Effect of Thromboprophylaxis on Clinical Outcomes After COVID-19 Hospitalization.

BACKGROUND: Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 have an increased incidence of thromboembolism. The role of extended thromboprophylaxis after hospital discharge is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether anticoagulation is superior to placebo in reducing death and thromboembolic complications among patients discharged after COVID-19 hospitalization. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04650087). SETTING: Done during 2021 to 2022 among 127 U.S. hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 18 years or older hospitalized with COVID-19 for 48 hours or more and ready for discharge, excluding those with a requirement for, or contraindication to, anticoagulation. INTERVENTION: 2.5 mg of apixaban versus placebo twice daily for 30 days. MEASUREMENTS: The primary efficacy end point was a 30-day composite of death, arterial thromboembolism, and venous thromboembolism. The primary safety end points were 30-day major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. RESULTS: Enrollment was terminated early, after 1217 participants were randomly assigned, because of a lower than anticipated event rate and a declining rate of COVID-19 hospitalizations. Median age was 54 years, 50.4% were women, 26.5% were Black, and 16.7% were Hispanic; 30.7% had a World Health Organization severity score of 5 or greater, and 11.0% had an International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism risk prediction score of greater than 4. Incidence of the primary end point was 2.13% (95% CI, 1.14 to 3.62) in the apixaban group and 2.31% (CI, 1.27 to 3.84) in the placebo group. Major bleeding occurred in 2 (0.4%) and 1 (0.2%) and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 3 (0.6%) and 6 (1.1%) apixaban-treated and placebo-treated participants, respectively. By day 30, thirty-six (3.0%) participants were lost to follow-up, and 8.5% of apixaban and 11.9% of placebo participants permanently discontinued the study drug treatment. LIMITATIONS: The introduction of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines decreased the risk for hospitalization and death. Study enrollment spanned the peaks of the Delta and Omicron variants in the United States, which influenced illness severity. CONCLUSION: The incidence of death or thromboembolism was low in this cohort of patients discharged after hospitalization with COVID-19. Because of early enrollment termination, the results were imprecise and the study was inconclusive. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Convalescent Plasma Outpatient Therapy to Prevent Outpatient Hospitalization: A Meta-Analysis of Individual Participant Data From 5 Randomized Trials.

BACKGROUND: Outpatient monoclonal antibodies are no longer effective and antiviral treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease remain largely unavailable in many countries worldwide. Although treatment with COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) is promising, clinical trials among outpatients have shown mixed results. METHODS: We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis from outpatient trials to assess the overall risk reduction for all-cause hospitalizations by day 28 in transfused participants. Relevant trials were identified by searching Medline, Embase, medRxiv, World Health Organization COVID-19 Research Database, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from January 2020 to September 2022. RESULTS: Five included studies from 4 countries enrolled and transfused 2620 adult patients. Comorbidities were present in 1795 (69%). The virus neutralizing antibody dilutional titer levels ranged from 8 to 14 580 in diverse assays. One hundred sixty of 1315 (12.2%) control patients were hospitalized, versus 111 of 1305 (8.5%) CCP-treated patients, yielding a 3.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3%-6.0%; P = .001) absolute risk reduction and 30.1% relative risk reduction for all-cause hospitalization. The hospitalization reduction was greatest in those with both early transfusion and high titer with a 7.6% absolute risk reduction (95% CI, 4.0%-11.1%; P = .0001) accompanied by at 51.4% relative risk reduction. No significant reduction in hospitalization was seen with treatment >5 days after symptom onset or in those receiving CCP with antibody titers below the median titer. CONCLUSIONS: Among outpatients with COVID-19, treatment with CCP reduced the rate of all-cause hospitalization and may be most effective when given within 5 days of symptom onset and when antibody titer is higher.

Diabetes Distress in Uninsured Patients with Diabetes During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Longitudinal Observational Study.

This study assessed diabetes distress (DD) and glycemic control levels through three time periods during the COVID-19 pandemic in uninsured patients with diabetes. Diabetes Distress Screening Scales 2 and 17 were utilized to identify the prevalence of DD among uninsured patients during multiple stages of the COVID-19 pandemic at the Providing Access to Healthcare (PATH) diabetes clinic at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. For the 328 uninsured diabetic patients who were screened for DD at least once, the mean age was 46 years old with a majority being Black (55.5%), male (56.1%), and non-Hispanic (89.9%). Mean scores reflecting patients' level of DD initially increased in the first 6 months of the pandemic, from 2.86 to 3.44, and then decreased after 12 months of the COVID-19 pandemic to 3.09, while their mean hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) followed a similar pattern of initial increase (from 11.31 to 12.13) followed by a decline (to 10.79). Addressing patient concerns quickly through early interventions to provide alternative means of care through telehealth and accommodating safe pick-up of diabetes supplies and medications, including insulin, can reduce DD and contribute to better management of glycemic control. Understanding the potential direct correlation of DD with HbA1c in uninsured patients with diabetes is an important factor for clinicians when providing care to this vulnerable population.

