONCLUSION

Our study indicates that CCP may be efficient in treating COVID-19 patients if given in early course of the disease.

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)

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.

Long-term antibody titers variation in unvaccinated patients receiving convalescent plasma or placebo for severe SARS-CoV-2 pulmonary infection

BACKGROUND

Convalescent plasma (CP) became a prominent treatment in the early stages of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. In Argentina, a randomized clinical trial was executed to compare the use of CP in inpatients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia versus placebo. No differences in clinical outcomes or overall mortality between groups were observed. We conducted a cohort study in outpatients enrolled in the trial to describe long-term antibody titer variations between CP and placebo recipients.

METHODS

Patients' total SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies against spike protein were collected 3, 6 and 12 months after hospital discharge from August 2020 to December 2021. In addition, reinfections, deaths and vaccination status were retrieved. Statistical analysis was performed using antibody geometric mean titers (GMT). All estimations were made considering the date of the trial infusion (placebo or CP) as time 0.

RESULTS

From the 93 patients included in the follow-up, 64 had received CP and 29 placebo. We excluded all 12-month measurements because they were collected after the patients' vaccination date. At 90 days post-infusion, patients had an antibody GMT of 8.1 (IQR 7.4-8.1) in the CP group and 8.8 (IQR 8.1-9.1) in the placebo group. At 180 days, both groups had a GMT of 8.1 (IQR 7.4-8.1). No statistical differences in GMT were found between CP and placebo groups at 90 days (p = 0.12) and 180 days (p = 0.25). No patients registered a new COVID-19 infection; one died in the CP group from an ischemic stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

No differences were observed in long-term antibody titers in unvaccinated patients that received CP or placebo after severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

Efficacy and Safety of Treatment with Plasma from COVID-19-Recovered Individuals

Convalescent plasma therapy, which involves administering plasma from recovered coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients to infected individuals, is being explored as a potential treatment for severe cases of COVID-19. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of convalescent plasma therapy in COVID-19 patients with moderate to severe illness. An open-label, single-arm intervention study was conducted without a control group. Plasma collected from recovered COVID-19 patients was administered to eligible participants. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who were placed on artificial ventilation or died within 14 days of transfusion. Secondary endpoints included clinical improvement, viral load measurements, and adverse event monitoring. A total of 59 cases were included in the study. The primary endpoint was evaluated by comparing the rate obtained in the study to an existing rate of 25%. The study also assessed clinical improvement, viral load changes, and safety endpoints through adverse event monitoring. Convalescent plasma therapy shows potential as a treatment option for COVID-19. This study aimed to provide evidence for the efficacy and safety of this therapy and may contribute to its future use in treating severe cases of COVID-19.

Perceptions of Saudis Toward Participating in the COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma Clinical Trial

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has been a major public health and economic issue worldwide. Even though vaccines have been developed to reduce the spread of the infection, treating patients remains a significant challenge. This study aims to measure the perceptions of Saudis toward participating in the COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma Clinical Trial. Method A cross-sectional study measuring the perceptions of Saudis toward participating in the COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma Clinical Trial was conducted with participants who had recovered from COVID-19. The study used an online questionnaire covering variables related to demographics, awareness, attitudes, perceptions, and plans for improvement. Results A sample of 1,051 participants participated in the questionnaire. A total of 85% had recovered from COVID-19, only 2.76% had participated in clinical trials before, and 83.44% would participate if they were advised or knew about them. The participants showed a high level of education, with 88% having obtained a degree and most used social media. The results can be biased toward the participants who get their knowledge from social media and hope to learn about things on social media. The gap in knowledge about clinical trials among the participants indicated that certain age groups could be targeted through channels where they communicate the most. Conclusion Engaging the community in clinical trials and educating others about their value by sharing experiences would help promote clinical trials and activate donations.

The prevention and treatment of COVID-19 in patients treated with hemodialysis

Patients treated with hemodialysis are often immunocompromised due to concomitant disease. As a result, this population is at high risk of infection and mortality from COVID-19. In addition to symptomatic treatment, a series of antiviral drugs targeting COVID-19 are now emerging. However, these antivirals are used mainly in mild or moderate patients with high-risk factors for progression to severe disease and are not available as pre- or post-exposure prophylaxis for COVID-19. There is a lack of clinical data on the use of anti-COVID-19 drugs, especially in patients treated with hemodialysis, therefore, vaccination remains the main measure to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in these patients. Here, we review the clinical features and prognosis of patients on hemodialysis infected with SARS-CoV-2, the main anti-COVID-19 drugs currently available for clinical use, and the safety and efficacy of anti-COVID-19 drugs or COVID-19 vaccination in patients treated with hemodialysis. This information will provide a reference for the treatment and vaccination of COVID-19 in patients treated with hemodialysis and maximize the health benefits of these patients during the outbreak.

Trends of participants in convalescent plasma donation for COVID-19 in Japan as the pandemic evolved

Background

We aimed to investigate chronological changes in the characteristics of participants in a coronavirus disease 2019 convalescent plasma donation study that may benefit optimal collection methods in the future.

Methods

Data from a convalescent plasma donation study from April 30, 2020 to November 5, 2021 were collected and analyzed. After August 23, 2021, an interim analysis of factors linked to higher antibody titers led us to restrict our participant recruitment criteria to participants who were within 4 months of disease onset and to patients who were otherwise most likely to have sufficiently high antibody titers. Overall, 1299 samples from 1179 patients were analyzed.

Results

Over the duration of the study, 35.9% of the samples were deemed eligible for convalescent plasma collection. The overall eligibility rate initially declined, dipping to <20% after one year. During this period, the proportion of enrolled samples from patients who had severe illness also declined, and the proportion of samples from participants who were >120 days post disease onset increased. After the addition of days from onset and vaccination status to our participant recruitment criteria, the eligibility rate improved significantly.

