The Effect of Convalescent Plasma Therapy on Mortality Among Patients With COVID-19: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Evidence for the Efficacy of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma

During the global health emergency caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), evidence relating to the efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy-evidence critically needed for both public policy and clinical practice-came from multiple levels of the epistemic hierarchy. The challenges of conducting clinical research during a pandemic, combined with the biological complexities of convalescent plasma treatment, required the use of observational data to fully assess the impact of convalescent plasma therapy on COVID symptomatology, hospitalization rates, and mortality rates. Observational studies showing the mortality benefits of convalescent plasma emerged early during the COVID-19 pandemic from multiple continents and were substantiated by real-time pragmatic meta-analyses. Although many randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were initiated at the onset of the pandemic and were designed to provide high-quality evidence, the relative inflexibility in the design of clinical trials meant that findings generally lagged behind other forms of emerging information and ultimately provided inconsistent results on the efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma. In the pandemic framework, it is necessary to emphasize more flexible analytic strategies in clinical trials, including secondary, subgroup, and exploratory analyses. We conclude that in totality, observational studies and clinical trials taken together provide strong evidence of a mortality benefit conferred by COVID-19 convalescent plasma, while acknowledging that some randomized clinical trials examined suboptimal uses of convalescent plasma.

HemoClear: A Practical and Cost-Effective Alternative to Conventional Convalescent Plasma Retrieval Methods

Convalescent plasma has increasingly been used to treat various viral infections and confer post-exposure prophylactic protection during the last decade and has demonstrated favorable clinical outcomes in patients infected with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during the recent COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic has highlighted the need for cost-effective, accessible, and easy-to-use alternatives to conventional blood plasmapheresis techniques, allowing hospitals to become more self-sufficient in harvesting and transfusing donor plasma into recipients in a single setting. To this end, the use of a membrane-based bedside plasmapheresis device (HemoClear) was evaluated in an open-label, non-randomized prospective trial in Suriname in 2021, demonstrating its practicality and efficacy in a low-to middle-income country. This paper will review the use of this method and its potential to expedite the process of obtaining convalescent plasma, especially during pandemics and in resource-constrained settings.

Convalescent Plasma and Other Antibody Therapies for Infectious Diseases-Lessons Learned from COVID-19 and Future Prospects

Antiviral passive antibody therapy includes convalescent plasma, hyperimmune globulin, and monoclonal antibodies. Passive antibodies have proven effective in reducing morbidity and mortality for SARS-CoV-2 and other infectious diseases when given early in the disease course with sufficiently high specific total and neutralizing antibody levels. Convalescent plasma can be delivered to patients before vaccination implementation or novel drug production. Carefully designed and executed randomized controlled trials near the pandemic outset are important for regulatory bodies, healthcare workers, guideline committees, the public, and the government. Unfortunately, many otherwise well-designed antibody-based clinical trials in COVID-19 were futile, either because they intervened too late in the disease or provided plasma with insufficient antibodies. The need for early treatment mandates outpatient clinical trials in parallel with inpatient trials. Early outpatient COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion with high antibody content within 9 days of symptom onset has proven effective in blunting disease progression and reducing hospitalization, thus reducing hospital overcrowding in a pandemic. Convalescent plasma offers the opportunity for hope by enabling community participation in outpatient curative therapy while monoclonal therapies, vaccines, and drugs are being developed. Maintaining the appropriate infrastructure for antibody infusion in both outpatient and inpatient facilities is critical for future pandemic readiness.

rAbDesFlow: a novel workflow for computational recombinant antibody design for healthcare engineering

Recombinant antibodies (rAbs) have emerged as a promising solution to tackle antigen specificity, enhancement of immunogenic potential and versatile functionalization to treat human diseases. The development of single chain variable fragments has helped accelerate treatment in cancers and viral infections, due to their favorable pharmacokinetics and human compatibility. However, designing rAbs is traditionally viewed as a genetic engineering problem, with phage display and cell free systems playing a major role in sequence selection for gene synthesis. The process of antibody engineering involves complex and time-consuming laboratory techniques, which demand substantial resources and expertise. The success rate of obtaining desired antibody candidates through experimental approaches can be modest, necessitating iterative cycles of selection and optimization. With ongoing advancements in technology, in silico design of diverse antibody libraries, screening and identification of potential candidates for in vitro validation can be accelerated. To meet this need, we have developed rAbDesFlow, a unified computational workflow for recombinant antibody engineering with open-source programs and tools for ease of implementation. The workflow encompasses five computational modules to perform antigen selection, antibody library generation, antigen and antibody structure modeling, antigen-antibody interaction modeling, structure analysis, and consensus ranking of potential antibody sequences for synthesis and experimental validation. The proposed workflow has been demonstrated through design of rAbs for the ovarian cancer antigen Mucin-16 (CA-125). This approach can serve as a blueprint for designing similar engineered molecules targeting other biomarkers, allowing for a simplified adaptation to different cancer types or disease-specific antigens.

Neonatal and infant infection with SARS-CoV-2

Despite the substantial body of investigative work describing the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, its impact on neonates and infants remains less well characterized. Here, we review the data on epidemiology of COVID-19 in this population. Widespread use of universal testing for SARS-CoV-2 among pregnant persons presenting for delivery complicates interpretation of the risks of perinatal exposure. While many neonates and infants with COVID-19 are well-appearing or have only mild signs of illness, factors such as preterm birth, low birth weight, and medical comorbidities increase the risk of severe infection. We highlight potential protective maternal factors, summarize treatment options and discuss vaccine development. Higher quality data are needed to better inform our understanding of COVID-19 in neonates and infants.

Convalescent Plasma as Adjunctive Therapy for Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: The Co-CLARITY Trial

Background and Objective

Convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) may reduce the risk of disease progression among patients with COVID-19. This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CPT in preventing ICU admission among hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Methods

In this open-label randomized controlled trial, we randomly assigned hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 in a 1:1 ratio to receive convalescent plasma as an adjunct to standard of care or standard of care alone. The primary endpoint was ICU admission within first 28 days of enrolment. Primary safety endpoints include rapid deterioration of respiratory or clinical status within four hours of convalescent plasma transfusion and cumulative incidence of serious adverse events during the study period including transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI), transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO), severe allergic reactions, and transfusion-related infections.

Results

A total of 22 patients were assigned to receive convalescent plasma as an adjunct to standard of care and 22 to receive standard of care alone. The median time from onset of COVID-19 symptoms to study enrolment was eight days (IQR, 4 to 10). Two patients (9.1%) in the CPT group and one patient (4.5%) in the control group were admitted to the ICU. The primary outcome measure, ICU admission, was not different between the two groups (q-value >0.9). No patient who received convalescent plasma had rapid deterioration of respiratory/clinical status within four hours of transfusion and none developed TRALI, TACO, anaphylaxis, severe allergic reactions, or transfusion-related infections. There was also no significant difference in the secondary outcomes of 28-day mortality (two patients in the CPT group and none in the control group, q-value >0.90), dialysis-free days, vasopressor-free days, and ICU-free days.

Conclusions

Among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, no significant differences were observed in the need for ICU admission between patients given CPT as adjunct to standard of care and those who received standard of care alone. Interpretation is limited by early termination of the trial which may have been underpowered to detect a clinically important difference.

