How should we use convalescent plasma therapies for the management of COVID-19?

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

Objective

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

Method

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

PDE5 inhibitors: breaking new grounds in the treatment of COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

Despite the ever-increasing occurrences of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) cases around the world, very few medications have been validated in the clinical trials to combat COVID-19. Although several vaccines have been developed in the past quarter, the time elapsed between deployment and administration remains a major impediment.

CONTENT

Repurposing of pre-approved drugs, such as phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE5) inhibitors, could be a game-changer while lessening the burden on the current healthcare system. Repurposing and developing phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE5) inhibitors could extrapolate their utility to combat the SARS-CoV-2 infection, and potentially aid in the management of the symptoms associated with its newer variants such as BF.7, BQ.1, BQ.1.1, XBB.1.5, and XBB.1.16.

SUMMARY

Administration of PDE5 inhibitors via the oral and intravenous route demonstrates other potential off-label benefits, including anti-apoptotic, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and immunomodulatory effects, by intercepting several pathways. These effects can not only be of clinical importance in mild-to-moderate, but also moderate-to-severe SARS-CoV-2 infections. This article explores the various mechanisms by which PDE5 inhibitors alleviates the symptoms associated with COVID-19 as well as well as highlights recent studies and findings.

OUTLOOK

These benefits of PDE5 inhibitors make it a potential drug in the physicians' armamentarium in alleviating symptoms associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, adequate clinical studies must be instituted to eliminate any untoward adverse events.

PDE5 inhibitors: breaking new grounds in the treatment of COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

Despite the ever-increasing occurrences of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) cases around the world, very few medications have been validated in the clinical trials to combat COVID-19. Although several vaccines have been developed in the past quarter, the time elapsed between deployment and administration remains a major impediment.

CONTENT

Repurposing of pre-approved drugs, such as phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE5) inhibitors, could be a game-changer while lessening the burden on the current healthcare system. Repurposing and developing phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE5) inhibitors could extrapolate their utility to combat the SARS-CoV-2 infection, and potentially aid in the management of the symptoms associated with its newer variants such as BF.7, BQ.1, BQ.1.1, XBB.1.5, and XBB.1.16.

SUMMARY

Administration of PDE5 inhibitors via the oral and intravenous route demonstrates other potential off-label benefits, including anti-apoptotic, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and immunomodulatory effects, by intercepting several pathways. These effects can not only be of clinical importance in mild-to-moderate, but also moderate-to-severe SARS-CoV-2 infections. This article explores the various mechanisms by which PDE5 inhibitors alleviates the symptoms associated with COVID-19 as well as well as highlights recent studies and findings.

OUTLOOK

These benefits of PDE5 inhibitors make it a potential drug in the physicians' armamentarium in alleviating symptoms associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, adequate clinical studies must be instituted to eliminate any untoward adverse events.

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

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

Exploring the Role of Immune System and Inflammatory Cytokines in SARS-CoV-2 Induced Lung Disease: A Narrative Review

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the causative pathogen of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). COVID-19 can manifest with a heterogenous spectrum of disease severity, from mild upper airways infection to severe interstitial pneumonia and devastating acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). SARS-CoV-2 infection may induce an over activation of the immune system and the release of high concentrations of pro-inflammatory cytokines, leading to a "cytokine storm", a recognized pathogenetic mechanism in the genesis of SARS-CoV-2-induced lung disease. This overproduction of inflammatory cytokines has been recognized as a poor prognostic factor, since it can lead to disease progression, organ failure, ARDS and death. Moreover, the immune system shows dysregulated activity, particularly through activated macrophages and T-helper cells and in the co-occurrent exhaustion of lymphocytes. We carried out a non-systematic literature review aimed at providing an overview of the current knowledge on the pathologic mechanisms played by the immune system and the inflammation in the genesis of SARS-CoV-2-induced lung disease. An overview on potential treatments for this harmful condition and for contrasting the "cytokine storm" has also been presented. Finally, a look at the experimented experimental vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 has been included.