Conclusions

As outbreaks of emerging infectious disease occur, it is desirable to construct and implement a scheme for convalescent plasma donation promptly and to monitor the eligibility rate over time. If it declines, promptly analyze and resolve the associated factors. Additionally, vaccine development and infection prevalence are likely to influence the effective recruitment of participants with high antibody titers.

Design of VA CoronavirUs Research and Efficacy Studies-1 (VA CURES-1): A double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial of COVID-19 convalescent plasma in hospitalized patients with early respiratory compromise

BACKGROUND

Effective therapeutics for severe acute respiratory syndrome CoronaVirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are evolving. Under Emergency Use Authorization, COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) was widely used in individuals hospitalized for COVID-19, but few randomized controlled trials supported its efficacy to limit respiratory failure or death.

METHODS

VA CoronavirUs Research and Efficacy Studies-1 (VA CURES-1) was a double-blind, multi-site, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of CCP with conventional therapy in hospitalized Veterans with SARS-CoV-2 infection and early respiratory compromise (requirement for oxygen). Participants (planned sample size 702) were randomized 1:1 to receive CCP with high titer neutralizing activity or 0.9% saline, stratified by site and age (≥65 versus <65 years old). Participants were followed daily during initial hospitalization and at Days 15, 22 and 28.

OUTCOMES

The composite primary outcome was acute hypoxemic respiratory failure or all-cause death by Day 28. Secondary outcomes by day 28 included time-to-recovery, clinical severity, mortality, rehospitalization for COVID-19, and adverse events. Serial respiratory and blood samples were collected for safety, virologic and immunologic analyses and future studies. Key variables in predicting the success of CURES-1 were: (1) enrollment early in the course of severe infection; (2) use of plasma with high neutralizing activity; (3) reliance on unambiguous, clinically meaningful outcomes. CURES-1 was terminated for futility due to perceived inability to enroll in the lull between the Alpha and Delta waves of the SARS CoV-2 epidemic.

CONCLUSIONS

VA CURES-1 was a large multi-site trial designed to provide conclusive information about the efficacy of CCP in well-characterized patients at risk for progression of COVID-19. It utilized a rigorous study design with relevant initial timing, quality of product and outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04539275.

Re-Emerging COVID-19: Controversy of Its Zoonotic Origin, Risks of Severity of Reinfection and Management

The re-emergence of COVID-19 has sparked controversy around its zoonotic origin, management strategies, risks posed by the virus, and the severity of reinfection. While it is widely accepted that the virus originated from animals, the exact source and transmission pathway remain unclear. This has led to debates regarding the regulation of wildlife markets and trade, as well as the need for more robust surveillance and monitoring systems. Hence, the objective of this review is to provide a brief overview of the disease's biology, preventative strategies, risk factors, degree of reinfection, and epidemiological profile. It offers a thorough examination of the disease's root cause, potential zoonotic transmission, and the most recent preventive measures, like vaccines. In terms of management, there is ongoing debate about the most effective strategies to mitigate the spread of the virus. While public health measures such as social distancing and mask-wearing have been widely implemented, there are differing opinions on the effectiveness of lockdowns and restrictions on public movement. The risks posed by COVID-19 are also a topic of debate, with some arguing that the virus is relatively low-risk for the majority of the population while others highlight the potential for severe illness, particularly among vulnerable populations such as the elderly or those with underlying health conditions. Finally, the possibility of reinfection has raised concerns about the longevity of immunity following infection or vaccination. While some studies have suggested that reinfection may be possible and potentially more severe, the overall risk remains uncertain and further research is needed to fully understand the implications of reinfection.

Immunomodulatory approaches in managing lung inflammation in COVID-19: A double-edge sword

INTRODUCTION

The novel coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19) which is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has emerged as a gigantic problem. The lung is the major target organ of SARS-CoV-2 and some of its variants like Delta and Omicron variant adapted in such a way that these variants can significantly damage this vital organ of the body. These variants raised a few eyebrows as the outbreaks have been seen in the vaccinated population. Patients develop severe respiratory illnesses which eventually prove fatal unless treated early.

MAIN BODY

Studies have shown that SARS-CoV-2 causes the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as interleukin (IL)-6, IL-1β and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α which are mediators of lung inflammation, lung damage, fever, and fibrosis. Additionally, various chemokines have been found to play an important role in the disease progression. A plethora of pro-inflammatory cytokines "cytokine storm" has been observed in severe cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and pneumonia that may prove fatal. To counteract cytokine storm-inducing lung inflammation, several promising immunomodulatory approaches are being investigated in numerous clinical trials. However, the benefits of using these strategies should outweigh the risks involved as the use of certain immunosuppressive approaches might lead the host susceptible to secondary bacterial infections.

CONCLUSION

The present review discusses promising immunomodulatory approaches to manage lung inflammation in COVID-19 cases which may serve as potential therapeutic options in the future and may prove lifesaving.

Dynamics of Cytokine, SARS-CoV-2-Specific IgG, and Neutralizing Antibody Levels in COVID-19 Patients Treated with Convalescent Plasma

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a contagious illness worldwide. While guidelines for the treatment of COVID-19 have been established, the understanding of the relationship among neutralizing antibodies, cytokines, and the combined use of antiviral medications, steroid drugs, and convalescent plasma therapy remains limited. Here, we investigated the connection between the immunological response and the efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy in COVID-19 patients with moderate-to-severe pneumonia. The study included a retrospective analysis of 49 patients aged 35 to 57. We conducted clinical assessments to determine antibody levels, biochemical markers, and cytokine levels. Among the patients, 48 (98%) were discharged, while one died. We observed significantly higher levels of anti-nucleocapsid, anti-spike, and neutralizing antibodies on days 3, 7, and 14 after the transfusion compared to before treatment. Serum CRP and D-dimer levels varied significantly across these four time points. Moreover, convalescent plasma therapy demonstrated an immunoregulatory effect on cytokine parameters, with significant differences in IFN-β, IL-6, IL-10, and IFN-α levels observed at different sampling times. Evaluating the cytokine signature, along with standard clinical and laboratory parameters, may help to identify the onset of a cytokine storm in COVID-19 patients and determine the appropriate indication for anti-cytokine treatment.