A Descriptive, Retrospective Analysis of COVID-19 Passive Antibody Therapy and Its Effects on Morbidity and Mortality in Patients Receiving B-Cell-Depleting Therapies

Patients receiving B-cell-depleting therapies (BCDT) are at an increased risk for severe COVID-19. Passive antibody therapy (PAT), including COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) and monoclonal antibodies (mAb), may be an effective treatment in this population. Real-world data on PAT effectiveness are limited. To evaluate response to PAT measured through 90-day all-cause morbidity and mortality, we performed a retrospective review of patients who contracted COVID-19 within a year from the last BCDT. From 64 included patients, the majority were Caucasians (95%), female (56%), vaccinated (67%), treated outpatients (64%), with multiple comorbidities. Examined BCDT were rituximab (55%), obinutuzumab (33%), ocrelizumab (11%) and ofatumumab (1%), used for underlying hematological malignancy (HEM) (40%), multiple sclerosis (34%), and rheumatoid arthritis (16%). Of seven deceased patients, three died from COVID-19. All three were elderly males with multiple comorbidities, treated inpatient for severe COVID-19. Four of 41 patients treated as outpatients were hospitalized for non-COVID-19-related reasons. All deceased and hospitalized patients had an underlying HEM. All but one were on rituximab. PAT may be an effective treatment for patients receiving BCDT, especially if given early for non-severe disease. Patients with underlying HEM may be at increased risk for severe disease compared with others receiving the same BCDT.

Factors related to the development of high antibody titres against SARS-CoV-2 in convalescent plasma donors from the ConPlas-19 trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CP) associates with high titres of antibodies. ConPlas-19 clinical trial showed that CP reduces the risk of progression to severe COVID-19 at 28 days. Here, we aim to study ConPlas-19 donors and characteristics that associate with high anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four-hundred donors were enrolled in ConPlas-19. The presence and titres of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were evaluated by EUROIMMUN anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG ELISA.

RESULTS

A majority of 80.3% of ConPlas-19 donor candidates had positive EUROIMMUN test results (ratio ≥1.1), and of these, 51.4% had high antibody titres (ratio ≥3.5). Antibody levels decline over time, but nevertheless, out of 37 donors tested for an intended second CP donation, over 90% were still EUROIMMUN positive, and nearly 75% of those with high titres maintained high titres in the second sample. Donors with a greater probability of developing high titres of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies include those older than 40 years of age (RR 2.06; 95% CI 1.24-3.42), with more than 7 days of COVID-19 symptoms (RR 1.89; 95% CI 1.05-3.43) and collected within 4 months from infection (RR 2.61; 95% CI 1.16-5.90). Male donors had a trend towards higher titres compared with women (RR 1.67; 95% CI 0.91-3.06).

CONCLUSION

SARS-CoV-2 CP candidate donors' age, duration of COVID-19 symptoms and time from infection to donation associate with the collection of CP with high antibody levels. Beyond COVID-19, these data are relevant to inform decisions to optimize the CP donor selection process in potential future outbreaks.

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)

IMPORTANCE

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.

[Efficacy and safety of convalescent plasma administration in patients with COVID-19 infection]

INTRODUCTION

During the COVID-19 pandemic, several strategies were suggested for the management of the disease, including pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments such as convalescent plasma (CP). The use of CP was suggested due to the beneficial results shown in treating other viral diseases.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy and safety of CP obtained from whole blood in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

Pilot clinical trial in patients with COVID-19 from a general hospital. The subjects were separated into three groups that received the transfusion of 400ml of CP (n=23) or 400ml of standard plasma (SP) (n=19) and a non-transfused group (NT) (n=37). Patients also received the standard available medical treatment for COVID-19. Subjects were followed up daily from admission to day 21.

RESULTS

The CP did not improve the survival curve in moderate and severe variants of COVID-19, nor did it reduce the degree of severity of the disease evaluated with the COVID-19 WHO and SOFA clinical progression scale. No patient had a severe post-transfusion reaction to CP.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with CP does not reduce the mortality of patients even when its administration has a high degree of safety.

Rates Among Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 Treated With Convalescent Plasma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

To examine the association of COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion with mortality and the differences between subgroups in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Patients and Methods

On October 26, 2022, a systematic search was performed for clinical studies of COVID-19 convalescent plasma in the literature from January 1, 2020, to October 26, 2022. Randomized clinical trials and matched cohort studies investigating COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion compared with standard of care treatment or placebo among hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 were included. The electronic search yielded 3841 unique records, of which 744 were considered for full-text screening. The selection process was performed independently by a panel of 5 reviewers. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data were extracted by 5 independent reviewers in duplicate and pooled using an inverse-variance random effects model. The prespecified end point was all-cause mortality during hospitalization.

Results

Thirty-nine randomized clinical trials enrolling 21,529 participants and 70 matched cohort studies enrolling 50,160 participants were included in the systematic review. Separate meta-analyses reported that transfusion of COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the control cohort for both randomized clinical trials (odds ratio [OR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-1.00) and matched cohort studies (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.88). The meta-analysis of subgroups revealed 2 important findings. First, treatment with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with convalescent plasma containing low antibody levels (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.99). Second, earlier treatment with COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the later treatment cohort (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.82).

Conclusion

During COVID-19 convalescent plasma use was associated with a 13% reduced risk of mortality, implying a mortality benefit for hospitalized patients with COVID-19, particularly those treated with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels treated earlier in the disease course.

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.

Advances in attractive therapeutic approach for macrophage activation syndrome in COVID-19

Nowadays, people have relaxed their vigilance against COVID-19 due to its declining infection numbers and attenuated virulence. However, COVID-19 still needs to be concern due to its emerging variants, the relaxation of restrictions as well as breakthrough infections. During the period of the COVID-19 infection, the imbalanced and hyper-responsive immune system plays a critical role in its pathogenesis. Macrophage Activation Syndrome (MAS) is a fatal complication of immune system disease, which is caused by the excessive activation and proliferation of macrophages and cytotoxic T cells (CTL). COVID-19-related hyperinflammation shares common clinical features with the above MAS symptoms, such as hypercytokinemia, hyperferritinemia, and coagulopathy. In MAS, immune exhaustion or defective anti-viral responses leads to the inadequate cytolytic capacity of CTL which contributes to prolonged interaction between CTL, APCs and macrophages. It is possible that the same process also occurred in COVID-19 patients, and further led to a cytokine storm confined to the lungs. It is associated with the poor prognosis of severe patients such as multiple organ failure and even death. The main difference of cytokine storm is that in COVID-19 pneumonia is mainly the specific damage of the lung, while in MAS is easy to develop into a systemic. The attractive therapeutic approach to prevent MAS in COVID-19 mainly includes antiviral, antibiotics, convalescent plasma (CP) therapy and hemadsorption, extensive immunosuppressive agents, and cytokine-targeted therapies. Here, we discuss the role of the therapeutic approaches mentioned above in the two diseases. And we found that the treatment effect of the same therapeutic approach is different.

Exercise and Experiments of Nature

In this article, we highlight the contributions of passive experiments that address important exercise-related questions in integrative physiology and medicine. Passive experiments differ from active experiments in that passive experiments involve limited or no active intervention to generate observations and test hypotheses. Experiments of nature and natural experiments are two types of passive experiments. Experiments of nature include research participants with rare genetic or acquired conditions that facilitate exploration of specific physiological mechanisms. In this way, experiments of nature are parallel to classical "knockout" animal models among human research participants. Natural experiments are gleaned from data sets that allow population-based questions to be addressed. An advantage of both types of passive experiments is that more extreme and/or prolonged exposures to physiological and behavioral stimuli are possible in humans. In this article, we discuss a number of key passive experiments that have generated foundational medical knowledge or mechanistic physiological insights related to exercise. Both natural experiments and experiments of nature will be essential to generate and test hypotheses about the limits of human adaptability to stressors like exercise. © 2023 American Physiological Society. Compr Physiol 13:4879-4907, 2023.

