The Recipient Epidemiology and Donor Evaluation Study-IV-Pediatric (REDS-IV-P): A research program striving to improve blood donor safety and optimize transfusion outcomes across the lifespan.

BACKGROUND: The Recipient Epidemiology and Donor Evaluation Study-IV-Pediatric (REDS-IV-P) is a new iteration of prior National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) REDS programs that focus on improving transfusion recipient outcomes across the lifespan as well as the safety and availability of the blood supply. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The US program includes blood centers and hospitals (22 including 6 free-standing Children's hospitals) in four geographic regions. The Brazilian program has 5 participating hemocenters. A Center for Transfusion Laboratory Studies (CTLS) and a Data Coordinating Center (DCC) support synergistic studies and activities over the 7-year REDS-IV-P program. RESULTS: The US is building a centralized, vein-to-vein (V2V) database, linking information collected from blood donors, their donations, the resulting manufactured components, and data extracts from hospital electronic medical records of transfused and non-transfused patients. Simultaneously, the Brazilian program is building a donor, donation, and component database. The databases will serve as the backbone for retrospective and prospective observational studies in transfusion epidemiology, transfusion recipient outcomes, blood component quality, and emerging blood safety issues. Special focus will be on preterm infants, patients with sickle cell disease, thalassemia or cancer, and the effect of donor biologic variability and component manufacturing on recipient outcomes. A rapid response capability to emerging safety threats has resulted in timely studies related to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Corona Virus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). CONCLUSIONS: The REDS-IV-P program endeavors to improve donor-recipient-linked research with a focus on children and special populations while also maintaining the flexibility to address emerging blood safety issues.

ABO blood group and COVID-19: a review on behalf of the ISBT COVID-19 Working Group.

Growing evidence suggests that ABO blood group may play a role in the immunopathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, with group O individuals less likely to test positive and group A conferring a higher susceptibility to infection and propensity to severe disease. The level of evidence supporting an association between ABO type and SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 ranges from small observational studies, to genome-wide-association-analyses and country-level meta-regression analyses. ABO blood group antigens are oligosaccharides expressed on red cells and other tissues (notably endothelium). There are several hypotheses to explain the differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection by ABO type. For example, anti-A and/or anti-B antibodies (e.g. present in group O individuals) could bind to corresponding antigens on the viral envelope and contribute to viral neutralization, thereby preventing target cell infection. The SARS-CoV-2 virus and SARS-CoV spike (S) proteins may be bound by anti-A isoagglutinins (e.g. present in group O and group B individuals), which may block interactions between virus and angiotensin-converting-enzyme-2-receptor, thereby preventing entry into lung epithelial cells. ABO type-associated variations in angiotensin-converting enzyme-1 activity and levels of von Willebrand factor (VWF) and factor VIII could also influence adverse outcomes, notably in group A individuals who express high VWF levels. In conclusion, group O may be associated with a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and group A may be associated with a higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection along with severe disease. However, prospective and mechanistic studies are needed to verify several of the proposed associations. Based on the strength of available studies, there are insufficient data for guiding policy in this regard.

Are We Forgetting About IgA? A Re-examination of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Convalescent Plasma.

BACKGROUND: While convalescent plasma (CP) may benefit patients with COVID-19, fundamental questions remain regarding its efficacy, including the components of CP that may contribute to its therapeutic effect. Most current serological evaluation of CP relies on examination of total immunoglobulin or IgG-specific anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels. However, IgA antibodies, which also circulate and are secreted along the respiratory mucosa, represent a relatively uncharacterized component of CP. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Residual samples from patients and CP donors were assessed for IgM, IgG, and IgA anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers against the receptor-binding domain responsible for viral entry. Symptom onset was obtained by chart review. RESULTS: Increased IgA anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels correlated with clinical improvement and viral clearance in an infant with COVID-19, prompting a broader examination of IgA levels among CP donors and hospitalized patients. Significant heterogeneity in IgA levels was observed among CP donors, which correlated weakly with IgG levels or the results of a commonly employed serological test. Unlike IgG and IgM, IgA levels were also more likely to be variable in hospitalized patients and this variability persisted in some patients >14 days following symptom onset. IgA levels were also less likely to be sustained than IgG levels following subsequent CP donation. CONCLUSIONS: IgA levels can be very heterogenous among CP donors and hospitalized patients and do not necessarily correlate with commonly employed testing platforms. Examining isotype levels in CP and COVID-19 patients may allow for a tailored approach when seeking to fill specific gaps in humoral immunity.

Comparison of Antibody Class-Specific SARS-CoV-2 Serologies for the Diagnosis of Acute COVID-19.