Diminished Neutralization Capacity of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 in Donor Plasma Collected from January to March 2021

The 50% plaque reduction neutralization assay (PRNT50) has been previously used to assess the neutralization capacity of donor plasma against wild-type and variant of concern (VOC) severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Emerging data suggest that plasma with an anti-SARS-CoV-2 level of ≥2 × 104 binding antibody units/mL (BAU/mL) protects against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 infection. Specimens were collected using a cross-sectional random sampling approach. For PRNT50 studies, 63 previously analyzed specimens by PRNT50 versus SARS-CoV-2 wild-type, Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta were analyzed by PRNT50 versus Omicron BA.1. The 63 specimens plus 4,390 specimens (randomly sampled regardless of serological evidence of infection) were also tested using the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant assay (anti-spike [S]; Abbott, Chicago, IL, USA; Abbott Quant assay). In the vaccinated group, the percentages of specimens with any measurable PRNT50 versus wild-type or VOC were wild type (21/25 [84%]), Alpha (19/25 [76%]), Beta (18/25 [72%]), Gamma (13/25 [52%]), Delta (19/25 [76%]), and Omicron BA.1 (9/25 [36%]). In the unvaccinated group, the percentages of specimens with any measurable PRNT50 versus wild type or VOC were wild-type SARS-CoV-2 (16/39 [41%]), Alpha (16/39 [41%]), Beta (10/39 [26%]), Gamma (9/39 [23%]), Delta (16/39 [41%]), and Omicron BA.1 (0/39) (Fisher's exact tests, vaccinated versus unvaccinated for each variant, P < 0.05). None of the 4,453 specimens tested by the Abbott Quant assay had a binding capacity of ≥2 × 104 BAU/mL. Vaccinated donors were more likely than unvaccinated donors to neutralize Omicron when assessed by a PRNT50 assay. IMPORTANCE SARS-CoV-2 Omicron emergence occurred in Canada during the period from November 2021 to January 2022. This study assessed the ability of donor plasma collected earlier (January to March 2021) to generate any neutralizing capacity against Omicron BA.1 SARS-CoV-2. Vaccinated individuals, regardless of infection status, were more likely to neutralize Omicron BA.1 than unvaccinated individuals. This study then used a semiquantitative binding antibody assay to screen a larger number of specimens (4,453) for individual specimens that might have high-titer neutralizing capacity against Omicron BA.1. None of the 4,453 specimens tested by the semiquantitative SARS-CoV-2 assay had a binding capacity suggestive of a high-titer neutralizing capacity against Omicron BA.1. These data do not imply that Canadians lacked immunity to Omicron BA.1 during the study period. Immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is complex, and there is still no wide consensus on correlation of protection to SARS-CoV-2.

Use of convalescent plasma to treat COVID-19: case studies

There have been several efforts to minimize the effects caused by the COVID-19 virus around the world. Vaccines were developed in record time and alternative therapies were studied and applied in several countries, such as the use of plasma from recovered patients. Identifying, systematically evaluating and summarizing the best available scientific evidence on the efficacy and safety of using plasma from recovered COVID-19 patients remains the objective of this study. The studies carried out showed that the application of convalescent plasma contributes to the reduction of mortality, viral load and length of hospital stay. However, the effectiveness of the therapy still raises doubts due to the number of patients evaluated in clinical studies, in addition to its high cost and limitations in terms of availability and implementation, with the drug being authorized only for hospital use.

Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity of JMB2002-an antibody against COVID-19: a phase 1 clinical trial in healthy Chinese adults

BACKGROUND

The emergence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and subsequent Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in a significant global public health burden, leading to an urgent need for effective therapeutic strategies. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are a potentially effective therapeutic option. We identified a potent antibody JMB2002 against the SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain. JMB2002 has demonstrated therapeutic efficacy in a SARS-CoV-2 infected rhesus macaque model.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, double-blind, phase 1 trial to evaluate the JMB2002's safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity in healthy Chinese adults. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four cohorts with sequential dose, administrated intravenously with JMB2002 or placebo, and followed up for 85 ± 5 days.

RESULTS

40 participants were recruited and completed in the study. Eight (25.0%) participants experienced 13 treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) that were drug-related. No serious adverse events (SAEs), dose limiting events (DLTs), or adverse events of special interest (AESIs), such as infusion related/allergic reactions, were observed, and no drop out due to adverse events (AEs) occurred. There was no significant safety difference observed between JMB2002 and the placebo, suggesting it was well tolerated. The AUC_0-∞, AUC_0 - t of JMB2002 infusion increased dose-dependently from 5 mg/kg to 50 mg/kg while there is also a linear trend between doses and C_max.

CONCLUSION

Therefore, JMB2002 was well tolerated after administration of a single dose in the range of 5 mg/kg to 50 mg/kg in healthy Chinese adults.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2100042150 at https://www.chictr.org.cn/searchproj.aspx (14/01/2021).

What have we learned from a case of convalescent plasma treatment in a two-time kidney transplant recipient COVID-19 patient? A case report from the perspective of viral load evolution and immune response

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), an infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, can have a wide range of clinical manifestations, ranging from asymptomatic disease to potentially life-threatening complications. Convalescent plasma therapy has been proposed as an effective alternative for the treatment of severe cases. The aim of this study was to follow a two-time renal transplant patient with severe COVID-19 treated with convalescent plasma over time from an immunologic and virologic perspective. A 42-year-old female patient, who was a two-time kidney transplant recipient, was hospitalized with COVID-19. Due to worsening respiratory symptoms, she was admitted to the intensive care unit, where she received two doses of convalescent plasma. We analyzed the dynamics of viral load in nasopharyngeal swab, saliva, and tracheal aspirate samples, before and after convalescent plasma transfusion. The levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines and antibody titers were also measured in serum samples. A significant decrease in viral load was observed after treatment in the saliva and nasopharyngeal swab samples, and a slight decrease was observed in tracheal aspirate samples. In addition, we found evidence of an increase in antibody titers after transfusion, accompanied by a decrease in the levels of several cytokines responsible for cytokine storm.