Too Early to Abandon Convalescent Plasma for Supportive Treatment of COVID-19

The authors of a systematic review and meta-analysis conclude that the benefit of convalescent plasma (CP) in the treatment of COVID-19 is limited. Among other systematic reviews, only one found an indication of benefit of CP. However, a meta-analysis needs a focused and meaningful clinical question and should include studies which are designed to test a reasonable hypothesis. Clinical trials to support the licensing of medicines should aim to define as exactly as possible the investigational drug and target disease. In the case of COVID-19, trial details (e.g., duration, stage and severity of disease, and antibody content and dose of CP) are quite heterogeneous. The so far available evidence suggests that the hypothesis should be sharpened as to treat COVID -19 patients at risk for developing severe disease as early enough with a sufficiently high dose of specific antibodies. It has been demonstrated that such an approach is feasible, and the lack of an independent reproduction by further trials with a really comparable design can probably not be compensated by compiling all available, heterogenous trials, even with the best methodology of a systematic review and meta-analysis. Though the COVID-19 pandemic appears to be fading, we should not neglect the search for effective prevention and treatments, given the still high death toll of COVID-19. Monoclonal antibodies were found effective in the early phase of the pandemic; however, due to new variants of SARS-COV2 undermining their efficacy they are no longer recommended by the current NIH guidelines. CP can provide a spectrum of polyclonal antibodies in close timely and regional connection to the particular prevalent virus variant. It would be extremely valuable to obtain a solid scientific foundation for the principle of target specific and temporarily adapted passive immunization, which could be a fast and flexible instrument also in future outbreaks of novel pathogens.

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.

Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoglobulin Intravenous (Human) Investigational Product (COVID-HIGIV) in Healthy Adults: a Randomized, Controlled, Double-Blinded, Phase 1 Study

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin (human) investigational product (COVID-HIGIV) is a purified immunoglobulin preparation containing SARS-CoV-2 polyclonal antibodies. This single-center clinical trial aimed to characterize the safety and pharmacokinetics of COVID-HIGIV in healthy, adult volunteers. Participants were enrolled to receive one of three doses of COVID-HIGIV (100, 200, 400 mg/kg) or placebo in a 2:2:2:1 randomization scheme. Between 24 December 2020 and 27 July 2021, 28 participants met eligibility and were randomized with 27 of these 28 (96.4%) being administered either COVID-HIGIV (n = 23) or placebo (n = 4). Only one SAE was observed, and it occurred in the placebo group. A total of 18 out of 27 participants (66.7%) reported 50 adverse events (AEs) overall. All COVID-HIGIV-related adverse events were mild or moderate in severity and transient. The most frequent AEs (>5% of participants) reported in the safety population were headache (n = 6, 22.2%), chills (n = 3, 11.1%), increased bilirubin (n = 2, 7.4%), muscle spasms (n = 2, 7.4%), seasonal allergies (n = 2, 7.4%), pyrexia (n = 2, 7.4%), and oropharyngeal pain (n = 2, 7.4%). Using the SARS-CoV-2 binding IgG immunoassay (n = 22, specific for pharmacokinetics), the geometric means of Cmax (AU/mL) for the three COVID-HIGIV dose levels (low to high) were 7.69, 17.02, and 33.27 AU/mL; the average values of T_max were 7.09, 7.93, and 5.36 h, respectively. The half-life of COVID-HIGIV per dose level was 24 d (583 h), 31 d (753 h), and 26 d (619 h) for the 100 mg/kg, 200 mg/kg, and 400 mg/kg groups, respectively. The safety and pharmacokinetics of COVID-HIGIV support its development as a single-dose regimen for postexposure prophylaxis or treatment of COVID-19.

An update on SARS-CoV-2 immunization and future directions

Millions of people have died as a result of SARS-CoV-2, which was first discovered in China and has since spread globally. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection may show a range of symptoms, including fever, coughing, and shortness of breath, or they may show no symptoms at all. To treat COVID-19 symptoms and avoid serious infections, many medications and vaccinations have been employed. However, to entirely eradicate COVID-19 from the world, next-generation vaccine research is required because of the devastating consequences it is having for humanity and every nation's economy. Scientists are working hard to eradicate this dangerous virus across the world. SARS-CoV-2 has also undergone significant mutation, leading to distinct viral types such as the alpha, beta, gamma, delta, and omicron variants. This has sparked discussion about the effectiveness of current vaccines for the newly formed variants. A proper comparison of these vaccinations is required to compare their efficacy as the number of people immunized against SARS-CoV-2 globally increases. Population-level statistics evaluating the capacity of these vaccines to reduce infection are therefore being developed. In this paper, we analyze the many vaccines on the market in terms of their production process, price, dosage needed, and efficacy. This article also discusses the challenges of achieving herd immunity, the likelihood of reinfection, and the importance of convalescent plasma therapy in reducing infection.

Treating COVID-19: Targeting the Host Response, Not the Virus

In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), inexpensive generic drugs like statins, ACE inhibitors, and ARBs, especially if used in combination, might be the only practical way to save the lives of patients with severe COVID-19. These drugs will already be available in all countries on the first pandemic day. Because they target the host response to infection instead of the virus, they could be used to save lives during any pandemic. Observational studies show that inpatient statin treatment reduces 28–30-day mortality but randomized controlled trials have failed to show this benefit. Combination treatment has been tested for antivirals and dexamethasone but, with the exception of one observational study in Belgium, not for inexpensive generic drugs. Future pandemic research must include testing combination generic drug treatments that could be used in LMICs.

COVID 19 convalescent plasma: Is there still a place for CCP?

BACKGROUND

Convalescent plasma has been used for a long time for the treatment of various infectious diseases. The principle is to collect antibody-containing plasma from recovered patients and to transfuse the plasma to infectious patients thereby modifying their immune system. This approach was also used in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic when no specific drugs were available for the treatment of the disease.

DESIGN AND METHODS

This short narrative review reports on relevant studies of collection and transfusion of Covid-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) from 2020 until August 2022. Clinical patients' outcome parameters such as need for ventilation, length of hospital stay and mortality were analysed.

RESULTS

Heterogenous patient groups were studied resulting in difficult comparability of the studies. High titer of transfused neutralizing antibodies, early onset of CCP treatment and moderate disease activity were identified as key parameters for effective treatment. Special subgroups of patients were identified to benefit from CCP treatment. No relevant side effects were observed during and after collection and transfusion of CCP.

CONCLUSIONS

Transfusion of CCP plasma is an option for the treatment of special subgroups of patients suffering from SARS-CoV-2 infection. CCP can be easily used in low-to-middle income countries where no specific drugs are available for treatment of the disease. Further clinical trials are necessary to define the role of CCP in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 disease.

Effect of convalescent plasma transfusion on outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019: a meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

The aim of this review was to update evidence for benefit of convalescent plasma transfusion (CPT) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing CPT plus standard treatment versus standard treatment only in adults with COVID-19. Primary outcome measures were mortality and need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Twenty-Six RCT involving 19,816 patients were included in meta-analysis for mortality. Quantitative synthesis showed no statistically significant benefit of adding CPT to standard treatment (RR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.92 to 1.02) with unimportant heterogeneity (Q(25) = 26.48, p = .38, I² = 0.00%). Trim-and-fill-adjusted effect size was unimportantly changed and level of evidence was graded as high. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) indicated information size was adequate and CPT was futile. Seventeen trials involving 16,083 patients were included in meta-analysis for need of IMV. There was no statistically significant effect of CPT (RR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.95 to 1.10) with unimportant heterogeneity (Q(16) = 9.43, p = .89, I² = 3.30%). Trim-and-fill-adjusted effect size was trivially changed and level of evidence was graded as high. TSA showed information size was adequate and indicated futility of CPT. It is concluded with high level of certainty that CPT added to standard treatment of COVID-19 is not associated with reduced mortality or need of IMV compared with standard treatment alone. In view of these findings, further trials on efficacy of CPT in COVID-19 patients are probably not needed.