Accurate diagnosis of acute severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is critical for appropriate management of patients with this disease. We examined the possible complementary role of laboratory-developed class-specific clinical serology in assessing SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitalized patients. Serological tests for immunoglobulin G (IgG), IgA, and IgM antibodies against the receptor binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 were evaluated using samples from real-time reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (qRT-PCR)-confirmed inpatient coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. We analyzed the influence of timing and clinical severity on the diagnostic value of class-specific COVID-19 serology testing. Cross-sectional analysis revealed higher sensitivity and specificity at lower optical density cutoffs for IgA in hospitalized patients than for IgG and IgM serology (IgG area under the curve [AUC] of 0.91 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.89 to 0.93] versus IgA AUC of 0.97 [95% CI, 0.96 to 0.98] versus IgM AUC of 0.95 [95% CI, 0.92 to 0.97]). The enhanced performance of IgA serology was apparent in the first 2 weeks after symptom onset and the first week after PCR testing. In patients requiring intubation, all three tests exhibit enhanced sensitivity. Among PCR-negative patients under investigation for SARS-CoV-2 infection, 2 out of 61 showed clear evidence of seroconversion IgG, IgA, and IgM. Suspected false-positive results in the latter population were most frequently observed in IgG and IgM serology tests. Our findings suggest the potential utility of IgA serology in the acute setting and explore the benefits and limitations of class-specific serology as a complementary diagnostic tool to PCR for COVID-19 in the acute setting.

Clinical use of Convalescent Plasma in the COVID-19 pandemic: a transfusion-focussed gap analysis with recommendations for future research priorities.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Use of convalescent plasma for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment has gained interest worldwide. However, there is lack of evidence on its dosing, safety and effectiveness. Until data from clinical studies are available to provide solid evidence for worldwide applicable guidelines, there is a need to provide guidance to the transfusion community and researchers on this emergent therapeutic option. This paper aims to identify existing key gaps in current knowledge in the clinical application of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The International Society of Blood Transfusion (ISBT) initiated a multidisciplinary working group with worldwide representation from all six continents with the aim of reviewing existing practices on CCP use from donor, product and patient perspectives. A subgroup of clinical transfusion professionals was formed to draft a document for CCP clinical application to identify the gaps in knowledge in existing literature. RESULTS: Gaps in knowledge were identified in the following main domains: study design, patient eligibility, CCP dose, frequency and timing of CCP administration, parameters to assess response to CCP treatment and long-term outcome, adverse events and CCP application in less-resourced countries as well as in paediatrics and neonates. CONCLUSION: This paper outlines a framework of gaps in the knowledge of clinical deployment of CPP that were identified as being most relevant. Studies to address the identified gaps are required to provide better evidence on the effectiveness and safety of CCP use.

Complement Inhibition in Severe COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Most children with COVID-19 have asymptomatic or mild illness. Those who become critically ill suffer from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and acute kidney injury (AKI). The rapid deterioration of lung function has been linked to microangiopathic and immune-mediated processes seen in the lungs of adult patients with COVID-19. The role of complement-mediated acute lung injury is supported by animal models of SARS-CoV, evaluation of lung tissue in those who died from COVID-19 and response of COVID-19 ARDS to complement inhibition. We present a summary of a child with COVID-19 disease treated with convalescent plasma and eculizumab and provide a detailed evaluation of the inflammatory pathways.

Therapeutic plasma exchange for COVID-19-associated hyperviscosity.

BACKGROUND: Recent data suggests an association between blood hyperviscosity and both propensity for thrombosis and disease severity in patients with COVID-19. This raises the possibility that increased viscosity may contribute to endothelial damage and multiorgan failure in COVID-19, and that therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) to decrease viscosity may improve patient outcomes. Here we sought to share our experience using TPE in the first 6 patients treated for COVID-19-associated hyperviscosity. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Six critically ill COVID-19 patients with plasma viscosity levels ranging from 2.6 to 4.2 centipoise (cP; normal range, 1.4-1.8 cP) underwent daily TPE for 2-3 treatments. RESULTS: TPE decreased plasma viscosity in all six patients (Pre-TPE median 3.75 cP, range 2.6-4.2 cP; Post-TPE median 1.6 cP, range 1.5-1.9 cP). TPE also decreased fibrinogen levels in all five patients for whom results were available (Pre-TPE median 739 mg/dL, range 601-1188 mg/dL; Post-TPE median 359 mg/dL, range 235-461 mg/dL); D-dimer levels in all six patients (Pre-TPE median 5921 ng/mL, range 1134-60 000 ng/mL; Post-TPE median 4893 ng/mL, range 620-7518 ng/mL); and CRP levels in five of six patients (Pre-TPE median 292 mg/L, range 136-329 mg/L; Post-TPE median 84 mg/L, range 31-211 mg/L). While the two sickest patients died, significant improvement in clinical status was observed in four of six patients shortly after TPE. CONCLUSIONS: This series demonstrates the utility of TPE to rapidly correct increased blood viscosity in patients with COVID-19-associated hyperviscosity. Large randomized trials are needed to determine whether TPE may improve clinical outcomes for patients with COVID-19.