Therapeutic Interventions for COVID-19

SARS-CoV-2, a novel coronavirus, is currently represented a major public health concern. The high transmission rate of this virus increases the mortality rate worldwide. To date, significant efforts and restricted regulations were performed around the world to control this crisis effectively, but unfortunately, there is no specific and successful therapy for COVID-19. Many approaches have been repurposed for SARS-CoV-2 treatment such as antivirals and anti-inflammatories. Furthermore, antibody therapies are one of the main and important approaches of SARS-CoV-2 infection treatment. In recent trials, various immunotherapeutic interventions such as convalescent plasma therapy and monoclonal antibodies, as well as immunomodulatory agents are being proposed. However, the development of a vaccine that provides durable protective immunity will be the most effective therapy for controlling possible epidemics of this virus. The current review summarized all the proposed therapeutic approaches together with information on their safety and efficacy in treating COVID-19, as well as the vaccine candidates. The provided comprehensive information regarding the applied therapeutic strategies against COVID-19 might help the scientific community in any progress toward the treatment of COVID-19 infection.

Correlation between Clinical Characteristics and Antibody Levels in COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma Donor Candidates

COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) with high neutralizing antibodies has been suggested in preventing disease progression in COVID-19. In this study, we investigated the relationship between clinical donor characteristics and neutralizing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in CCP donors. COVID-19 convalescent plasma donors were included into the study. Clinical parameters were recorded and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels (Spike Trimer, Receptor Binding Domain (RBD), S1, S2 and nucleocapsid protein) as well as ACE2 binding inhibition were measured. An ACE2 binding inhibition < 20% was defined as an inadequate neutralization capacity. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to detect the predictors of inadequate neutralization capacity. Ninety-one CCP donors (56 female; 61%) were analyzed. A robust correlation between all SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies and ACE2 binding inhibition, as well as a positive correlation between donor age, body mass index, and a negative correlation between time since symptom onset and antibody levels were found. We identified time since symptom onset, normal body mass index (BMI), and the absence of high fever as independent predictors of inadequate neutralization capacity. Gender, duration of symptoms, and number of symptoms were not associated with SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels or neutralization. Neutralizing capacity was correlated with SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies and associated with time since symptom onset, BMI, and fever. These clinical parameters can be easily incorporated into the preselection of CCP donors.

Efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy for COVID-19 in Japan: An open-label, randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Convalescent plasma is a potential therapeutic option for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Despite its use for treating several viral infections, we lack comprehensive data on its efficacy against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial of convalescent plasma therapy with high neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2 in high-risk patients within five days after the onset of COVID-19 symptoms. The primary endpoint was the time-weighted average change in the SARS-CoV-2 viral load in nasopharyngeal swabs from days 0-5.

RESULTS

Between February 24, 2021, and November 30, 2021, 25 patients were randomly assigned to either convalescent plasma (n = 14) or standard of care (n = 11) groups. Four patients discontinued their allocated convalescent plasma, and 21 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The median interval between the symptom onset and plasma administration was 4.5 days (interquartile range, 3-5 days). The primary outcome of the time-weighted average change in the SARS-CoV-2 viral load in nasopharyngeal swabs did not significantly differ between days 0-5 (1.2 log₁₀ copies/mL in the convalescent plasma vs. 1.2 log₁₀ copies/mL in the standard of care (effect estimate, 0.0 [95% confidence interval, -0.8-0.7]; P = 0.94)). No deaths were observed in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

The early administration of convalescent plasma with high neutralizing activity did not contribute to a decrease in the viral load within five days compared with the standard of care alone.

Persistent SARS-CoV-2 PCR Positivity Despite Anti-viral Treatment in Immunodeficient Patients

PURPOSE

COVID-19 infection in immunodeficient individuals can result in chronically poor health, persistent or relapsing SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity, and long-term infectious potential. While clinical trials have demonstrated promising outcomes using anti-SARS-CoV-2 medicines in immunocompetent hosts, their ability to achieve sustained viral clearance in immunodeficient patients remains unknown. We therefore aimed to study long-term virological outcomes in patients treated at our centre.

METHODS

We followed up immunocompromised inpatients treated with casirivimab-imdevimab (Ronapreve) between September and December 2021, and immunocompromised patients who received sotrovimab, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid), or no treatment from December 2021 to March 2022. Nasopharyngeal swab and sputum samples were obtained either in hospital or in the community until sustained viral clearance, defined as 3 consecutive negative PCR samples, was achieved. Positive samples were sequenced and analysed for mutations of interest.

RESULTS

We observed sustained viral clearance in 71 of 103 patients, none of whom died. Of the 32/103 patients where sustained clearance was not confirmed, 6 died (between 2 and 34 days from treatment). Notably, we observed 25 cases of sputum positivity despite negative nasopharyngeal swab samples, as well as recurrence of SARS-CoV-2 positivity following a negative sample in 12 cases. Patients were then divided into those who cleared within 28 days and those with PCR positivity beyond 28 days. We noted lower B cell counts in the group with persistent PCR positivity (mean (SD) 0.06 (0.10) ×10⁹/L vs 0.22 (0.28) ×10⁹/L, p = 0.015) as well as lower IgA (median (IQR) 0.00 (0.00-0.15) g/L vs 0.40 (0.00-0.95) g/L, p = 0.001) and IgM (median (IQR) 0.05 (0.00-0.28) g/L vs 0.35 (0.10-1.10) g/L, p = 0.005). No differences were seen in CD4+ or CD8+ T cell counts. Antiviral treatment did not impact risk of persistent PCR positivity.

