Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 12 de 12
Filter
1.
Transfus Med ; 2022 May 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2253563

ABSTRACT

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

2.
Transfus Med Rev ; 36(3): 117-124, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1882562

ABSTRACT

Home blood product transfusion has been utilized around the world in various forms over the past few decades. There is current interest in decentralizing hospital care to improve patient independence and convenience, minimize cost to the health service, and to prevent nosocomial infection, especially with the recent COVID-19 pandemic. The transition to "hospital in the home" is occurring across the healthcare sector driven by aims to improve patient outcomes and patient satisfaction, capacity pressures in the acute care sector, and most recently due to concerns regarding infectious disease transmission in hospital settings. This review explores the published literature on home red cell and platelet transfusions, and where the literature is limited, also considered data from subcutaneous immunoglobulin studies. Current published experience on red cell and platelet transfusion at home has identified benefits to the patient and health service, with further studies needed to quantify improvement in quality of life and health-related outcomes. Safety concerns may be a perceived barrier to implementation of home transfusion, however current published data suggests serious adverse reactions are rare. Cost-effectiveness data for home transfusion are very limited and a key area for future research. Home transfusion has the potential to benefit from newer technologies, such as portable/remote monitoring and electronic patient identifiers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Quality of Life , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans , Pandemics , Platelet Transfusion
3.
6.
JAMA ; 326(17): 1690-1702, 2021 Nov 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525402

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: The evidence for benefit of convalescent plasma for critically ill patients with COVID-19 is inconclusive. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether convalescent plasma would improve outcomes for critically ill adults with COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The ongoing Randomized, Embedded, Multifactorial, Adaptive Platform Trial for Community-Acquired Pneumonia (REMAP-CAP) enrolled and randomized 4763 adults with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 between March 9, 2020, and January 18, 2021, within at least 1 domain; 2011 critically ill adults were randomized to open-label interventions in the immunoglobulin domain at 129 sites in 4 countries. Follow-up ended on April 19, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: The immunoglobulin domain randomized participants to receive 2 units of high-titer, ABO-compatible convalescent plasma (total volume of 550 mL ± 150 mL) within 48 hours of randomization (n = 1084) or no convalescent plasma (n = 916). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary ordinal end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of intensive care unit-based organ support) up to day 21 (range, -1 to 21 days; patients who died were assigned -1 day). The primary analysis was an adjusted bayesian cumulative logistic model. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio (OR) greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Futility was defined as the posterior probability of an OR less than 1.2 (threshold for trial conclusion of futility >95%). An OR greater than 1 represented improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both. The prespecified secondary outcomes included in-hospital survival; 28-day survival; 90-day survival; respiratory support-free days; cardiovascular support-free days; progression to invasive mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal mechanical oxygenation, or death; intensive care unit length of stay; hospital length of stay; World Health Organization ordinal scale score at day 14; venous thromboembolic events at 90 days; and serious adverse events. RESULTS: Among the 2011 participants who were randomized (median age, 61 [IQR, 52 to 70] years and 645/1998 [32.3%] women), 1990 (99%) completed the trial. The convalescent plasma intervention was stopped after the prespecified criterion for futility was met. The median number of organ support-free days was 0 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the convalescent plasma group and 3 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the no convalescent plasma group. The in-hospital mortality rate was 37.3% (401/1075) for the convalescent plasma group and 38.4% (347/904) for the no convalescent plasma group and the median number of days alive and free of organ support was 14 (IQR, 3 to 18) and 14 (IQR, 7 to 18), respectively. The median-adjusted OR was 0.97 (95% credible interval, 0.83 to 1.15) and the posterior probability of futility (OR <1.2) was 99.4% for the convalescent plasma group compared with the no convalescent plasma group. The treatment effects were consistent across the primary outcome and the 11 secondary outcomes. Serious adverse events were reported in 3.0% (32/1075) of participants in the convalescent plasma group and in 1.3% (12/905) of participants in the no convalescent plasma group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among critically ill adults with confirmed COVID-19, treatment with 2 units of high-titer, ABO-compatible convalescent plasma had a low likelihood of providing improvement in the number of organ support-free days. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , ABO Blood-Group System , Adult , Aged , Critical Illness/therapy , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Length of Stay , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Failure , Vasoconstrictor Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Serotherapy
7.
Nat Med ; 27(11): 2012-2024, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526091

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Canada/epidemiology , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Intention to Treat Analysis , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Treatment Outcome , United States/epidemiology , COVID-19 Serotherapy
8.
Trials ; 22(1): 323, 2021 May 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1273249