White paper on pandemic preparedness in the blood supply

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

In March 2020, the WHO declared the SARS-CoV-2 corona virus a pandemic which caused a great disruption to global society and had a pronounced effect on the worldwide supply of blood.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 2022 an on-line meeting was organised with experts from Austria, Canada, Germany, Greece, Netherlands and United States to explore the opportunities for increasing preparedness within blood systems for a potential future pandemic with similar, or more devastating, consequences. The main themes included the value of preparedness, current risks to the blood supply, supply chain vulnerabilities, and the role of innovation in increasing resiliency and safety.

RESULTS

Seven key recommendations were formulated and including required actions at different levels.

CONCLUSION

Although SARS-CoV-2 might be seen as a unique event, global health risks are expected to increase and will affect blood transfusion medicine if no preparedness plans are developed.

Early Treatment with Monoclonal Antibodies or Convalescent Plasma Reduces Mortality in Non-Vaccinated COVID-19 High-Risk Patients

Vulnerable patients such as immunosuppressed or elderly patients are at high risk for a severe course of COVID-19 upon SARS-CoV-2 infection. Immunotherapy with SARS-CoV-2 specific monoclonal antibodies (mAb) or convalescent plasma represents a considerable treatment option to protect these patients from a severe or lethal course of infection. However, monoclonal antibodies are not always available or less effective against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. Convalescent plasma is more commonly available and may represent a good treatment alternative in low-income countries. We retrospectively evaluated outcomes in individuals treated with mAbs or convalescent plasma and compared the 30-day overall survival with a patient cohort that received supportive care due to a lack of SARS-CoV-2 specific therapies between March 2020 and April 2021. Our data demonstrate that mAb treatment is highly effective in preventing severe courses of SARS-CoV-2 infection. All patients treated with mAb survived. Treatment with convalescent plasma improved overall survival to 82% compared with 61% in patients without SARS-CoV-2 targeted therapy. Our data indicate that early convalescent plasma treatment may be an option to improve the overall survival of high-risk COVID-19 patients. This is especially true when other antiviral drugs are not available or their efficacy is significantly reduced, which may be the case with emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants.

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

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

Efficacy and safety of obinutuzumab in systemic lupus erythematosus patients with secondary non-response to rituximab

OBJECTIVES

Secondary inefficacy with infusion reactions and anti-drug antibodies (secondary non-depletion nonresponse, 2NDNR) occurs in 14% of SLE patients receiving repeated rituximab courses. We evaluated baseline clinical characteristics, efficacy and safety of obinutuzumab, a next-generation humanized type-2 anti-CD20 antibody licensed for haematological malignancies in SLE patients with 2NDNR to rituximab.

METHODS

We collated data from SLE patients receiving obinutuzumab for secondary non-response to rituximab in BILAG centres. Disease activity was assessed using BILAG-2004, SLEDAI-2K and serology before, and 6 months after, obinutuzumab 2× 1000 mg infusions alongside methylprednisolone 100 mg.

RESULTS

All nine patients included in the study received obinutuzumab with concomitant oral immunosuppression. At 6 months post-obinutuzumab, there were significant reductions in median SLEDAI-2K from 12 to 6 (P = 0.014) and total BILAG-2004 score from 21 to 2 (P = 0.009). Complement C3 and dsDNA titres improved significantly (both P = 0.04). Numerical, but not statistically significant improvements were seen in C4 levels. Of 8/9 patients receiving concomitant oral prednisolone at baseline (all >10 mg/day), 5/8 had their dose reduced at 6 months. Four of nine patients were on 5 mg/day and were in Lupus Low Disease Activity State following obinutuzumab. After obinutuzumab, 6/9 patients with peripheral B cell data achieved complete depletion, including 4/4 assessed with highly sensitive assays. Of the nine patients, one obinutuzumab non-responder required CYC therapy. One unvaccinated patient died from COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

Obinutuzumab appears to be effective and steroid-sparing in renal and non-renal SLE patients with secondary non-response to rituximab. These patients have severe disease with few treatment options but given responsiveness to B cell depletion, switching to humanized type-2 anti-CD20 therapy is a logical approach.