CONCLUSION

Persistent SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity is common among immunodeficient individuals, especially those with antibody deficiencies, regardless of anti-viral treatment. Peripheral B cell count and serum IgA and IgM levels are predictors of viral persistence.

Convalescent Plasma Therapy in Late-State, Severe COVID-19 Infection

OBJECTIVES

Current evidence favors plasma to be effective against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in critically ill patients in the early stages of infection. We investigated the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma in specifically late-stage (designated as after 2 weeks of hospital admission) severe COVID-19 infection. We also conducted a literature review on the late-stage use of plasma in COVID-19.

METHODS

This case series examined eight COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) who met criteria for severe or life-threatening complications. Each patient received one dose (200 mL) of plasma. Clinical information was gathered in intervals of 1 day pretransfusion and 1 hour, 3 days, and 7 days posttransfusion. The primary outcome was effectiveness of plasma transfusion, measured by clinical improvement, laboratory parameters, and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Eight ICU patients received plasma late in the course of COVID-19 infection, on average at 16.13 days postadmission. On the day before transfusion, the averaged initial Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, PaO₂:FiO₂ ratio, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), and lymphocyte count were 6.5, 228.03, 8.63, and 1.19, respectively. Three days after plasma treatment, the group averages for the SOFA score (4.86), PaO₂:FiO₂ ratio (302.73), GCS (9.29), and lymphocyte count (1.75) improved. Although the mean GCS improved to 10.14 by posttransfusion day 7, the other means marginally worsened with an SOFA score of 5.43, a PaO₂:FiO₂ ratio of 280.44, and a lymphocyte count of 1.71. Clinical improvement was noted in six patients who were discharged from the ICU.

CONCLUSIONS

This case series provides evidence that convalescent plasma may be safe and effective in late-stage, severe COVID-19 infection. Results showed clinical improvement posttransfusion as well as decreased all-cause mortality in comparison to pretransfusion predicted mortality. Randomized controlled trials are needed to conclusively determine benefits, dosage, and timing of treatment.

Severe COVID-19: Drugs and Clinical Trials

By January of 2023, the COVID-19 pandemic had led to a reported total of 6,700,883 deaths and 662,631,114 cases worldwide. To date, there have been no effective therapies or standardized treatment schemes for this disease; therefore, the search for effective prophylactic and therapeutic strategies is a primary goal that must be addressed. This review aims to provide an analysis of the most efficient and promising therapies and drugs for the prevention and treatment of severe COVID-19, comparing their degree of success, scope, and limitations, with the aim of providing support to health professionals in choosing the best pharmacological approach. An investigation of the most promising and effective treatments against COVID-19 that are currently available was carried out by employing search terms including "Convalescent plasma therapy in COVID-19" or "Viral polymerase inhibitors" and "COVID-19" in the Clinicaltrials.gov and PubMed databases. From the current perspective and with the information available from the various clinical trials assessing the efficacy of different therapeutic options, we conclude that it is necessary to standardize certain variables-such as the viral clearance time, biomarkers associated with severity, hospital stay, requirement of invasive mechanical ventilation, and mortality rate-in order to facilitate verification of the efficacy of such treatments and to better assess the repeatability of the most effective and promising results.

Convalescent plasma (hyperimmune immunoglobulin) for COVID-19 management: An update

The pandemic COVID-19 has spread widely throughout the globe and has been responsible for millions of deaths worldwide. Recently, it has been identified that there is no specific and 100% effective treatment available to manage the infection especially for the severe cases. A significant amount of research efforts and clinical trials have been undertaken globally and many more are underway to find the potential treatment option. Earlier, convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin was effectively used in the treatment of many endemic or epidemic viral infections as a part of passive immunization. In this article, we have touched upon the immunopathology of COVID-19 infection, a basic understanding of convalescent plasma, it's manufacturing as well as evaluation, and have reviewed the scientific developments focussing on the potential of convalescent plasma vis-à-vis other modalities for the management of COVID-19. The article also covers various research approaches, clinical trials conducted globally, and the clinical trials which are at various stages for exploring the efficacy and safety of the convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) to predict its future perspective to manage COVID-19.

The safety of plasma apheresis from donors recovering from COVID-19 infection in Japan

PURPOSE

Since 2020, the novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19) has spread globally. A few studies have investigated the safety of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) apheresis from COVID-19. This study was the first retrospective observational study of CCP in Japan.

METHODS

We recruit donors from April 2020 to November 2021 and plasmapheresis in our center (NCGM: national center for global health and medicine). We set the primary endpoint as the Donors Adverse Event (DAE) occurrence at the time of the CCP collection. Variable selection was used to explore the determinants of DAE.

RESULTS

Mean and SD age was 50.5 (10.6) years old. Seventy-three (42.2 %) were female, and 87 (33.3 %) were multiple-times donors. Twelve (6.97 % by donors and 4.6 % in total collections) adverse events occurred. The DAEs were VVR (Vaso Vagal Reaction), paresthesia, hypotension, agitation, dizziness, malaise, and hearing impairment/paresthesia. Half of them were VVR during apheresis. DAE occurred only in first-time donors and more in severe illnesses such as using ventilation and ECMO. From the donor characteristics and variable selection, the risk factors are as follows: younger age, female, the severity of disease at the time of the disease, and lower SBP before initiation. Our DAE incidence did not differ from previous studies. DAEs were more likely to occur in CCP apheresis than in healthy donors.

CONCLUSION

We confirm the safety of CCP apheresis in this study, although DAEs were more than healthy donors. More caution should be exercised in the plasma collection for future outbreaks of emerging infectious diseases.

