Hospital red blood cell and platelet supply and utilization from March to December of the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: The BEST collaborative study.

BACKGROUND: At the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, widespread blood shortages were anticipated. We sought to determine how hospital blood supply and blood utilization were affected by the first wave of COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Weekly red blood cell (RBC) and platelet (PLT) inventory, transfusion, and outdate data were collected from 13 institutions in the United States, Brazil, Canada, and Denmark from March 1st to December 31st of 2020 and 2019. Data from the sites were aligned based on each site's local first peak of COVID-19 cases, and data from 2020 (pandemic year) were compared with data from the corresponding period in 2019 (pre-pandemic baseline). RESULTS: RBC inventories were 3% lower in 2020 than in 2019 (680 vs. 704, p < .001) and 5% fewer RBCs were transfused per week compared to 2019 (477 vs. 501, p < .001). However, during the first COVID-19 peak, RBC and PLT inventories were higher than normal, as reflected by deviation from par, days on hand, and percent outdated. At this time, 16% fewer inpatient beds were occupied, and 43% fewer surgeries were performed compared to 2019 (p < .001). In contrast to 2019 when there was no correlation, there was, in 2020, significant negative correlations between RBC and PLT days on hand and both percentage occupancy of inpatient beds and percentage of surgeries performed. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, RBC and PLT inventories remained adequate. During the first wave of cases, significant decreases in patient care activities were associated with excess RBC and PLT supplies and increased product outdating.

Treatment of severe COVID-19 patients with either low- or high-volume of convalescent plasma versus standard of care: A multicenter Bayesian randomized open-label clinical trial (COOP-COVID-19-MCTI).

Background: Administration of convalescent plasma may serve as an adjunct to supportive treatment to prevent COVID-19 progression and death. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2 volumes of intravenous convalescent plasma (CP) with high antibody titers for the treatment of severe cases of COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a Bayesian, randomized, open-label, multicenter, controlled clinical trial in 7 Brazilian hospitals. Adults admitted to hospital with positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV2, within 10 days of the symptom onset, were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive standard of care (SoC) alone, or in combination with 200 mL (150-300 mL) of CP (Low-volume), or 400 mL (300-600 mL) of CP (High-volume); infusion had to be performed within 24 h of randomization. Randomization was centralized, stratified by center. The primary outcome was the time until clinical improvement up to day 28, measured by the WHO ten-point scale, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Interim and terminal analyses were performed in a Bayesian framework. Trial registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04415086. Findings: Between June 2, 2020, and November 18, 2020, 129 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to SoC (n = 42), Low-volume (n = 43) or High-volume (n = 44) CP. Donors presented a median titer of neutralizing antibodies of 1:320 (interquartile range, 1:160 to 1:1088). No evidence of any benefit of convalescent plasma was observed, with Bayesian estimate of 28-day clinical improvement of 72.7% (95%CI, 58.8 to 84.7) in the SoC versus 64.1% (95%ci, 53.8 to 73.7) in the pooled experimental groups (mean difference of -8.7%, 95%CI, -24.6 to 8.2). There was one case of cutaneous mild allergic reaction related to plasma transfusion and one case of suspected transfusion-related acute lung injury but deemed not to be related to convalescent plasma infusion. Interpretation: In this prospective, randomized trial of adult hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19, convalescent plasma was not associated with clinical benefits. Funding: Brazilian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo.

Short-term effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised patients: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the short-term effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines among immunocompromised patients to prevent laboratory-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 infection. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis. We calculated the pooled diagnostic odds ratio [DOR] (95% CI) for COVID-19 infection between immunocompromised patients and healthy people or those with stable chronic medical conditions. VE was estimated as 100% x (1-DOR). We also investigated the rates of developing anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein IgG between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Twenty studies evaluating COVID-19 vaccine response, and four studies evaluating VE were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled DOR for symptomatic COVID-19 infection in immunocompromised patients was 0.296 (95% CI: 0.108-0.811) with an estimated VE of 70.4% (95% CI: 18.9%- 89.2%). When stratified by diagnosis, IgG antibody levels were much higher in the control group compared to immunocompromised patients with solid organ transplant (pOR 232.3; 95% Cl: 66.98-806.03), malignant diseases (pOR 42.0, 95% Cl: 11.68-151.03), and inflammatory rheumatic diseases (pOR 19.06; 95% Cl: 5.00-72.62). CONCLUSIONS: We found COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were effective against symptomatic COVID-19 among the immunocompromised patients but had lower VE compared to the controls. Further research is needed to understand the discordance between antibody production and protection against symptomatic COVID-19 infection.

Screening for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in convalescent plasma in Brazil: Preliminary lessons from a voluntary convalescent donor program.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescent plasma (CCP) collection began in two Brazilian hospitals for treatment of severe/critical patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Mild/moderate COVID-19 convalescents were selected as CCP donors after reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and absence of symptoms for ≥14 days plus (a) age (18-60 years), body weight greater than 55 kg; (b) immunohematological studies; (c) no infectious markers of hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, human immunodeficiency virus, human T-lymphotropic virus-1/2, Chagas and syphilis infection; (d) no HLA antibodies (multiparous); (e) second RT-PCR (nasopharyngeal swab and/or blood) negativity; (f) virus neutralization test (cytopathic effect-based virus neutralization test neutralizing antibody) and anti-nucleocapsid protein SARS-CoV-2 IgM, IgG, and IgA enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. RESULTS: Among 271 donors (41 females, 230 males), 250 presented with neutralizing antibodies. Final RT-PCR was negative on swab (77.0%) or blood (88.4%; P = .46). Final definition of RT-PCR was only defined at more than 28 days after full recovery in 59 of 174 (33.9%) RT-PCR -ve, and 25/69 RT-PCR +ve (36.2%; 13 between 35 and 48 days). Neutralizing antibody titers of 160 or greater were found in 63.6%. Correlation between IgG signal/cutoff of 5.0 or greater and neutralizing antibody of 160 or greater was 82.4%. Combination of final RT-PCR -ve with neutralizing antibody ≥160 was 41.3% (112/271). Serial plasma collection showed decline in neutralizing antibody titers and IgA levels (P < .05), probably denoting a "golden period" for CCP collection (≤28 days after joining the program); IgA might have an important role as neutralizing antibody. Donor's weight, days between disease onset and serial plasma collection, and IgG and IgM levels are important predictors for neutralizing antibody titer. CONCLUSIONS: RT-PCR +ve cases are still detected in 36.2% within 28 to 48 days after recovery. High anti-nucleocapsid protein IgG levels may be used as a surrogate marker to neutralizing antibody.