Targeting autophagy regulation in NLRP3 inflammasome-mediated lung inflammation in COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Emerging evidence indicates that the NOD-, LRR- and pyrin domain-containing protein 3 (NLRP3) inflammasome is activated, which results in a cytokine storm at the late stage of COVID-19. Autophagy regulation is involved in the infection and replication of SARS-CoV-2 at the early stage and the inhibition of NLRP3 inflammasome-mediated lung inflammation at the late stage of COVID-19. Here, we discuss the autophagy regulation at different stages of COVID-19. Specifically, we highlight the therapeutic potential of autophagy activators in COVID-19 by inhibiting the NLRP3 inflammasome, thereby avoiding the cytokine storm. We hope this review provides enlightenment for the use of autophagy activators targeting the inhibition of the NLRP3 inflammasome, specifically the combinational therapy of autophagy modulators with the inhibitors of the NLRP3 inflammasome, antiviral drugs, or anti-inflammatory drugs in the fight against COVID-19.

Lessons from SARS‑CoV‑2 and its variants (Review)

COVID-19 has swept through mainland China by human-to-human transmission. The rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2 and its variants, including the currently prevalent Omicron strain, pose a serious threat worldwide. The present review summarizes epidemiological investigation and etiological analysis of genomic, epidemiological, and pathological characteristics of the original strain and its variants, as well as progress in diagnosis and treatment. Prevention and control measures used during the current Omicron pandemic are discussed to provide further knowledge of SARS-CoV-2.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 and Blood Safety: An Updated Review

Background

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel human coronavirus first identified in late 2019 and subsequently declared a worldwide pandemic in March 2020. In this review, we provide an overview of the implications of SARS-CoV-2 for blood safety and sufficiency.

Summary

Approximately one-third of SARS-CoV-2 infections are asymptomatic. The reported mean incubation period typically varies from 2 to 11 days, but longer periods up to 22 days have been reported. The blood phase of SARS-CoV-2 appears to be brief and low level, with RNAaemia detectable in only a small proportion of patients, typically associated with more severe disease and not demonstrated to be infectious virus. A small number of presymptomatic and asymptomatic blood phase cases have been reported. Transfusion-transmission (TT) of SARS-CoV-2 has not been reported. Therefore, the TT risk associated with SARS-CoV-2 is currently theoretical. To mitigate any potential TT risk, but more importantly to prevent respiratory transmission in donor centers, blood services can implement donor deferral policies based on travel, disease status, or potential risk of exposure and encourage staff vaccination.

Key Messages

The TT risk of SARS-CoV-2 appears to be low. The biggest risk to blood services in the current COVID-19 pandemic is to maintain the sufficiency of the blood supply while minimizing respiratory transmission of SARS-CoV-2 to donors and staff while donating blood.

Convalescent plasma in COVID-19: renewed focus on the timing and effectiveness of an old therapy

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is responsible for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic that has strained health care systems worldwide and resulted in high mortality. The current COVID-19 treatment is based on supportive and symptomatic care. Therefore, convalescent plasma (CP), which provides passive immunization against many infectious diseases, has been studied for COVID-19 management. To date, a large number of randomized and non-randomized clinical trials as well as many systematic reviews have revealed conflicting results. This article summarizes the basic principles of passive immunization, particularly addressing CP in COVID-19. It also evaluates the effectiveness of CP as a therapy in patients with COVID-19, clinical trial reports and systematic reviews, regulatory considerations and different protocols that are authorized in different countries to use it safely and effectively. An advanced search was carried out in major databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE) and Google Scholar using the following key words: SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, convalescent plasma, and the applied query was “convalescent plasma” AND “COVID-19 OR SARS-CoV-2”. The results were filtered and duplicate data were removed. Collective evidence indicates that two cardinal players determine the effectiveness of CP use, time of infusion, and quality of CP. Early administration of CP with high neutralizing anti-spike IgG titer is hypothesized to be effective in improving clinical outcome, prevent progression, decrease the length of hospital stay, and reduce mortality. However, more reliable, high quality, well-controlled, double-blinded, randomized, international and multicenter collaborative trials are still needed.