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma has been used for numerous viral diseases including influenza, severe acute respiratory syndrome, Middle East respiratory syndrome and Ebola virus; however, evidence to support its use is weak. SARS-CoV-2 is a novel coronavirus responsible for the 2019 global pandemic of COVID-19 community acquired pneumonia. We have undertaken a randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: CONCOR-1 is an open-label, multicentre, randomized trial. Inclusion criteria include the following: patients > 16 years, admitted to hospital with COVID-19 infection, receiving supplemental oxygen for respiratory complications of COVID-19, and availability of blood group compatible CCP. Exclusion criteria are : onset of respiratory symptoms more than 12 days prior to randomization, intubated or imminent plan for intubation, and previous severe reactions to plasma. Consenting patients are randomized 2:1 to receive either approximately 500 mL of CCP or standard of care. CCP is collected from donors who have recovered from COVID-19 and who have detectable anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies quantified serologically. The primary outcome is intubation or death at day 30. Secondary outcomes include ventilator-free days, length of stay in intensive care or hospital, transfusion reactions, serious adverse events, and reduction in SARS-CoV-2 viral load. Exploratory analyses include patients who received CCP containing high titre antibodies. A sample size of 1200 patients gives 80% power to detect a 25% relative risk reduction assuming a 30% baseline risk of intubation or death at 30 days (two-sided test; α = 0.05). An interim analysis and sample size re-estimation will be done by an unblinded independent biostatistician after primary outcome data are available for 50% of the target recruitment (n = 600). DISCUSSION: This trial will determine whether CCP will reduce intubation or death non-intubated adults with COVID-19. The trial will also provide information on the role of and thresholds for SARS-CoV-2 antibody titres and neutralization assays for donor qualification. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04348656 . Registered on 16 April 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections , Adult , Bisoprolol , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome , COVID-19 Serotherapy
9.
Transfusion ; 61(6): 1955-1965, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1142977

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Avoidable human error is a significant cause of transfusion adverse events. Adequately trained, laboratory staff in blood establishments and blood banks, collectively blood facilities, are key in ensuring high-quality transfusion medicine (TM) services. Gaps in TM education and training of laboratory staff exist in most African countries. We assessed the status of the training and education of laboratory staff working in blood facilities in Africa. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study using a self-administered pilot-tested questionnaire was performed. The questionnaire comprised 26 questions targeting six themes. Blood facilities from 16 countries were invited to participate. Individually completed questionnaires were grouped by country and descriptive analysis performed. RESULTS: Ten blood establishments and two blood banks from eight African countries confirmed the availability of a host of training programs for laboratory staff; the majority of which were syllabus or curriculum-guided and focused on both theoretical and practical laboratory skills development. Training was usually preplanned, dependent on student and trainer availability and delivered through lecture-based classroom training as well as formal and informal on the job training. There were minimal online didactic and self-directed learning. Teaching of humanistic values appeared to be lacking. CONCLUSION: We confirmed the availability of diverse training programs across a variety of African countries. Incorporation of virtual learning platforms, rather than complete reliance on didactic, in-person training programs may improve the education reach of the existing programs. Digitalization driven by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic may provide an opportunity to narrow the knowledge gap in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).


Subject(s)
Blood Banks , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Medical Laboratory Personnel/education , Transfusion Medicine/education , Adult , Africa/epidemiology , Blood Banks/methods , Blood Banks/standards , Blood Specimen Collection/methods , Blood Specimen Collection/standards , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , Transfusion Medicine/standards
12.
Anesth Analg ; 131(1): 74-85, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-23192

ABSTRACT

The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a pandemic. Global health care now faces unprecedented challenges with widespread and rapid human-to-human transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and high morbidity and mortality with COVID-19 worldwide. Across the world, medical care is hampered by a critical shortage of not only hand sanitizers, personal protective equipment, ventilators, and hospital beds, but also impediments to the blood supply. Blood donation centers in many areas around the globe have mostly closed. Donors, practicing social distancing, some either with illness or undergoing self-quarantine, are quickly diminishing. Drastic public health initiatives have focused on containment and "flattening the curve" while invaluable resources are being depleted. In some countries, the point has been reached at which the demand for such resources, including donor blood, outstrips the supply. Questions as to the safety of blood persist. Although it does not appear very likely that the virus can be transmitted through allogeneic blood transfusion, this still remains to be fully determined. As options dwindle, we must enact regional and national shortage plans worldwide and more vitally disseminate the knowledge of and immediately implement patient blood management (PBM). PBM is an evidence-based bundle of care to optimize medical and surgical patient outcomes by clinically managing and preserving a patient's own blood. This multinational and diverse group of authors issue this "Call to Action" underscoring "The Essential Role of Patient Blood Management in the Management of Pandemics" and urging all stakeholders and providers to implement the practical and commonsense principles of PBM and its multiprofessional and multimodality approaches.


Subject(s)
Blood Banks/organization & administration , Blood Transfusion , Coronavirus Infections , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Blood Donors , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Evidence-Based Medicine , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL