ABSTRACT
Currently, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has been reported in almost all countries globally. No effective therapy has been documented for COVID-19, and the role of convalescent plasma therapy is unknown. In the current study, 6 patients with COVID-19 and respiratory failure received convalescent plasma a median of 21.5 days after viral shedding was first detected, all tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 RNA within 3 days after infusion, and 5 eventually died. In conclusion, convalescent plasma treatment can end SARS-CoV-2 shedding but cannot reduce the mortality rate in critically ill patients with end-stage COVID-19, and treatment should be initiated earlier.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/genetics , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Virus Shedding/immunology , Adult , Aged , Blood Donors , COVID-19 , China , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Critical Illness , Female , Humans , Immunization, Passive/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , RNA, Viral/genetics , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Survival Rate , Treatment Outcome , COVID-19 SerotherapyABSTRACT
Currently, COVID-19 has been reported in nearly all countries globally. To date, little is known about the viral shedding duration, clinical course and treatment efficacy of COVID-19 near Hubei Province, China. This multicentre, retrospective study was performed in 12 hospitals in Henan and Shaanxi Provinces from 20 January to 8 February 2020. Clinical outcomes were followed up until 26 March 2020. The viral shedding duration, full clinical course and treatment efficacy were analysed in different subgroups of patients. A total of 149 COVID-19 patients were enrolled. The median age was 42 years, and 61.1% (91) were males. Of them, 133 (89.3%) had fever, 131 of 144 (91%) had pneumonia, 27 (18.1%) required intensive care unit (ICU) management, 3 (2%) were pregnant, and 3 (2%) died. Two premature newborns were negative for SARS-CoV-2. In total, the median SARS-CoV-2 shedding period and clinical course were 12 (IQR: 9-17; mean: 13.4, 95% CI: 12.5, 14.2) and 20 (IQR: 16-24; mean: 21.2, 95% CI: 20.1, 22.3) days, respectively, and ICU patients had longer median viral shedding periods (21 [17-24] versus 11 [9-15]) and clinical courses (30 [22-33] vs. 19 [15.8-22]) than non-ICU patients (both p < .0001). SARS-CoV-2 clearances occurred at least 2 days before fatality in 3 non-survivors. Current treatment with any anti-viral agent or combination did not present the benefit of shortening viral shedding period and clinical course (all p > .05) in real-life settings. In conclusion, the viral shedding duration and clinical course in Henan and Shaanxi Provinces were shorter than those in Hubei Province, and current anti-viral therapies were ineffective for shortening viral shedding duration and clinical course in real-world settings. These findings expand our knowledge of the SARS-CoV-2 infection and may be helpful for management of the epidemic outbreak of COVID-19 worldwide. Further studies concerning effective anti-viral agents and vaccines are urgently needed.