Convalescent Plasma Treatment of Patients Previously Treated with B-Cell-Depleting Monoclonal Antibodies Suffering COVID-19 Is Associated with Reduced Re-Admission Rates

Patients receiving treatment with B-cell-depleting monoclonal antibodies, such as anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, such as rituximab and obinutuzumab, either for hematological disease or another diagnosis, such as a rheumatological disease, are at an increased risk for medical complications and mortality from COVID-19. Since inconsistencies persist regarding the use of convalescent plasma (CP), especially in the vulnerable patient population that has received previous treatment with B-cell-depleting monoclonal antibodies, further studies should be performed in thisdirection. The aim of the present study was to describe the characteristics of patients with previous use of B-cell-depleting monoclonal antibodies and describe the potential beneficial effects of CP use in terms of mortality, ICU admission and disease relapse. In this retrospective cohort study, 39 patients with previous use of B-cell-depleting monoclonal antibodies hospitalized in the COVID-19 department of a tertiary hospital in Greece were recorded and evaluated. The mean age was 66.3 years and 51.3% were male. Regarding treatment for COVID-19, remdesivir was used in 89.7%, corticosteroids in 94.9% and CP in 53.8%. In-hospital mortality was 15.4%. Patients who died were more likely to need ICU admission and also had a trend towards a longer hospital stay, even though the last did not reach statistical significance. Patients treated with CP had a lower re-admission rate for COVID-19 after discharge. Further studies should be performed to identify the role of CP in patients with treatment with B-cell-depleting monoclonal antibodies suffering from COVID-19.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma (CCP) During the Pandemic Era: A Literature Review

Worldwide pandemic with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) was caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). As November 2, 2022, World Health Organization (WHO) received 628,035,553 reported incidents on COVID-19, with 6,572,800 mortalities and, with a total 12,850,970,971 vaccine doses have been delivered as of October 31, 2022. The infection can cause mild or self-limiting symptoms of pulmonary and severe infections or death may be caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection. Simultaneously, antivirals, corticosteroids, immunological treatments, antibiotics, and anticoagulants have been proposed as potential medicines to cure COVID-19 affected patients. Among these initial treatments, COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP), which was retrieved from COVID-19 recovered patients to be used as passive immune therapy, in which antibodies from cured patients were given to infected patients to prevent illness. Such treatment has yielded the best results in earlier with preventative or early stages of illness. Convalescent plasma (CP) is the first treatment available when infectious disease initially appears, although few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted to evaluate its effectiveness. The historical record suggests with potential benefit for other respiratory infections, as coronaviruses like Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-CoV-I (SARS-CoV-I) and Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), though the analysis of such research is constrained by some non-randomized experiments (NREs). Rigorous studies on CP are made more demanding by the following with the immediacy of the epidemics, CP use may restrict the ability to utilize it for clinical testing, non-homogenous nature of product, highly decentralized manufacturing process; constraints with capacity to measure biologic function, ultimate availability of substitute therapies, as antivirals, purified immune globulins, or monoclonal antibodies. Though, it is still not clear how effectively CCP works among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The current review tries to focus on its efficiency and usage in clinical scenarios and identifying existing benefits of implementation during pandemic or how it may assist with future pandemic preventions.

High-Throughput Neutralization and Serology Assays Reveal Correlated but Highly Variable Humoral Immune Responses in a Large Population of Individuals Infected with SARS-CoV-2 in the US between March and August 2020

The ability to measure neutralizing antibodies on large scale can be important for understanding features of the natural history and epidemiology of infection, as well as an aid in determining the efficacy of interventions, particularly in outbreaks such as the current severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. Because of the assay's rapid scalability and high efficiency, serology measurements that quantify the presence rather than function of serum antibodies often serve as proxies of immune protection. Here, we report the development of a high-throughput, automated fluorescence-based neutralization assay using SARS-CoV-2 virus to quantify neutralizing antibody activity in patient specimens. We performed large-scale testing of over 19,000 COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) samples from patients who had been infected with SARS-CoV-2 between March and August 2020 across the United States. The neutralization capacity of the samples was moderately correlated with serological measurements of anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD) IgG levels. The neutralizing antibody levels within these convalescent-phase serum samples were highly variable against the original USA-WA1/2020 strain with almost 10% of individuals who had had PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection having no detectable antibodies either by serology or neutralization, and ~1/3 having no or low neutralizing activity. Discordance between neutralization and serology measurements was mainly due to the presence of non-IgG RBD isotypes. Meanwhile, natural infection with the earliest SARS-CoV-2 strain USA-WA1/2020 resulted in weaker neutralization of subsequent B.1.1.7 (alpha) and the B.1.351 (beta) variants, with 88% of samples having no activity against the BA.1 (omicron) variant. IMPORTANCE The ability to directly measure neutralizing antibodies on live SARS-CoV-2 virus in individuals can play an important role in understanding the efficacy of therapeutic interventions or vaccines. In contrast to functional neutralization assays, serological assays only quantify the presence of antibodies as a proxy of immune protection. Here, we have developed a high-throughput, automated neutralization assay for SARS-CoV-2 and measured the neutralizing activity of ~19,000 COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) samples collected across the United States between March and August of 2020. These data were used to support the FDA's interpretation of CCP efficacy in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and their issuance of emergency use authorization of CCP in 2020.

Lessons learned from the CONCOR-1 trial

Faced with an evolving pandemic and a lack of clarity of the role of convalescent plasma for patients with COVID-19, the CONCOR-1 trial was launched. In 14 months the trial was designed, launched, completed, and submitted for publication. In total, 72 sites in three countries served by four blood suppliers randomised 940 patients. Many enablers facilitated the trial including: three study principal investigators to distribute the trial workload, diverse steering committee members, an international data safety monitoring committee, multiple statisticians and methodologists, virtual meeting platforms, REDCap data platform, pausing of non-COVID-19 trials, rapid approval pathways for institutional review boards and regulators, centralised institutional review boards in many locations, restriction of use of convalescent plasma to trial participants and the incredible dedication by research personnel. In future pandemics, we need to be prepared for rapid launch of trials. The protocols, consent forms, data collection tools, and procedures need to be in draft form ready for use at all times. We were well-prepared for blood shortages but should have anticipated the need to conduct trials with convalescent plasma. In this short article, we detail our lessons learned to inform researchers faced with the next pandemic pathogen.