Antithrombin Activity Is Associated with Persistent Thromboinflammation and Mortality in Patients with Severe COVID-19 Illness.

INTRODUCTION: Severe COVID-19 illness can lead to thrombotic complications, organ failure, and death. Antithrombin (AT) regulates thromboinflammation and is a key component of chemical thromboprophylaxis. Our goal was to examine the link between AT activity and responsiveness to thromboprophylaxis, markers of hypercoagulability, and inflammation among severe COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective observational study enrolling SARS-CoV-2-positive patients admitted to the intensive care unit on prophylactic enoxaparin. Blood was collected daily for 7 days to assess AT activity and anti-factor Xa levels. Patient demographics, outcomes, and hospital laboratory results were collected. Continuous variables were compared using Mann-Whitney tests, and categorical variables were compared using χ2 tests. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the association between AT activity and mortality. RESULTS: In 36 patients, 3 thromboembolic events occurred, and 18 (50%) patients died. Patients who died had higher fibrinogen, D-dimer, and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels and lower AT activity. Reduced AT activity was independently associated with mortality and correlated with both markers of hypercoagulability (D-dimer) and inflammation (CRP). CONCLUSION: Low AT activity is associated with mortality and persistent hypercoagulable and proinflammatory states in severe COVID-19 patients. The anti-thromboinflammatory properties of AT make it an appealing therapeutic target for future studies.

Transfusing convalescent plasma as post-exposure prophylaxis against SARS-CoV-2 infection: a double-blinded, phase 2 randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma (CCP) for preventing infection in exposed, uninfected individuals is unknown. CCP might prevent infection when administered before symptoms or laboratory evidence of infection. METHODS: This double-blinded, phase 2 randomized, controlled trial (RCT) compared the efficacy and safety of prophylactic high titer (≥1:320 by Euroimmun ELISA) CCP with standard plasma. Asymptomatic participants aged ≥18 years with close contact exposure to a person with confirmed COVID-19 in the previous 120 hours and negative SARS-CoV-2 test within 24 hours before transfusion were eligible. The primary outcome was new SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: 180 participants were enrolled; 87 were assigned to CCP and 93 to control plasma, and 170 transfused at 19 sites across the United States from June 2020 to March 2021. Two were excluded for screening SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positivity. Of the remaining 168 participants, 12/81 (14·8%) CCP and 13/87 (14·9%) control recipients developed SARS-CoV-2 infection; 6 (7·4%) CCP and 7 (8%) control recipients developed COVID-19 (infection with symptoms). There were no COVID-19-related hospitalizations in CCP and 2 in control recipients. Efficacy by restricted mean infection free time (RMIFT) by 28 days for all SARS-CoV-2 infections (25·3 vs. 25·2 days; p = 0·49) and COVID-19 (26·3 vs. 25·9 days; p = 0·35) was similar for both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of high-titer CCP as post-exposure prophylaxis, while appearing safe, did not prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Symptom Duration and Resolution With Early Outpatient Treatment of Convalescent Plasma for Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescent plasma (CCP) reduces hospitalizations among outpatients treated early after symptom onset. It is unknown whether CCP reduces time to symptom resolution among outpatients. METHODS: We evaluated symptom resolution at day 14 by trial arm using an adjusted subdistribution hazard model, with hospitalization as a competing risk. We also assessed the prevalence of symptom clusters at day 14 between treatments. Clusters were defined based on biologic clustering, impact on ability to work, and an algorithm. RESULTS: Among 1070 outpatients followed up after transfusion, 381 of 538 (70.8%) receiving CCP and 381 of 532 (71.6%) receiving control plasma were still symptomatic (P = .78) at day 14. Associations between CCP and symptom resolution by day 14 did not differ significantly from those in controls after adjustment for baseline characteristics (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.99; P = .62). The most common cluster consisted of cough, fatigue, shortness of breath, and headache and was found in 308 (57.2%) and 325 (61.1%) of CCP and control plasma recipients, respectively (P = .16). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial of outpatients with early COVID-19, CCP was not associated with faster resolution of symptoms compared with control. Overall, there were no differences by treatment in the prevalence of each symptom or symptom clusters at day 14. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04373460.