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.

Comprehensive evaluation of six interventions for hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A propensity score matching study

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of either hydroxychloroquine, triple combination therapy (TCT), favipiravir, dexamethasone, remdesivir, or COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) in comparison with standard-of-care for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 using real-world data from Saudi Arabia.

Patients and methods

A secondary database analysis was conducted using the Saudi Ministry of Health database for patients with COVID-19. Adult (≥ 18 years) hospitalized patients with COVID-19 between March 2020 and January 2021 were included in the analysis. A propensity score matching technique was used to establish comparable groups for each therapeutic approach. Lastly, an independent t-test and chi-square test were used to compare the matching groups in the aspects of the duration of hospitalization, length of stay (LOS) in intensive care units (ICU), in-hospital mortality, and composite poor outcome. Multilevel logistic regression model was used to assess the association between the severity stage of COVID-19 and the outcomes while using the medication or intervention used as a grouping variable in the model.

Results

The mean duration of hospitalization was significantly longer for patients who received TCT, favipiravir, dexamethasone, or CCP compared to patients who did not receive these therapies, with a mean difference ranging between 2.2 and 4.9 days for dexamethasone and CCP, respectively. Furthermore, the use of favipiravir or CCP was associated with a longer stay in ICU. Remdesivir was the only agent associated with in-hospital mortality benefit. A higher risk of mortality and poorer composite outcome were associated with the use of favipiravir or dexamethasone. However, the logistic regression model reveled that the difference between the two matched cohorts was due to the severity stage not the medication. Additionally, the use of hydroxychloroquine, TCT, or CCP had no impact on the incidence of in-hospital mortality or composite poor outcomes.

Conclusion

Remdesivir was the only agent associated with in-hospital mortality benefit. The observed worsened treatment outcomes associated with the use of dexamethasone or FPV shall be attributed to the severity stage rather than the medication use. In light of these varied results, additional studies are needed to continue evaluating the actual benefits of these therapies.

The evidence base for emergency use authorizations for COVID-19 treatments: A rapid review

Background and Aims

During the COVID-19 pandemic, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) permitted emergency use authorizations (EUAs) for vaccines/treatments with promising data. Eight treatments were issued EUAs by May 31, 2021; one of these was approved (Remdesivir for certain populations) and two were revoked (chloroquine phosphate/hydroxychloroquine and bamlanivimab) by September 30, 2021. The aim of this study is to find out what evidence the EUAs were based on and how many studies were published while they remained active (up to September 30, 2021).

Methods

A review of published clinical studies for the 6 months before each EUA was issued, and the time after (until September 30, 2021, or until revoked). PubMed and the identified systematic reviews were the sources for identifying published literature.

Results

The number of clinical studies published pre-EUA varied from a single case study (for chloroquine phosphate/hydroxychloroquine) to numerous studies of multiple types (for convalescent plasma). Four treatments had a single randomized controlled trial (RCT) as evidence (bamlanivimab monotherapy, REGN-COV, bamlanivimab + etesevimab, sotrovimab) and two also had other study types (remdesivir and baricitinib). The number of clinical studies published post-EUA (for those active on September 30, 2021) was widely varied. Eighteen RCTs were published for Convalescent plasma, while Remdesivir had eight. Baricitinib, REGN-COV, and bamlanivimab + etesevimab all had one, but none were published for sotrovimab.

Conclusion

The number of trials for treatments with EUAs was limited in all cases before the EUA was issued, and in most cases for those with EUAs ongoing at the end of September 2021. The presence of EUAs may discourage participation in relevant clinical trials, which delays the widespread implementation of evidenced-based therapies. Large, robust RCTs should be completed, such as the RECOVERY trial in the United Kingdom, to quickly find the answers desperately required during a pandemic.

Inflammatory markers and auto-Abs to type I IFNs in COVID-19 convalescent plasma cohort study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) contains neutralising anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies that may be useful as COVID-19 passive immunotherapy in patients at risk of developing severe disease. Such plasma from convalescent patients may also have additional immune-modulatory properties when transfused to COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

CCP (n = 766) was compared to non-convalescent control plasma (n = 166) for soluble inflammatory markers, ex-vivo inflammatory bioactivity on endothelial cells, neutralising auto-Abs to type I IFNs and reported adverse events in the recipients.

FINDINGS

CCP exhibited a statistically significant increase in IL-6 and TNF-alpha levels (0.531 ± 0.04 vs 0.271 ± 0.04; (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07371-0.4446; p = 0.0061) and 0.900 ± 0.07 vs 0.283 ± 0.07 pg/mL; (95% [CI], 0.3097-0.9202; p = 0.0000829) and lower IL-10 (0.731 ± 0.07 vs 1.22 ± 0.19 pg/mL; (95% [CI], -0.8180 to -0.1633; p = 0.0034) levels than control plasma. Neutralising auto-Abs against type I IFNs were detected in 14/766 (1.8%) CCPs and were not associated with reported adverse events when transfused. Inflammatory markers and bioactivity in CCP with or without auto-Abs, or in CCP whether or not linked to adverse events in transfused patients, did not differ to a statistically significant extent.

INTERPRETATION

Overall, CCP exhibited moderately increased inflammatory markers compared to the control plasma with no discernible differences in ex-vivo bioactivity. Auto-Abs to type I IFNs detected in a small fraction of CCP were not associated with reported adverse events or differences in inflammatory markers. Additional studies, including careful clinical evaluation of patients treated with CCP, are required in order to further define the clinical relevance of these findings.

FUNDING

French National Blood Service-EFS, the Association "Les Amis de Rémi" Savigneux, France, the "Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale (Medical Research Foundation)-REACTing 2020".

Pharmacokinetics of convalescent plasma therapy in a COVID-19 patient with X-linked Agammaglobulinemia

Convalescent plasma (CP) has been the first line of defense against numerous infectious diseases throughout history. The COVID-19 pandemic created a need for a quick, easily accessible, and effective treatment for severe disease and CP was able to meet that immediate need. The utility of CP warrants a better understanding of the pharmacokinetics of CP treatment. Here we present the case of a COVID-19 patient with a genetic deficiency in antibody production who received CP as a part of the treatment regimen. In depth serological analysis revealed a surprising lack of SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies and reduced serum IgG following CP infusion. Our study highlights plasma dilution and accelerated antibody clearance as potential mechanisms for the variable efficacy of CP therapy.

Lack of efficacy of convalescent plasma in COVID-19 patients with concomitant hematological malignancies: An Italian retrospective study

A multicenter retrospective study was designed to assess clinical outcome of COVID-19 in patients with hematological malignancies (HM) following treatment with anti-SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma (CP) or standard of care therapy. To this aim, a propensity score matching was used to assess the role of non-randomized administration of CP in this high-risk cohort of patients from the Italian Hematology Alliance on COVID-19 (ITA-HEMA-COV) project, now including 2049 untreated control patients. We investigated 30- and 90-day mortality, rate of admission to intensive care unit, proportion of patients requiring mechanical ventilatory support, hospitalization time, and SARS-CoV-2 clearance in 79 CP recipients and compared results with 158 propensity score-matched controls. Results indicated a lack of efficacy of CP in the study group compared with the untreated group, thus confirming the negative results obtained from randomized studies in immunocompetent individuals with COVID-19. In conclusion, this retrospective analysis did not meet the primary and secondary end points in any category of immunocompromized patients affected by HM.