Evaluation of Convalescent Plasma in the Management of Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients (with No Detectable Neutralizing Antibodies Nab) in Kashmir, India

BACKGROUND

For centuries, convalescent plasma (CP) has been recommended to treat a diverse set of viral diseases. Therefore, the present study was undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness of CP in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

From 23 March 2021 to 29 December 2021, an open-label, prospective cohort, single-centre study was conducted at Chest Disease Hospital, Jammu and Kashmir, Srinagar. Patients with severe manifestation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) under BST (best standard treatment) +CP were prospectively observed in order to evaluate effectiveness of CP therapy and historical control under BST were used as the control group Results: A total of 1667 patients were found positive for COVID-19. Of these, 873 (52.4%), 431 (28.8%), and 363 (21.8%) were moderately, severely, and critically ill, respectively. On 35th day post-infusion of CP, all-cause mortality was higher in the BST (best standard treatment) +CP group 12 (37.5%) compared to 127 (35%) in the BST group with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.4 and hazard ratio (HR) (95% CI: 1.08-1.79, p = 0.06). Similarly, 7 (21.9) patients in the BST+CP group and 121 (33.3) patients in the BST group showed the transition from critically ill to moderate disease with subhazard ratio (s-HR 1.37) (95% CI: 1.03-2.9).

CONCLUSIONS

In the present study, we could not find any significant difference in the CP group and BST +CP in primary outcome of reducing all-cause mortality in critically ill patients with negligible Nabs levels. However, beneficial results were observed with use of CP in a limited number of secondary outcomes which includes days of hospitalization, negative conversion of SARS-CoV-2 on basis of RT-PCR on 7th day and 14th day, need for invasive mechanical ventilation on 14th day post-CP treatment, and resolution of shortness of breath.

Clinical nursing care protocol for convalescent plasma transfusion in patients with COVID-19

Introduction

The treatment of COVID-19 is still challenge. So convalescent plasma can be an important alternative of treatment. Protocols with nursing care during infusion is very important to guide an effective and safety care.

Objective

to analyze the evidence in the literature on the action of convalescent plasma, of the use of protocols with nursing care to use convalescent plasma and build a nursing care protocol for transfusion in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

Methodological study carried out in two stages: scoping review. The search was done using the descriptors: convalescent plasma transfusion, convalescent plasma, and acute respiratory syndromes or COVID-19, to found protocols and effectiveness of convalescent plasm. Beside was done a specialist panel to build the protocol.

Results

Low-evidence studies have shown improvement in the clinical signs of COVID-19 using Convalescent Plasma, reduction or elimination of viral load, benefits in the production of lymphocytes, decreases C-reactive protein, increases titers of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, positive evolution in lung involvement identified by X-rays, decrease in hospitalization. No studies were found in the databases on the protocol for clinical nursing care in plasma transfusion. Therefore, a protocol was developed with the description of clinical nursing care to be performed before, during and after the transfusion by plasma: checking of vital signs and indicative signs of transfusion reaction, measurement of oxygen saturation, assessment of venous access and checking of the level of consciousness.

Conclusion

There are no evidence studies to support the use of plasma, nor anything related to bundles.

Convalescent Plasma Therapy against COVID-19: An Update on the Changing Facets of the ongoing Pandemic

The severe respiratory infections in the current pandemic coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) have influenced more or less every human life. The first person to get infected with this virus was reported in the capital of Hubei province (Wuhan), China, in late December 2019. Since the disease has been declared a pandemic, research scholars and experts have been manufacturing new vaccines or targeted therapies to curb the spread of SARS-CoV-2. However, only limited options have emerged so far, which yet require complete scientific validation by long-term data collection regarding safety and efficacy. In the wake of the recent emerging wave of the pandemic viz omicron variant, changing facets of the viral genome and dearth of preventative and therapeutic possibilities for the management of COVID-19, the usage of Convalescent Plasma Therapy (CPT) may be looked at as a potentially viable option of treatment in the existing situation. Earlier, immune plasma has been used with success in the management of H1N1 influenza virus, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-1 epidemics. In the present unpredictable situation created by the COVID-19 pandemic, the CPT is used with a positive outcome amongst many infected individuals in different parts of the world with acceptable efficacy. This article aimed to present an up-to-date evaluation of existing literature on the efficacy of convalescent plasma as a potential therapy, its safety and effectiveness and the challenges in treating COVID-19.

CURRENT ASPECTS OF ETIOTROPIC COVID-19 THERAPY

Since the beginning of the pandemic, repeated attempts have been made to develop etiotropic therapy for a novel coronavirus infection. Hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, etc. derivatives were used as antiviral agents, however, they demonstrated a low efficiency and an insufficient safety. In this connection, other groups of drugs with a more effective and safe pharmacological profile are currently being actively used.

The aim of the study was to analyze the literature references on the efficacy and safety of antiviral drugs for the COVID-19 treatment.

Materials and methods. When searching for the materials for the review article writing, such abstract databases as PubMed, Google Scholar, e-Library were used. The search was carried out on publications for the period from January 2020 to september 2022. The key queries were: COVID-19, etiotropic therapy; immunological drugs; antiviral drugs; interferons.

Results. Currently, there are various degrees of effective etiotropic drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. The review has considered a few groups of drugs that are of interest from the point of view of etiotropic therapy: immunological drugs (anticovid plasma, the drugs based on antiviral antibodies, the drugs of recombinant interferons-α2 and -β1, as well as interferon inducers, i.e., the drugs based on double-stranded RNA sodium salt, and others); drugs that block the penetration of the virus into the cell (umifenovir); the drugs that disrupt the process of the viral replication (favipiravir, remdesivir, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir).