Evaluation of serological anti-SARS-CoV-2 chemiluminescent immunoassays correlated to live virus neutralization test, for the detection of anti-RBD antibodies as a relevant alternative in COVID-19 large-scale neutralizing activity monitoring

The Spike-Receptor Binding Domain (S-RBD) is considered the most antigenic protein in SARS-CoV-2 and probably the key player in SARS-CoV-2 immune response. Quantitative immunoassays may help establish an anti-RBD Abs threshold as an indication of protective immunity. Since different immunoassays are commercial, the standard reference method for the neutralizing activity is the live Virus Neutralization Test (VNT).

In this study, anti-RBD IgG levels were detected with two chemiluminescent immunoassays in paucisymptomatic, symptomatic and vaccinated subjects, and their neutralizing activity was correlated to VNT titer, using SARS-CoV-2 original and British variant strains.

Both immunoassays confirmed higher anti-RBD Abs levels in vaccinated subjects. Furthermore, despite different anti-RBD Abs median concentrations between the immunoassays, a strong positive correlation with VNT was observed.

In conclusion, although the SARS-CoV-2 immune response heterogeneity, the use of immunoassays can help in large-scale monitoring of COVID-19 samples, becoming a valid alternative to VNT test for diagnostic routine laboratories.

Clinical Management of Adult Patients with COVID-19 Outside Intensive Care Units: Guidelines from the Italian Society of Anti-Infective Therapy (SITA) and the Italian Society of Pulmonology (SIP)

INTRODUCTION

The Italian Society of Anti-Infective Therapy (SITA) and the Italian Society of Pulmonology (SIP) constituted an expert panel for developing evidence-based guidance for the clinical management of adult patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outside intensive care units.

METHODS

Ten systematic literature searches were performed to answer ten different key questions. The retrieved evidence was graded according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology (GRADE).

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

The literature searches mostly assessed the available evidence on the management of COVID-19 patients in terms of antiviral, anticoagulant, anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP)/non-invasive ventilation (NIV) treatment. Most evidence was deemed as of low certainty, and in some cases, recommendations could not be developed according to the GRADE system (best practice recommendations were provided in similar situations). The use of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies may be considered for outpatients at risk of disease progression. For inpatients, favorable recommendations were provided for anticoagulant prophylaxis and systemic steroids administration, although with low certainty of evidence. Favorable recommendations, with very low/low certainty of evidence, were also provided for, in specific situations, remdesivir, alone or in combination with baricitinib, and tocilizumab. The presence of many best practice recommendations testified to the need for further investigations by means of randomized controlled trials, whenever possible, with some possible future research directions stemming from the results of the ten systematic reviews.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials testing the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Evidence-base for practise and implications for research

BACKGROUND

Despite scientific advances, there is no effective medical therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy in COVID-19.

METHODS

This review was carried out in accordance with Cochrane methodology including risk of bias assessment and grading of the quality of evidence. Only prospective clinical trials randomly assigning COVID-19 patients to convalescent plasma plus standard of care therapy (test arm) versus placebo/standard of care (control arm) were included. Two reviewers independently read each preprint/publication and extracted relevant data from individual studies. Data were pooled using the random-effects model and expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 13 206 patients from 12 randomised controlled trials were included. There was no significant difference in clinical improvement rate (RR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.98-1.02, p = 0.96) or time to clinical improvement (median difference of 1.08 days with 95% CI ranging from -0.15 to +2.30 days) between convalescent plasma versus placebo/standard of care therapy. The use of convalescent plasma was not associated with significantly reduced risk of death (RR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.65-1.02, p = 0.08). Reassuringly, overall incidence of infusion-related serious adverse events was low (3.25%) and not significantly different (RR = 1.14, 95% CI: 0.93-1.40, p = 0.22) for convalescent plasma transfusion compared to placebo/standard of care therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

There is low to moderate certainty evidence that the addition of convalescent plasma to current standard of care therapy is generally safe but, does not result in any significant clinical benefit or reduction of mortality in COVID-19.