A pilot study for treatment of severe COVID-19 pneumonia by aerosolized formulation of convalescent human immune plasma exosomes (ChipEXO™)

This is a single-center prospective, open-label, single arm interventional study to test the safety and efficacy of recently described ChipEXO™ for severe COVID-19 pneumonia. The ChipEXO™ is a natural product derived from convalescent human immune plasma of patients recovered from moderate COVID-19 infection. In September 2021, 13 patients with pending respiratory failure were treated with ChipEXO™ adapted for aerosolized formulation delivered via jet nebulizer. Patients received 1-5x1010 nano vesicle/5 mL in distilled water twice daily for five days as an add-on to ongoing conventional COVID-19 treatment. The primary endpoint was patient safety and survival over a 28-day follow-up. The secondary endpoint was longitudinal assessment of clinical parameters following ChipEXO™ to evaluate treatment response and gain insights into the pharmacodynamics. ChipEXO™ was tolerated well without any allergic reaction or acute toxicity. The survival rate was 84.6% and 11 out of 13 recovered without any sequel to lungs or other organs. ChipEXO™ treatment was effective immediately as shown in arterial blood gas analyses before and two hours after exosome inhalation. During the 5 days of treatment, there was a sustainable and gradual improvement on oxygenation parameters: i.e. respiratory rate (RR) [20.8% (P < 0.05)], oxygen saturation (SpO2) [6,7% (P < 0.05)] and partial pressure of oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) [127.9% (P < 0.05)] that correlated with steep decrease in the disease activity scores and inflammatory markers, i.e. the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score (75%, p < 0.05), C-reactive protein (46% p < 0.05), ferritin (58% p = 0.53), D-dimer (28% p=0.46). In conclusion, aerosolized ChipEXO™ showed promising safety and efficacy for life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia. Further studies on larger patient populations are required to confirm our findings and understand the pathophysiology of improvement toward a new therapeutic agent for the treatment of severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

A pilot study for treatment of severe COVID-19 pneumonia by aerosolized formulation of convalescent human immune plasma exosomes (ChipEXO™)

This is a single-center prospective, open-label, single arm interventional study to test the safety and efficacy of recently described ChipEXO™ for severe COVID-19 pneumonia. The ChipEXO™ is a natural product derived from convalescent human immune plasma of patients recovered from moderate COVID-19 infection. In September 2021, 13 patients with pending respiratory failure were treated with ChipEXO™ adapted for aerosolized formulation delivered via jet nebulizer. Patients received 1-5x1010 nano vesicle/5 mL in distilled water twice daily for five days as an add-on to ongoing conventional COVID-19 treatment. The primary endpoint was patient safety and survival over a 28-day follow-up. The secondary endpoint was longitudinal assessment of clinical parameters following ChipEXO™ to evaluate treatment response and gain insights into the pharmacodynamics. ChipEXO™ was tolerated well without any allergic reaction or acute toxicity. The survival rate was 84.6% and 11 out of 13 recovered without any sequel to lungs or other organs. ChipEXO™ treatment was effective immediately as shown in arterial blood gas analyses before and two hours after exosome inhalation. During the 5 days of treatment, there was a sustainable and gradual improvement on oxygenation parameters: i.e. respiratory rate (RR) [20.8% (P &lt; 0.05)], oxygen saturation (SpO2) [6,7% (P &lt; 0.05)] and partial pressure of oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) [127.9% (P &lt; 0.05)] that correlated with steep decrease in the disease activity scores and inflammatory markers, i.e. the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score (75%, p &lt; 0.05), C-reactive protein (46% p &lt; 0.05), ferritin (58% p = 0.53), D-dimer (28% p=0.46). In conclusion, aerosolized ChipEXO™ showed promising safety and efficacy for life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia. Further studies on larger patient populations are required to confirm our findings and understand the pathophysiology of improvement toward a new therapeutic agent for the treatment of severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

A pilot study for treatment of severe COVID-19 pneumonia by aerosolized formulation of convalescent human immune plasma exosomes (ChipEXO™)

This is a single-center prospective, open-label, single arm interventional study to test the safety and efficacy of recently described ChipEXO™ for severe COVID-19 pneumonia. The ChipEXO™ is a natural product derived from convalescent human immune plasma of patients recovered from moderate COVID-19 infection. In September 2021, 13 patients with pending respiratory failure were treated with ChipEXO™ adapted for aerosolized formulation delivered via jet nebulizer. Patients received 1-5x1010 nano vesicle/5 mL in distilled water twice daily for five days as an add-on to ongoing conventional COVID-19 treatment. The primary endpoint was patient safety and survival over a 28-day follow-up. The secondary endpoint was longitudinal assessment of clinical parameters following ChipEXO™ to evaluate treatment response and gain insights into the pharmacodynamics. ChipEXO™ was tolerated well without any allergic reaction or acute toxicity. The survival rate was 84.6% and 11 out of 13 recovered without any sequel to lungs or other organs. ChipEXO™ treatment was effective immediately as shown in arterial blood gas analyses before and two hours after exosome inhalation. During the 5 days of treatment, there was a sustainable and gradual improvement on oxygenation parameters: i.e. respiratory rate (RR) [20.8% (P &lt; 0.05)], oxygen saturation (SpO2) [6,7% (P &lt; 0.05)] and partial pressure of oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) [127.9% (P &lt; 0.05)] that correlated with steep decrease in the disease activity scores and inflammatory markers, i.e. the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score (75%, p &lt; 0.05), C-reactive protein (46% p &lt; 0.05), ferritin (58% p = 0.53), D-dimer (28% p=0.46). In conclusion, aerosolized ChipEXO™ showed promising safety and efficacy for life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia. Further studies on larger patient populations are required to confirm our findings and understand the pathophysiology of improvement toward a new therapeutic agent for the treatment of severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

Essential services: Quantifying the contributions of America's pharmacists in COVID-19 clinical interventions

BACKGROUND

As the COVID-19 pandemic spread across the United States, America's pharmacists and their teammates expanded their clinical services to help their communities from every practice setting: community and ambulatory care, inpatient, long-term care, academia, public health, and many others.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the study is to begin to quantify contributions of U.S. pharmacists in providing clinical interventions that mitigate and control the pandemic. These interventions span the gamut of diagnosis, prevention, treatment, and support, intervening patient by patient with vaccines, diagnostic tests, convalescent plasma, monoclonal antibodies, antiviral medications, and supportive therapies.

METHODS

Review of published literature, relevant web pages, and queries to national and state professional pharmacy associations and government agencies.

RESULTS

From February 2020 through September 2022, pharmacists and their teammates conducted >42 million COVID-19 tests, provided >270 million vaccinations (including 8.1 million COVID-19 vaccinations for long-term care residents) within community pharmacy programs alone, and provided >50 million influenza and other vaccinations per year. Pharmacists plausibly accounted for >50% of COVID-19 vaccinations in the United States. Pharmacists prescribed, dispensed, and administered an uncounted number of antibody products and antiviral medications, including care for 5.4 million inpatients and innumerable outpatients. Using conservative estimates, pandemic interventions by pharmacists and teammates averted >1 million deaths, >8 million hospitalizations, and $450 billion in health care costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacists and their teammates contributed to America's health and recovery during the COVID-19 pandemic by providing >350 million clinical interventions to >150 million people in the form of testing, parenteral antibodies, vaccinations, antiviral therapies, and inpatient care. The number of lives touched and people cared for by pharmacists continues to rise.