Conclusion. Synthetic antivirals, in particular favipiravir, molnupiravir, remdesivir, and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, have the largest evidence base for their efficacy and safety. The search for new effective and safe etiotropic drugs for the treatment of COVID-19, as well as the collection and analysis of post-registration data on the drugs already used in clinical practice, continues.

A comprehensive review on pharmacologic agents, immunotherapies and supportive therapeutics for COVID-19

The emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has affected many countries throughout the world. As urgency is a necessity, most efforts have focused on identifying small molecule drugs that can be repurposed for use as anti-SARS-CoV-2 agents. Although several drug candidates have been identified using in silico method and in vitro studies, most of these drugs require the support of in vivo data before they can be considered for clinical trials. Several drugs are considered promising therapeutic agents for COVID-19. In addition to the direct-acting antiviral drugs, supportive therapies including traditional Chinese medicine, immunotherapies, immunomodulators, and nutritional therapy could contribute a major role in treating COVID-19 patients. Some of these drugs have already been included in the treatment guidelines, recommendations, and standard operating procedures. In this article, we comprehensively review the approved and potential therapeutic drugs, immune cells-based therapies, immunomodulatory agents/drugs, herbs and plant metabolites, nutritional and dietary for COVID-19.

Convalescent or standard plasma versus standard of care in the treatment of COVID-19 patients with respiratory impairment: short and long-term effects. A three-arm randomized controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of early treatment with convalescent plasma in patients with COVID-19 is debated. Nothing is known about the potential effect of other plasma components other than anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

METHODS

To determine whether convalescent or standard plasma would improve outcomes for adults in early phase of Covid19 respiratory impairment we designed this randomized, three-arms, clinical trial (PLACO COVID) blinded on interventional arms that was conducted from June 2020 to August 2021. It was a multicentric trial at 19 Italian hospitals. We enrolled 180 hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia within 5 days from the onset of respiratory distress. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to standard of care (n = 60) or standard of care + three units of standard plasma (n = 60) or standard of care + three units of high-titre convalescent plasma (n = 60) administered on days 1, 3, 5 after randomization. Primary outcome was 30-days mortality. Secondary outcomes were: incidence of mechanical ventilation or death at day 30, 6-month mortality, proportion of days with mechanical ventilation on total length of hospital stay, IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion, viral clearance from plasma and respiratory tract samples, and variations in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. The trial was analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle.

RESULTS

180 patients (133/180 [73.9%] males, mean age 66.6 years [IQR 57-73]) were enrolled a median of 8 days from onset of symptoms. At enrollment, 88.9% of patients showed moderate/severe respiratory failure. 30-days mortality was 20% in Control arm, 23% in Convalescent (risk ratio [RR] 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-2.13, P = 0.694) and 25% in Standard plasma (RR 1.23; 95%CI, 0.63-2.37, P = 0.544). Time to viral clearance from respiratory tract was 21 days for Convalescent, 28 for Standard plasma and 23 in Control arm but differences were not statistically significant. No differences for other secondary endpoints were seen in the three arms. Serious adverse events were reported in 1.7%, 3.3% and 5% of patients in Control, Standard and Convalescent plasma arms respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Neither high-titer Convalescent nor Standard plasma improve outcomes of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04428021. First posted: 11/06/2020.

The clinical outcomes of high neutralizing antibodies titer convalescent plasma therapy in early developed severe COVID-19 patients; a case-control study

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) causes life-threatening pneumonia. Convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) is expected to be the effective COVID-19 treatment for passive immunity. The high neutralizing antibodies titer of CPT is needed to prove the benefit in early developed severe COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE

This case-control study evaluated transfusion efficacy and adverse events with high-titer (≥ 1:320) COVID-19 convalescent plasma compared with standard care alone in severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

RESULTS

Among 107 severe COVID-19 patients, 55 received CPT plus standard care, and 52 received standard care alone. All-cause mortality was 15.3% in the CPT group compared with 85.4% in the standard care group (p < 0.001). Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed reduced mortality with CPT (HR 0.14; 95% CI 0.07-0.31; p < 0.001 and HR 0.26; 95% CI 0.08-0.79; p = 0.018, respectively). CPT resulted in decreased use of mechanical ventilation, duration of supplemental oxygen, and high-flow oxygen requirement. Clinical and radiological outcomes improved.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate high neutralizing antibody titer CPT is safe and reduces mortality in early developed severe COVID-19 patients. The benefit of CPT in the early course of illness is challenging and requires additional study. Trial registration Thai clinical trials registry (TCTR) no. 20220101003.

Use of convalescent plasma therapy in hospitalised adult patients with non-critical COVID-19: a focus on the elderly from Hungary

Convalescent plasma therapy might be a feasible option for treatment of novel infections. During the early phases of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, several promising results were published with convalescent plasma therapy, followed by more disappointing findings of randomised controlled trials. In our single-centre, open-label, prospective, cohort study, we assessed the findings of 180 patients treated with convalescent plasma during the first four waves of the pandemic in Hungary. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes were clinical improvement and need for intensive care unit admission by day 28. Subgroup analysis comparing elderly and non-elderly (less than 65 years of age) was performed. Twenty (11.4%) patients died by day 28, at significantly higher rates in the elderly subgroup (3 vs. 17, p < 0.01). One hundred twenty-eight (72.7%) patients showed clinical improvement, and 15 (8.5%) were transferred to the intensive care unit until day 28. Non-elderly patients showed clinical improvement by day 28 in significantly higher rates (improvement 74 vs. 54, no improvement 15 vs. 11, worsening or death 4 vs. 18 patients, p < 0.01). In conclusion, we found similar clinical outcome results as randomised controlled trials, and the impact of risk factors for unfavourable clinical outcomes among patients in the elderly population.