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

Evaluation of Neutralizing Capacity of Tixagevimab plus Cilgavimab (AZD7442) against Different SARS-CoV-2 Variants: A Case Report Study with Comparison to a Vaccinated Population

AZD7442 (150 mg of tixagevimab plus 150 mg of cilgavimab) has been approved for the preexposure prophylaxis of COVID-19 and for the treatment of adults and adolescents with COVID-19 who do not require supplemental oxygen and who are at increased risk of severe COVID-19. Thus, the aim of the present study is to evaluate the neutralizing capacity of tixagevimab and cilgavimab across different SARS-CoV-2 variants in two patients who received AZD7442 for immunoprophylaxis. A cohort of subjects (n = 45) who had received the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine has been included to compare these two preventive strategies. Neutralizing antibody (NAb) titers against several variants were assessed against the wild-type, alpha, beta, gamma, delta, omicron BA.5, and XBB.1.5 variants. Binding antibodies have also been measured. NAbs T 1/2 for AZD7442 was 8.1 days (95% CI: 5.1-19.5 days) and was 11.8 days (95% CI: 7.9-23.7 days) for the primo-vaccination cohort. The time to reach neutralization negativity was 108.3 days (95% CI: 66.9-130.7) for AZD7442 compared to 95.4 days (95% CI: 31.0-119.7 days) for the primo-vaccination cohort. The time to reach NAbs' negativity differs between variants with the maximum value obtained for alpha (i.e., 101.1 days (95% CI: 30.0-135.4 days)) and the minimum obtained for beta (i.e., 61.2 days (95% CI: 37.8-77.1 days)). Our results reinforce the need of reviewing the use of AZD7442 in relation to variants of concern and potentially adapting its administration schedule. AZD7442 could be indicated for short-term prophylaxis in frail patients who may be acutely exposed to SARS-CoV-2.

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.

Experiences in the use of multiple doses of convalescent plasma in critically ill patients with COVID-19: An early phase 1 descriptive study

Background

At the beginning of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, transfusion of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescent plasma (CCP) emerged as a potential therapeutic strategy to help patients severely afflicted by COVID-19. The efficacy of CCP has been controversial as it depends on many variables pertaining to the plasma donor and the patient with COVID-19, for example, time of convalescence or symptoms onset. This feasibility and descriptive study aimed to assess the safety of multiple doses of CCP in mechanically ventilated, intubated patients with respiratory failure due to COVID-19.

Methods

A cohort of 30 patients all experiencing severe respiratory failure and undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation in an intensive care unit, received up to five doses of 300-600 mL of CCP on alternate days (0, 2, 4, 6, and 8) until extubation, futility, or death.

Results

Nineteen patients received five doses, seven received four, and four received two or three doses. At 28-day follow-up mark, 57% of patients recovered and were sent home, and the long-term mortality rate was 27%. Ten severe adverse events reported in the study were unrelated to CCP transfusion. Independent of the number of transfused doses, most patients had detectable levels of total and neutralizing antibodies in plasma.

Conclusion

This study suggests that transfusion of multiple doses of CCP is safe. This strategy may represent a viable option for future studies, given the potential benefit of CCP transfusions during the early stages of infection in unvaccinated populations and in settings where monoclonal antibodies or antivirals are contraindicated or unavailable.

Hyperimmune Plasma and Immunoglobulins against COVID-19: A Narrative Review

Since late 2019, the new SARS-CoV-2 virus belonging to the Coronaviridae family has been responsible for COVID-19 pandemic, a severe acute respiratory syndrome. Several antiviral therapies, mostly derived from previous epidemics, were initially repurposed to fight this not rarely life-threatening respiratory illness. Among them, however, the only specific antibody-based therapy available against SARS-CoV-2 infection during the first year of the pandemic was represented by COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP). CCP, collected from recovered individuals, contains high levels of polyclonal antibodies of different subclasses able to neutralize SARS-CoV-2 infection. Tens of randomized controlled trials have been conducted during the last three years of the pandemic to evaluate the safety and the clinical efficacy of CCP in both hospitalized and ambulatory COVID-19 patients, whose main results will be summarized in this narrative review. In addition, we will present the current knowledge on the development of anti-SARS-CoV-2 hyperimmune polyclonal immunoglobulins.

Omicron related COVID-19 prevention and treatment measures for patients with hematological malignancy and strategies for modifying hematologic treatment regimes

The Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 has rapidly become the dominant strain worldwide due to its high transmissibility, although it appears to be less pathogenic than previous strains. However, individuals with hematological malignancy (HM) and COVID-19 remain susceptible to severe infection and mortality, especially those with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and those undergoing chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) treatment. Hematologists should thoroughly assess the severity of the patient's hematological disease and the potential risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection before initiating chemotherapy or immunosuppressive treatment. Vaccination and booster doses are strongly recommended and patients with a poor vaccine response may benefit from long-acting COVID-19 neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (such as Evusheld). Early use of small molecule antiviral drugs is recommended for managing mild COVID-19 in HM patients and those with severe immunodeficiency may benefit from SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing monoclonal antibody therapy and high-titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP). For moderate to severe cases, low-dose glucocorticoids in combination with early antiviral treatment can be administered, with cytokine receptor antagonists or JAK inhibitors added if the condition persists or worsens. In the treatment of hematological malignancies, delaying chemotherapy is preferable for CLL, acute leukemia (AL), and low-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), but if the disease progresses, appropriate adjustments in dosage and frequency of treatment are required, with the avoidance of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, CAR-T and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Patients with chronic myelocytic leukemia (CML) and myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) can continue current treatment. What's more, non-drug protective measures, the development of new vaccines and antiviral drugs, and monitoring of mutations in immunocompromised populations are particularly important.

COVID-19 in Adult Patients with Hematological Malignancies-Lessons Learned after Three Years of Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic is undoubtedly the most difficult health challenge of the 21st century with more than 600 million laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections and over 6.5 million deaths worldwide. The coronavirus pandemic contributed to rapid development of mRNA vaccines, which, along with new antiviral drugs, have been the subject of extensive research for many decades. Nevertheless, elderly, multi-morbid and immunocompromised patients continue to face a more severe clinical course and a higher risk of death from COVID-19, even now that the risk of COVID-19 in the general population is significantly reduced due to the introduction of global vaccination strategies. In this paper, we present the mechanisms of increased susceptibility to infectious complications and the evolution of the clinical course of COVID-19 in patients with hematological malignancies, taking into account the mutation of the virus and the introduction of vaccines and new antiviral drugs. We also present current recommendations for prophylactic and therapeutic management in patients with hematological malignancies.