SARS-CoV-2 IgG Levels Allow Predicting the Optimal Time Span of Convalescent Plasma Donor Suitability

Convalescent plasma (CP) has been in use for the treatment of numerous infectious diseases for more than a century, recently also for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A major challenge for this treatment is identifying suitable donors with sufficient levels of functional antibodies and to determine the optimal time span for CP donation. In this retrospective study, we analyzed 189 CP donations of 66 donors regarding anti-SARS-CoV-2 anti-S IgG antibody levels. We found a significant correlation between the semi-quantitative SARS-CoV-2 IgG ratio values and in vitro antibody functionality. A time-to-event analysis allowed us to predict the optimal time span of COVID-19 CP donor suitability. We found that high IgG ratio values, which significantly correlate with high in vitro antibody functionality, were suitable for CP donation for a median of 134 days after the first CP donation. Donors with lower IgG ratios were suitable for a median of 53 days. Our data support plasma collection centers to determine optimal points in time for CP donation by means of widely used semi-quantitative laboratory IgG ratio values.

Efficacy of COVID-HIGIV in animal models of SARS-CoV-2 infection

In late 2019 the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus emerged in China and quickly spread into a worldwide pandemic. It has caused millions of hospitalizations and deaths, despite the use of COVID-19 vaccines. Convalescent plasma and monoclonal antibodies emerged as major therapeutic options for treatment of COVID-19. We have developed an anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin intravenous (Human) (COVID-HIGIV), a potential improvement from using convalescent plasma. In this report the efficacy of COVID-HIGIV was evaluated in hamster and mouse models of SARS-CoV-2 infection. COVID-HIGIV treatment in both mice and hamsters significantly reduced the viral load in the lungs. Among COVID-HIGIV treated animals, infection-related body weight loss was reduced and the animals regained their baseline body weight faster than the PBS controls. In hamsters, COVID-HIGIV treatment reduced infection-associated lung pathology including lung inflammation, and pneumocyte hypertrophy in the lungs. These results support ongoing trials for outpatient treatment with COVID-HIGIV for safety and efficacy evaluation (NCT04910269, NCT04546581).

Efficacy and Safety of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma in Hospitalized Patients-An Open-Label Phase II Clinical Trial

Background: COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) is an important antiviral option for selected patients with COVID-19. Materials and Methods: In this open-label, phase 2, clinical trial conducted from 30 April 2020 till 10 May 2021 in the Republic of North Macedonia, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of CCP in hospitalized patients. Treatment was with a single unit of CCP having an anti-RBD IgG concentration higher than 5 AU/mL. Results: There were 189 patients that completed the study, of which 65 (34.4%) had WHO 8-point clinical progression scale score of 3 (requiring hospital care but not oxygen support), 65 (34.4%) had a score of 4 (hospitalized and requiring supplemental oxygen by mask or nasal prongs), and 59 (31.2%) had a score of 5 (hospitalized and requiring supplemental oxygen by non-invasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen). Mean age was 57 years (range 22−94), 78.5% were males, 80.4% had elevated body mass index, and 70.9% had comorbidity. Following CCP transfusion, we observed clinical improvement with increase rates in oxygenation-free days of 32.3% and 58.5% at 24 h and seven days after CCP transfusion, a decline in WHO scores, and reduced progression to severe disease (only one patient was admitted to ICU after CCP transfusion). Mortality in the entire cohort was 11.6% (22/189). We recorded 0% mortality in WHO score 3 (0/65) and in patients that received CCP transfusion in the first seven days of disease, 4.6% mortality in WHO score 4 (3/65), and 30.5% mortality in WHO score 5 (18/59). Mortality correlated with WHO score (Chi-square 19.3, p < 0.001) and with stay in the ICU (Chi-square 55.526, p ≤ 0.001). No severe adverse events were reported. Conclusions: This study showed that early administration of CCP to patients with moderate disease was a safe and potentially effective treatment for hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04397523).

Antibody Therapy for COVID-19: Categories, Pros, and Cons

COVID-19 is a life-threatening respiratory disease triggered by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It has been considered a pandemic viral infection since December 2019. The investigation of the effective prophylaxis or therapeutic strategies for emergency management of the current condition has become a priority for medical research centers and pharmaceutical companies. This article provides a comprehensive review of antibody therapy and its different categories with their advantages and disadvantages for COVID-19 over the last few years of the current pandemic. Antibodies can be generated by active immunization, including natural infection with a pathogen and vaccination, or by the passive immunization method such as convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) and antibody synthesis in laboratories. Each of these ways has its characteristics. Arming the immune system with antibodies is the main aim of antiviral therapeutic procedures toward SARS-CoV-2. Collecting and discussing various aspects of available data in this field can give researchers a better perspective for the production of antibody-based products or selection of the most appropriate approach of antibody therapies to improve different cases of COVID-19. Moreover, it can help them control similar viral pandemics that may happen in the future appropriately.

Convalescent Plasma in Older Adults with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Among all patients infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the older adult population was the most affected, with 80%–90% of fatalities occurring in this group. The effectiveness of convalescent plasma (CP) in older adults is considerably more restricted than that in adults, resulting in a demand for data on the efficacy of therapeutic CP in older adults. This meta-analysis of updated literature examined the effect of CP in older adults with COVID-19.

Methods

Relevant literature was identified from studies indexed in the Cochrane, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases between December 2019 and April 2022. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Risk estimates were pooled using a random-effects model. The risk of bias was assessed by regression-based Egger test using the relative risk (RR) and upper and lower confidence intervals (CIs) of the three included studies.

Results

Among 377 studies identified, three full-text studies that included 1,038 patients met the inclusion criteria. The results of our meta-analysis showed that CP administration lowered the mortality risk in older adults with COVID-19 (RR=0.47; 95% CI, 0.26–0.86; p=0.01; I²=0%, p<0.81). CP therapy was more useful if delivered early in the course of the disease (within 72 hours of onset) and in less severe stages of the disease. Mortality tended to be lower in the high-titer group.Conclusions: CP treatment was significantly associated with a lower risk of mortality in older adults with COVID-19 than in patients not administered CP. The timing of CP administration is critical since earlier treatment after disease onset was associated with a better prognosis.

COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma and Clinical Trials: Understanding Conflicting Outcomes

Convalescent plasma (CP) recurs as a frontline treatment in epidemics because it is available as soon as there are survivors. The COVID-19 pandemic represented the first large-scale opportunity to shed light on the mechanisms of action, safety, and efficacy of CP using modern evidence-based medicine approaches. Studies ranging from observational case series to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported highly variable efficacy results for COVID-19 CP (CCP), resulting in uncertainty. We analyzed variables associated with efficacy, such as clinical settings, disease severity, CCP SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) antibody levels and function, dose, timing of administration (variously defined as time from onset of symptoms, molecular diagnosis, diagnosis of pneumonia, or hospitalization, or by serostatus), outcomes (defined as hospitalization, requirement for ventilation, clinical improvement, or mortality), CCP provenance and time for collection, and criteria for efficacy. The conflicting trial results, along with both recent WHO guidelines discouraging CCP usage and the recent expansion of the FDA emergency use authorization (EUA) to include outpatient use of CCP, create confusion for both clinicians and patients about the appropriate use of CCP. A review of 30 available RCTs demonstrated that signals of efficacy (including reductions in mortality) were more likely if the CCP neutralizing titer was >160 and the time to randomization was less than 9 days. The emergence of the Omicron variant also reminds us of the benefits of polyclonal antibody therapies, especially as a bridge to the development and availability of more specific therapies.

Convalescent plasma and COVID-19: Time for a second-second look?

In this short narrative, we highlight some of our experiences leading the US Convalescent Plasma Program at the beginning of the pandemic in the spring and summer of 2020. This includes a brief summary of how the program emerged and high-level lessons we learned. We also share our impressions about why convalescent plasma was used at scale in the United States, early in the pandemic and share ideas that might inform the use of convalescent plasma in future outbreaks of novel infectious diseases.

