Convalescent Plasma Efficacy in Life-Threatening COVID-19 Patients Admitted to the ICU: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

(1) Background: There are limited data regarding the efficacy of convalescent plasma (CP) in critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to determine whether CP is associated with better clinical outcome among these patients. (2) Methods: A retrospective single-center study including adult patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to the ICU for acute respiratory failure. The primary outcome was time to clinical improvement, within 28 days, defined as patient discharged alive or reduction of 2 points on a 6-point disease severity scale. (3) Results: Overall, 110 COVID-19 patients were admitted. Thirty-two patients (29%) received CP; among them, 62.5% received at least one CP with high neutralizing antibody titers (≥1:160). Clinical improvement occurred within 28 days in 14 patients (43.7%) of the CP group vs. 48 patients (61.5%) in the non-CP group (hazard ratio (HR): 0.75 (95% CI: 0.41-1.37), p = 0.35). After adjusting for potential confounding factors, CP was not independently associated with time to clinical improvement (HR: 0.53 (95% CI: 0.23-1.22), p = 0.14). Additionally, the average treatment effects of CP, calculated using the inverse probability weights (IPW), was not associated with the primary outcome (-0.14 days (95% CI: -3.19-2.91 days), p = 0.93). Hospital mortality did not differ between CP and non-CP groups (31.2% vs. 19.2%, p = 0.17, respectively). Comparing CP with high neutralizing antibody titers to the other group yielded the same findings. (4) Conclusions: In this study of life-threatening COVID-19 patients, CP was not associated with time to clinical improvement within 28 days, or hospital mortality.

Hydroxychloroquine is associated with slower viral clearance in clinical COVID-19 patients with mild to moderate disease.

ABSTRACT: There are conflicting data regarding the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in COVID-19 hospitalized patients. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy of HCQ in increasing SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance.Hospitalized adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were retrospectively included in the study. The primary outcome was the time from a confirmed positive nasopharyngeal swab to turn negative. A negative nasopharyngeal swab conversion was defined as a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 case followed by 2 negative results using RT-PCR assay with samples obtained 24 hours apart. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to adjust for potential confounders.Thirty-four confirmed COVID-19 patients completed the study. Nineteen (55.9%) patients presented with symptoms, and 14 (41.2%) had pneumonia. Only 21 (61.8%) patients received HCQ. The time to SARS-CoV-2 negativity nasopharyngeal test was significantly longer in patients who received HCQ than those who did not receive HCQ [17 (13-21) vs 10 (4-13) days, P = .023]. HCQ was independently associated with time to negativity test after adjustment for potential confounders (symptoms, comorbidities, antiviral drugs, pneumonia, or oxygen therapy) in multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis (hazard ratio = 0.33, 95% confidence interval: 0.13-0.9, P = .024). On day 14, 47.8% (14/23) patients tested negative in the HCQ group compared with 90.9% (10/11) patients who did not receive HCQ (P = .016).HCQ was associated with a slower viral clearance in COVID-19 patients with mild to moderate disease. Data from ongoing randomized clinical trials with HCQ should provide a definitive answer regarding the efficacy and safety of this treatment.

Residency training in the time of COVID-19: A framework for academic medical centers dealing with the pandemic.

BACKGROUND: As cases of COVID-19 climb worldwide, academic medical centers (AMCs) are scrambling to balance the increasing demand for medical services while maintaining safe learning environments. The scale and nature of the current pandemic, limitations on key resources, risks of transmission, and the impact on trainee wellbeing pose additional challenges to AMCs. We propose a framework for AMCs to utilize in facilitating health system, organization and program-level adjustments to meet the needs of medical trainees during the pandemic. APPROACH: In February 2020, we developed a three-level approach to the pandemic response of training programs at our AMC. The first level involved AMC alignment and engagement with regulatory stakeholders. The second level utilized the graduate medical education committee and leveraged organizational functions such as human resources, finance, and clinical departments. The third level of intervention focused on common approaches used by programs to ensure continuity of learning in the context of dynamic changes in workflows and service operations. EVALUATION: Outcomes at each level are reported. These include the co-development of a national framework on medical trainee responses to COVID-19, the composition of an operational guidance document, organizational protocols to accommodate novel challenges posed by the pandemic, and multiple program-level interventions. REFLECTION: This methodical approach, employed during a global crisis, was critical in facilitating interventions required to fulfill the mission of AMCs. Future steps include assessing the impact of these changes on trainee performance and the applicability of the approach in diverse settings.