Inhaled Sargramostim (Recombinant Human Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor) for COVID-19-Associated Acute Hypoxemia: Results of the Phase 2, Randomized, Open-Label Trial (iLeukPulm).

INTRODUCTION: Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), a protein produced in the lung, is essential for pulmonary host defense and alveolar integrity. Prior studies suggest potential benefits in several pulmonary conditions, including acute respiratory distress syndrome and viral infections. This trial evaluated the effect of the addition of inhaled sargramostim (yeast-derived, glycosylated recombinant human GM-CSF) to standard of care (SOC) on oxygenation and clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19-associated acute hypoxemia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomized, controlled, open-label trial of hospitalized adults with COVID-19-associated hypoxemia (oxygen saturation <93% on ≥2 L/min oxygen supplementation and/or PaO2/FiO2 <350) randomized 2:1 to inhaled sargramostim (125 mcg twice daily for 5 days) plus SOC versus SOC alone. Institutional SOC before and during the study was not limited. Primary outcomes were change in the alveolar-arterial oxygen gradient (P(A-a)O2) by day 6 and the percentage of patients intubated within 14 days. Safety evaluations included treatment-emergent adverse events. Efficacy analyses were based on the modified intent-to-treat population, the subset of the intent-to-treat population that received ≥1 dose of any study treatment (sargramostim and/or SOC). An analysis of covariance approach was used to analyze changes in oxygenation measures. The intubation rate was analyzed using the chi-squared test. All analyses are considered descriptive. The study was institutional review board approved. RESULTS: In total, 122 patients were treated (sargramostim, n = 78; SOC, n = 44). The sargramostim arm experienced greater improvement in P(A-a)O2 by day 6 compared to SOC alone (least squares [LS] mean change from baseline [SE]: -102.3 [19.4] versus -30.5 [26.9] mmHg; LS mean difference: -71.7 [SE 33.2, 95% CI -137.7 to -5.8]; P = .033; n = 96). By day 14, 11.5% (9/78) of sargramostim and 15.9% (7/44) of SOC arms required intubation (P = .49). The 28-day mortality was 11.5% (9/78) and 13.6% (6/44) in the sargramostim and SOC arms, respectively (hazard ratio 0.85; P = .76). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 67.9% (53/78) and 70.5% (31/44) on the sargramostim and SOC arms, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of inhaled sargramostim to SOC improved P(A-a)O2, a measure of oxygenation, by day 6 in hospitalized patients with COVID-19-associated acute hypoxemia and was well tolerated. Inhaled sargramostim is delivered directly to the lung, minimizing systemic effects, and is simple to administer making it a feasible treatment option in patients in settings where other therapy routes may be difficult. Although proportionally lower rates of intubation and mortality were observed in sargramostim-treated patients, this study was insufficiently powered to demonstrate significant changes in these outcomes. However, the significant improvement in gas exchange with sargramostim shows this inhalational treatment enhances pulmonary efficiency in this severe respiratory illness. These data provide strong support for further evaluation of sargramostim in high-risk patients with COVID-19.

Surge in Incidence and Coronavirus Disease 2019 Hospital Risk of Death, United States, September 2020 to March 2021.

Background: Studies of the early months of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic indicate that patient outcomes may be adversely affected by surges. However, the impact on in-hospital mortality during the largest surge to date, September 2020-March 2021, has not been studied. This study aimed to determine whether in-hospital mortality was impacted by the community surge of COVID-19. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of 416 962 adult COVID-19 patients admitted immediately before or during the surge at 229 US academic and 432 community hospitals in the Vizient Clinical Database. The odds ratios (ORs) of death among hospitalized patients during each phase of the surge was compared with the corresponding odds before the surge and adjusted for demographic, comorbidity, hospital characteristic, length of stay, and complication variables. Results: The unadjusted proportion of deaths among discharged patients was 9% in both the presurge and rising surge stages but rose to 12% during both the peak and declining surge intervals. With the presurge phase defined as the referent, the risk-adjusted ORs (aORs) for the surge periods were rising, 1.14 (1.10-1.19), peak 1.37 (1.32-1.43), and declining, 1.30 (1.25-1.35). The surge rise in-hospital mortality was present in 7 of 9 geographic divisions and greater for community hospitals than for academic centers. Conclusions: These data support public policies aimed at containing pandemic surges and supporting healthcare delivery during surges.

A multi-task Gaussian process self-attention neural network for real-time prediction of the need for mechanical ventilators in COVID-19 patients.