Decrease in Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme activity but not concentration in plasma/lungs in COVID-19 patients offers clues for diagnosis/treatment

Although several therapeutics are used to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, there is still no definitive metabolic marker to evaluate disease severity and recovery or a quantitative test to end quarantine. Because severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infects human cells via the angiotensin-converting-enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor and COVID-19 is associated with renin-angiotensin system dysregulation, we evaluated soluble ACE2 (sACE2) activity in the plasma/saliva of 80 hospitalized COVID-19 patients and 27 non-COVID-19 volunteers, and levels of ACE2/Ang (1-7) in plasma or membrane (mACE2) in lung autopsy samples. sACE2 activity was markedly reduced (p < 0.0001) in COVID-19 plasma (n = 59) compared with controls (n = 27). Nadir sACE2 activity in early hospitalization was restored during disease recovery, irrespective of patient age, demographic variations, or comorbidity; in convalescent plasma-administered patients (n = 45), restoration was statistically higher than matched controls (n = 22, p = 0.0021). ACE2 activity was also substantially reduced in the saliva of COVID-19 patients compared with controls (p = 0.0065). There is a strong inverse correlation between sACE2 concentration and sACE2 activity and Ang (1-7) levels in participant plasmas. However, there were no difference in membrane ACE2 levels in lungs of autopsy tissues of COVID-19 (n = 800) versus other conditions (n = 300). These clinical observations suggest sACE2 activity as a potential biomarker and therapeutic target for COVID-19.

Multistep screening and selection of COVID-19 convalescent plasma donors at the early stage of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: A retrospective analysis

Background and Aims

The COVID-19 pandemic reached Bavaria in February 2020. Almost simultaneously, Chinese physicians published reports on the first successful treatments with plasma from COVID-19 convalescent donors. With these silver linings on the horizon, we decided to establish the manufacturing of anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody-containing plasma from COVID-19 convalescent donors at our site. Here we describe our donor selection process, built from the ground up, which enabled us to cope with the immense resonance after our social media call for donors.

Methods

As a first step, we created a specific questionnaire for telephone interviews applied by trained students to filter the wave of callers interested in plasma donation. Afterward, the medical staff evaluated the hotline questionnaires and chose eligible donors to be invited for on-site donor evaluation. Data documentation was performed with MS Excel, and statistical analyses were calculated with GraphPad Prism 8. A quantitative in-house ELISA was used to detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and determine specific titers.

Results

Out of 1465 calls from potential plasma donors, we could register 420 persons with a completed questionnaire. Evaluation of questionnaires identified 222 of 420 persons as eligible for donation, and 55 were directly asked for on-site donor qualification. Subsequently, as anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers ≥1:800 were required, we invited 89 of 222 potential donors for an antibody screening. This procedure resulted in another 28 potential donors for an on-site evaluation. Finally, 12 donors qualified with a titer of 1:400 and 24 with ≥1:800.

Conclusion

Identifying suitable COVID-19 convalescent plasma donors was expected to be highly time-consuming. Implementing a screening procedure with our hotline questionnaire helped us streamline the donor selection process and reduce the workload for the staff. We propose combining the described selection process with the later introduced on-site antibody screening as an effective strategy.

The spike glycoprotein of highly pathogenic human coronaviruses: structural insights for understanding infection, evolution and inhibition

Highly pathogenic human coronaviruses (CoV) including SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 have emerged over the past two decades, resulting in infectious disease outbreaks that have greatly affected public health. The CoV surface spike (S) glycoprotein mediates receptor binding and membrane fusion for cell entry, playing critical roles in CoV infection and evolution. The S glycoprotein is also the major target molecule for prophylactic and therapeutic interventions, including neutralizing antibodies and vaccines. In this review, we summarize key studies that have revealed the structural basis of S-mediated cell entry of SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. Additionally, we discuss the evolution of the S glycoprotein to realize cross-species transmission from the viewpoint of structural biology. Lastly, we describe the recent progress in developing antibodies, nanobodies and peptide inhibitors that target the SARS-CoV-2 S glycoprotein for therapeutic purposes.

International Multicenter Study Comparing Cancer to Non-Cancer Patients with COVID-19: Impact of Risk Factors and Treatment Modalities on Survivorship

Background

In this international multicenter study we aimed to determine the independent risk factors associated with increased 30-day mortality and the impact of novel treatment modalities in a large group of cancer and non-cancer patients with COVID-19 from multiple countries.

Methods

We retrospectively collected de-identified data on a cohort of cancer and non-cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between January and November 2020, from 16 international centers.

Results

We analyzed 3966 COVID-19 confirmed patients, 1115 cancer and 2851 non-cancer patients. Cancer patients were more likely to be pancytopenic, and have a smoking history, pulmonary disorders, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and corticosteroid use in the preceding two weeks (p≤0.01). In addition, they were more likely to present with higher inflammatory biomarkers (D-dimer, ferritin and procalcitonin), but were less likely to present with clinical symptoms (p≤0.01). By multivariable logistic regression analysis, cancer was an independent risk factor for 30-day mortality (OR 1.46; 95% CI 1.03 to 2.07; p=0.035). Older age (≥65 years) was the strongest predictor of 30-day mortality in all patients (OR 4.55; 95% CI 3.34 to6.20; p< 0.0001). Remdesivir was the only therapeutic agent independently associated with decreased 30-day mortality (OR 0.58; CI 0.39-0.88; p=0.009). Among patients on low-flow oxygen at admission, patients who received remdesivir had a lower 30-day mortality rate than those who did not (5.9% vs 17.6%; p=0.03).

Conclusions

Cancer is an independent risk factor for increased 30-day all-cause mortality from COVID-19. Remdesivir, particularly in patients receiving low-flow oxygen, can reduce 30-day all-cause mortality.

Condensed Abstract

In this large multicenter worldwide study of 4015 patients with COVID-19 that included 1115 patients with cancer, we found that cancer is an independent risk factor for increased 30-day all-cause mortality. Remdesivir is a promising treatment modality to reduce 30-day all-cause mortality.

Characterization of Pathogen Inactivated COVID ‐19 Convalescent Plasma and Responses in Transfused Patients

Background

Efficacy of donated COVID‐19 convalescent plasma (dCCP) is uncertain and may depend on antibody titers, neutralizing capacity, timing of administration, and patient characteristics.

Study Design and Methods

In a single‐center hypothesis‐generating prospective case–control study with 1:2 matched dCCP recipients to controls according to disease severity at day 1, hospitalized adults with COVID‐19 pneumonia received 2 × 200 ml pathogen‐reduced treated dCCP from 2 different donors. We evaluated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) antibodies in COVID‐19 convalescent plasma donors and recipients using multiple antibody assays including a Coronavirus antigen microarray (COVAM), and binding and neutralizing antibody assays. Outcomes were dCCP characteristics, antibody responses, 28‐day mortality, and dCCP ‐related adverse events in recipients.

Results

Eleven of 13 dCCPs (85%) contained neutralizing antibodies (nAb). PRT did not affect dCCP antibody activity. Fifteen CCP recipients and 30 controls (median age 64 and 65 years, respectively) were enrolled. dCCP recipients received 2 dCCPs from 2 different donors after a median of one hospital day and 11 days after symptom onset. One dCCP recipient (6.7%) and 6 controls (20%) died (p = 0.233). We observed no dCCP‐related adverse events. Transfusion of unselected dCCP led to heterogeneous SARS CoV‐2 antibody responses. COVAM clustered dCCPs in 4 distinct groups and showed endogenous immune responses to SARS‐CoV‐2 antigens over 14–21 days post dCCP in all except 4 immunosuppressed recipients.