SARS-CoV-2: Overview and Its Impact on Oral Health

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its virulent variants causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) COVID-19 has spread rapidly worldwide, and is highly contagious. A comprehensive search was conducted for the most current published information about SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, and oral health. Clinical studies, case reports, in vivo studies, and any current published evidence on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 were included in this review. Survival against SARS-CoV-2 infection may be partially dependent on periodontal health, good oral hygiene, and access to dental care. Optimum oral health, maintaining good systemic health, and elimination of smoking habits may be beneficial for the prevention and management of COVID-19 infections.

COVID-19 Convalescent plasma

As the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic led to a global health crisis, there were limited treatment options and no prophylactic therapies for those exposed to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Convalescent plasma is quick to implement, potentially provides benefits, and has a good safety profile. The therapeutic potential of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) is likely mediated by antibodies through direct viral neutralization and Fc-dependent functions such as a phagocytosis, complement activation, and antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity. In the United States, CCP became one of the most common treatments with over half million units transfused despite limited efficacy data. More than a dozen randomized trials now demonstrate that CCP does not provide benefit for those with moderate to severe disease. However, similar to other passive antibody therapies, CCP is beneficial for early disease, when provided to elderly outpatients within 72 hours after symptom onset. Only high-titer CCP should be transfused. CCP should also be considered for immunosuppressed COVID-19 patients. CCP collected in proximity, by time and location, to the patient may be more beneficial due to SARS-CoV-2 variants. Additional randomized trial data are still accruing and should be incorporated with other trial data to optimize CCP indications.

Convalescent plasma associates with reduced mortality and improved clinical trajectory in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

BACKGROUNDEvidence supporting convalescent plasma (CP), one of the first investigational treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has been inconclusive, leading to conflicting recommendations. The primary objective was to perform a comparative effectiveness study of CP for all-cause, in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19.METHODSThe multicenter, electronic health records-based, retrospective study included 44,770 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in one of 176 HCA Healthcare-affiliated community hospitals. Coarsened exact matching (1:k) was employed, resulting in a sample of 3774 CP and 10,687 comparison patients.RESULTSExamination of mortality using a shared frailty model, controlling for concomitant medications, date of admission, and days from admission to transfusion, demonstrated a significant association of CP with lower mortality risk relative to the comparison group (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59-0.86; P < 0.001). Examination of patient risk trajectories, represented by 400 clinico-demographic features from our real-time risk model (RTRM), indicated that patients who received CP recovered more quickly. The stratification of days to transfusion revealed that CP within 3 days after admission, but not within 4 to 7 days, was associated with a significantly lower mortality risk (aHR = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.47-0.60; P < 0.001). CP serology level was inversely associated with mortality when controlling for its interaction with days to transfusion (HR = 0.998; 95% CI, 0.997-0.999; P = 0.013), yet it did not reach univariable significance.CONCLUSIONSThis large, diverse, multicenter cohort study demonstrated that CP, compared with matched controls, is significantly associated with reduced risk of in-hospital mortality. These observations highlight the utility of real-world evidence and suggest the need for further evaluation prior to abandoning CP as a viable therapy for COVID-19.FUNDINGThis research was supported in whole by HCA Healthcare and/or an HCA Healthcare-affiliated entity, including Sarah Cannon and Genospace.

Trends and risk factors of SARS-CoV-2 infection in asymptomatic blood donors

Background

A large proportion of SARS‐CoV‐2‐infected individuals does not develop severe symptoms. Serological tests help in evaluating the spread of infection and disease immunization. The aim of this study was to prospectively examine the trends and risk factors of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in blood donors.

Study design and methods

We screened 8798 asymptomatic donors presenting in Milan from July 2020 to February 2021 (10,680 presentations) before the vaccination campaign for anti‐nucleoprotein (NP) antibodies, and for anti‐spike receptor‐binding domain (RBD) antibodies and nasopharyngeal swab PCR in those who tested positive.

Results

The prevalence of anti‐NP+/RBD+ tests increased progressively with time up to ~15% (p < .0001), preceded by a peak of PCR+ tests. Anti‐RBD titers were higher in anti‐NP IgG+/IgM+ than in IgG+/IgM− individuals and in those with a history of infection (p < .0001); of these 197/630 (31.2%) displayed high titers (>80 AU/ml). Anti‐RBD titers declined during follow‐up, depending on baseline titers (p < .0001) and time (p = .025). Risk factors for seroconversion were a later presentation date and non‐O ABO blood group (p < .001). A positive PCR was detected in 0.7% of participants in the absence of SARS‐CoV‐2 viremia.

Conclusions

During the second wave of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in Northern Italy, we detected an increase in seroprevalence in healthy blood donors from ~4% to ~15%, with a trend paralleling that observed in the general population. Seroconversion was more frequent in carriers of non‐O blood groups. The persistence of anti‐RBD antibodies was short‐lived.

Convalescent plasma for hospitalized patients with COVID-19: an open-label, randomized controlled trial

The efficacy of convalescent plasma for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unclear. Although most randomized controlled trials have shown negative results, uncontrolled studies have suggested that the antibody content could influence patient outcomes. We conducted an open-label, randomized controlled trial of convalescent plasma for adults with COVID-19 receiving oxygen within 12 d of respiratory symptom onset (NCT04348656). Patients were allocated 2:1 to 500 ml of convalescent plasma or standard of care. The composite primary outcome was intubation or death by 30 d. Exploratory analyses of the effect of convalescent plasma antibodies on the primary outcome was assessed by logistic regression. The trial was terminated at 78% of planned enrollment after meeting stopping criteria for futility. In total, 940 patients were randomized, and 921 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Intubation or death occurred in 199/614 (32.4%) patients in the convalescent plasma arm and 86/307 (28.0%) patients in the standard of care arm—relative risk (RR) = 1.16 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94–1.43, P = 0.18). Patients in the convalescent plasma arm had more serious adverse events (33.4% versus 26.4%; RR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.02–1.57, P = 0.034). The antibody content significantly modulated the therapeutic effect of convalescent plasma. In multivariate analysis, each standardized log increase in neutralization or antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity independently reduced the potential harmful effect of plasma (odds ratio (OR) = 0.74, 95% CI 0.57–0.95 and OR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.50–0.87, respectively), whereas IgG against the full transmembrane spike protein increased it (OR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.14–2.05). Convalescent plasma did not reduce the risk of intubation or death at 30 d in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Transfusion of convalescent plasma with unfavorable antibody profiles could be associated with worse clinical outcomes compared to standard care.

A randomized trial in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 showed no benefit and potentially increased harm associated with the use of convalescent plasma, with subgroup analyses suggesting that the antibody profile in donor plasma is critical in determining clinical outcomes.

Neurological complications of COVID-19: from pathophysiology to rehabilitation. An overview

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate how the SARS-COV2 is able to affect the nervous system, the main neurological manifestation, and the treatment used, including neurorehabilitation.

METHODS

Studies performed during the current year that fulfilled inclusion criteria were selected from PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Sciences databases. The search combined the terms "Covid 19," "rehabilitation/treatment," and "neurological complications."

RESULTS

The exact route by which SARS-CoV-2 can penetrate the CNS is still unknown, although a possible retrograde transynaptic pathway from peripheral nerve endings, and/or through the olfactory bulb, have been suggested. An early management of COVID-19 by a multiprofessional team is fundamental to avoid long term sequaele. Rehabilitation is recommended to improve respiratory and cardiac function, as well as to avoid long term neurological complications.

CONCLUSIONS

As no specific conclusions in term of prognosis and treatment could be done, research and consensus paper are needed to provide NeuroCovid patients with the best treatment options, including neurorehabilitation.

Hyperimmune plasma in three immuno-deficient patients affected by non-severe, prolonged COVID-19: a single-center experience

Background

Convalescent plasma (CP) and hyperimmune plasma (HP) are passive immunotherapies consisting in the infusion of plasma from recovered people into infected patients. Following pre-existing evidence in many other viral diseases, such as SARS, MERS and Ebola, CP and HP have also been proposed for the treatment of COVID-19. Nevertheless, due to the lack of large, well-designed, clinical trials, no clear-cut guidelines exist about what subtype of patient CP and HP should be administered to.