Discussion

PRT did not impact dCCP anti‐virus neutralizing activity. Transfusion of unselected dCCP did not impact survival and had no adverse effects. Variable dCCP antibodies and post‐transfusion antibody responses indicate the need for controlled trials using well‐characterized dCCP with informative assays.

Potent and broad neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs) including omicron sub-lineages BA.1 and BA.2 by biparatopic human VH domains

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs) requires the development of next-generation biologics with high neutralization breadth. Here, we characterized a human VH domain, F6, which we generated by sequentially panning large phage-displayed VH libraries against receptor binding domains (RBDs) containing VOC mutations. Cryo-EM analyses reveal that F6 has a unique binding mode that spans a broad surface of the RBD and involves the antibody framework region. Attachment of an Fc region to a fusion of F6 and ab8, a previously characterized VH domain, resulted in a construct (F6-ab8-Fc) that broadly and potently neutralized VOCs including Omicron. Additionally, prophylactic treatment using F6-ab8-Fc reduced live Beta (B.1.351) variant viral titers in the lungs of a mouse model. Our results provide a new potential therapeutic against SARS-CoV-2 variants including Omicron and highlight a vulnerable epitope within the spike that may be exploited to achieve broad protection against circulating variants.

Multi-center matched cohort study of convalescent plasma for hospitalized patients with COVID-19

Background

Although frequently used in the early pandemic, data on the effectiveness of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) remain mixed. We investigated the effectiveness and safety of CCP in hospitalized COVID-19 patients in real-world practices during the first two waves of the pandemic in a multi-hospital healthcare system in Texas.

Methods and findings

Among 11,322 hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection from July 1, 2020 to April 15, 2021, we included patients who received CCP and matched them with those who did not receive CCP within ±2 days of the transfusion date across sites within strata of sex, age groups, days and use of dexamethasone from hospital admission to the match date, and oxygen requirements 4–12 hours prior to the match date. Cox proportional hazards model estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for effectiveness outcomes in a propensity score 1:1 matched cohort. Pre-defined safety outcomes were described. We included 1,245 patients each in the CCP treated and untreated groups. Oxygen support was required by 93% of patients at the baseline. The pre-defined primary effectiveness outcome of 28-day in-hospital all-cause mortality (HR = 0.85; 95%CI: 0.66,1.10) were similar between treatment groups. Sensitivity and stratified analyses found similar null results. CCP-treated patients were less likely to be discharged alive (HR = 0.82; 95%CI: 0.74, 0.91), and more likely to receive mechanical ventilation (HR = 1.48; 95%CI: 1.12, 1.96). Safety outcomes were rare and similar between treatment groups.

Conclusion

The findings in this large, matched cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and mostly requiring oxygen support at the time of treatment, do not support a clinical benefit in 28-day in-hospital all-cause mortality for CCP. Future studies should assess the potential benefits with specifically high-titer units in perhaps certain subgroups of patients (e.g. those with early disease or immunocompromised).

Recent advances in passive immunotherapies for COVID-19: The Evidence-Based approaches and clinical trials

In late 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged, causing a global pandemic called COVID-19. Currently, there is no definitive treatment for this emerging disease. Global efforts resulted in developing multiple platforms of COVID-19 vaccines, but their efficacy in humans should be wholly investigated in the long-term clinical and epidemiological follow-ups. Despite the international efforts, COVID-19 vaccination accompanies challenges, including financial and political obstacles, serious adverse effects (AEs), the impossibility of using vaccines in certain groups of people in the community, and viral evasion due to emerging novel variants of SARS-CoV-2 in many countries. For these reasons, passive immunotherapy has been considered a complementary remedy and a promising way to manage COVID-19. These approaches arebased on reduced inflammation due to inhibiting cytokine storm phenomena, immunomodulation,preventing acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), viral neutralization, anddecreased viral load. This article highlights passive immunotherapy and immunomodulation approaches in managing and treating COVID-19 patients and discusses relevant clinical trials (CTs).

Development and characterization of anti-SARS-CoV-2 intravenous immunoglobulin from COVID-19 convalescent plasma

Background: The authors describe the developmental process of intravenous anti-COVID-19 hyperimmune immunoglobulin from anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody-containing plasma. Furthermore, the authors investigated its safety and protective activity in animal models. Materials & methods: The manufacturing process included standard ethanol fractionation, chromatographic purification steps and virus removal or inactivation. Results: The authors produced pure and safe immunoglobulin for intravenous administration, with 98.1 ± 6.5 mg/ml protein content, of which 97.6 ± 0.7% was IgG. The concentration factor of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies was 9.4 ± 1.4-times. Safety studies in animals showed no signs of acute/chronic toxicity or allergenic or thrombogenic properties. Intravenous anti-COVID-19 hyperimmune immunoglobulin protected immunosuppressed hamsters against SARS-Cov-2. Conclusion: The obtained results can allow the start of clinical trials to study the safety and efficacy in healthy adults.

An intravenous immunoglobulin with a high concentration of SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibodies was prepared from COVID-19 convalescent plasma, which could be utilized as a passive immunization tool in regard to COVID-19 treatment. The manufacturing process employed conforms to commonly held business standards within the intravenous immunoglobulin industry and includes plasma ethanol fractionation following chromatographic purification and special virus removal or inactivation steps. The results of the preclinical in vitro and in vivo experiments demonstrate that the immunoglobulin produced in this study is pure and safe enough to be considered for intravenous applications. The SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody concentration was found to have increased 9.4 ± 1.4-times compared with human plasma. The anti-COVID-19 hyperimmune immunoglobulin showed no signs of toxicity and did not cause any blood clot formations when administered to rabbits. Furthermore, the anti-COVID-19 hyperimmune immunoglobulin was demonstrated to protect immunosuppressed hamsters against SARS-CoV-2.

Pure and safe intravenous immunoglobulin with a high concentration of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies was produced from #COVID19 convalescent plasma and demonstrated protective effects against SARS-CoV-2 in immunosuppressed hamsters.

Analysis of 52 240 source plasma donors of convalescent COVID-19 plasma: Sex, ethnicity, and age association with initial antibody levels and rate of dissipation

Background

COVID‐19 convalescent plasma (CCP) was approved under emergency authorization to treat critically ill patients with COVID‐19 in the United States in 2020. We explored the demographics of donors contributing plasma for a hyperimmune, plasma‐derived therapy to evaluate factors that may be associated with anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 antibody response variability and, subsequently, antibody titers.

Study Design

An electronic search of CCP donors was performed across 282 US plasma donation centers. Donations were screened for nucleocapsid protein‐binding‐IgG using the Abbott SARS‐CoV‐2 IgG assay.

Results

Overall, 52 240 donors donated 418 046 units of CCP. Donors were of various ethnicities: 43% Caucasian, 34% Hispanic, 17% African American, 2% Native American, 1% Asian, and 3% other. Females had higher initial mean anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 antibody titers but an overall faster rate of decline (P < .0001). Initial antibody titers increased with age: individuals aged 55 to 66 years had elevated anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 titers for longer periods compared with other ages (P = .0004). African American donors had the lowest initial antibody titers but a slower rate of decline (P < .0001), while Caucasian (P = .0088) and Hispanic (P = .0193) groups had the fastest rates of decline. Most donor antibody levels decreased below the inclusion criteria (≥1.50) within 30 to 100 days of first donation, but donation frequency did not appear to be associated with rate of decline.

Conclusion

Several factors may be associated with anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 antibody response including donor age and sex. Evaluating these factors during development of future hyperimmune globulin products may help generation of therapies with optimal efficacy.