Case presentation

We have reported the cases of 3 patients, all immunosuppressed and affected by non-severe, prolonged COVID-19. They were treated with HP, whose neutralizing titer was higher than 1/80. The first patient was a 55-year-old male, who had undergone lung transplant. He was under therapy with Tacrolimus and developed non-neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV2. The second patient was a 77-year-old female, affected by follicular lymphoma. She had tested positive for SARS-CoV2 after 6 months. The third was a 60-year-old patient, affected by chronic leukemia. He did not develop antibodies after 2-month disease. All 3 patients received HP and had tested negative for SARS-CoV2 within 2 weeks.

Conclusion

Despite encouraging initial data, no strong evidence exist in support of CP and HP to treat COVID-19. In our experience, although limited due to the reduced number of patients, we found a good safety and efficacy of HP in 3 immuno-deficient subjects. Further data are needed in order to assess whether this subtype of patients may particularly benefit from passive immunization.

A Perspective on COVID-19 Management

A novel coronavirus-Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-outbreak correlated with the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was declared by the WHO in March 2020, resulting in numerous counted cases attributed to SARS-CoV-2 worldwide. Herein, we discuss current knowledge on the available therapy options for patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Based on available scientific data, we present an overview of solutions in COVID-19 management by use of drugs, vaccines and antibodies. Many questions with non-conclusive answers on the measures for the management of the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on health still exist-i.e., the actual infection percentage of the population, updated precise mortality data, variability in response to infection by the population, the nature of immunity and its duration, vaccine development issues, a fear that science might end up with excessive promises in response to COVID-19-and were raised among scientists. Indeed, science may or may not deliver results in real time. In the presented paper we discuss some consequences of disease, its detection and serological tests, some solutions to disease prevention and management, pitfalls and obstacles, including vaccination. The presented ideas and data herein are meant to contribute to the ongoing debate on COVID-19 without pre-selection of available information.

COVID-19 convalescent plasma composition and immunological effects in severe patients

Convalescent plasma (CP) has emerged as a treatment for COVID-19. However, the composition and mechanism of action are not fully known. Therefore, we undertook a two-phase controlled study in which, first the immunological and metabolomic status of recovered and severe patients were evaluated. Secondly, the 28-day effect of CP on the immune response in severe patients was assessed. Nineteen recovered COVID-19 patients, 18 hospitalized patients with severe disease, and 16 pre-pandemic controls were included. Patients with severe disease were treated with CP transfusion and standard therapy (i.e., plasma recipients, n = 9) or standard therapy alone (n = 9). Clinical and biological assessments were done on day 0 and during follow-up on days 4, 7, 14, and 28. Clinical parameters, viral load, total immunoglobulin (Ig) G and IgA anti-S1-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, neutralizing antibodies (NAbs), autoantibodies, cytokines, T and B cells, and metabolomic and lipidomic profiles were examined. Total IgG and IgA anti-S1-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were key factors for CP selection and correlated with NAbs. In severe COVID-19 patients, mostly interleukin (IL)-6 (P = <0.0001), IL-10 (P = <0.0001), IP-10 (P = <0.0001), fatty acyls and glycerophospholipids were higher than in recovered patients. Latent autoimmunity and anti–IFN–α antibodies were observed in both recovered and severe patients. COVID-19 CP induced an early but transient cytokine profile modification and increases IgG anti-S1-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. At day 28 post-transfusion, a decrease in activated, effector and effector memory CD4⁺ (P < 0.05) and activated and effector CD8⁺ (P < 0.01) T cells and naïve B cells (P = 0.001), and an increase in non-classical memory B cells (P=<0.0001) and central memory CD4⁺ T cells (P = 0.0252) were observed. Moreover, IL-6/IFN-γ (P = 0.0089) and IL-6/IL-10 (P = 0.0180) ratios decreased in plasma recipients compared to those who received standard therapy alone. These results may have therapeutic implications and justify further post-COVID-19 studies.