OBJECTIVE: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has overwhelmed the capacity of healthcare resources and posed a challenge for worldwide hospitals. The ability to distinguish potentially deteriorating patients from the rest helps facilitate reasonable allocation of medical resources, such as ventilators, hospital beds, and human resources. The real-time accurate prediction of a patient's risk scores could also help physicians to provide earlier respiratory support for the patient and reduce the risk of mortality. METHODS: We propose a robust real-time prediction model for the in-hospital COVID-19 patients' probability of requiring mechanical ventilation (MV). The end-to-end neural network model incorporates the Multi-task Gaussian Process to handle the irregular sampling rate in observational data together with a self-attention neural network for the prediction task. RESULTS: We evaluate our model on a large database with 9,532 nationwide in-hospital patients with COVID-19. The model demonstrates significant robustness and consistency improvements compared to conventional machine learning models. The proposed prediction model also shows performance improvements in terms of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) compared to various deep learning models, especially at early times after a patient's hospital admission. CONCLUSION: The availability of large and real-time clinical data calls for new methods to make the best use of them for real-time patient risk prediction. It is not ideal for simplifying the data for traditional methods or for making unrealistic assumptions that deviate from observation's true dynamics. We demonstrate a pilot effort to harmonize cross-sectional and longitudinal information for mechanical ventilation needing prediction.

Convalescent plasma with a high level of virus-specific antibody effectively neutralizes SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern.

The ongoing evolution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants severely limits available effective monoclonal antibody therapies. Effective drugs are also supply limited. COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) qualified for high antibody levels effectively reduces immunocompetent outpatient hospitalization. The Food and Drug Administration currently allows outpatient CCP for the immunosuppressed. Viral-specific antibody levels in CCP can range 10- to 100-fold between donors, unlike the uniform viral-specific monoclonal antibody dosing. Limited data are available on the efficacy of polyclonal CCP to neutralize variants. We examined 108 pre-δ/pre-ο donor units obtained before March 2021, 20 post-δ COVID-19/postvaccination units, and 1 pre-δ/pre-ο hyperimmunoglobulin preparation for variant-specific virus (vaccine-related isolate [WA-1], δ, and ο) neutralization correlated to Euroimmun S1 immunoglobulin G antibody levels. We observed a two- to fourfold and 20- to 40-fold drop in virus neutralization from SARS-CoV-2 WA-1 to δ or ο, respectively. CCP antibody levels in the upper 10% of the 108 donations as well as 100% of the post-δ COVID-19/postvaccination units and the hyperimmunoglobulin effectively neutralized all 3 variants. High-titer CCP neutralizes SARS-CoV-2 variants despite no previous donor exposure to the variants.

Telehealth Mental Health Clinical Experience for Prelicensure Nursing Students During COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The use of an innovative approach for mental health interviews met unprecedented needs during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic for patients and staff at a community health clinic and provided nursing students with a telehealth activity that met patient care education requirements while practicing essential skills. METHOD: The nursing students and instructors worked collaboratively with the clinical team to call patients using an algorithm that incorporates screeners for depression, anxiety, and chronic disease distress. RESULTS: Reports during daily debriefings and feedback obtained from evaluations were summarized by faculty and used to improve the activity. These reports indicated the experience was beneficial to students and clinic staff. CONCLUSION: Providers were able to follow up on vulnerable patients more quickly, students were able to practice essential nursing skills during a time when safety concerns limited direct patient interaction, and patients continued to feel connected to health care providers during a global pandemic. [J Nurs Educ. 2022;61(4):205-207.].

Early Outpatient Treatment for Covid-19 with Convalescent Plasma.

BACKGROUND: Polyclonal convalescent plasma may be obtained from donors who have recovered from coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). The efficacy of this plasma in preventing serious complications in outpatients with recent-onset Covid-19 is uncertain. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of Covid-19 convalescent plasma, as compared with control plasma, in symptomatic adults (≥18 years of age) who had tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, regardless of their risk factors for disease progression or vaccination status. Participants were enrolled within 8 days after symptom onset and received a transfusion within 1 day after randomization. The primary outcome was Covid-19-related hospitalization within 28 days after transfusion. RESULTS: Participants were enrolled from June 3, 2020, through October 1, 2021. A total of 1225 participants underwent randomization, and 1181 received a transfusion. In the prespecified modified intention-to-treat analysis that included only participants who received a transfusion, the primary outcome occurred in 17 of 592 participants (2.9%) who received convalescent plasma and 37 of 589 participants (6.3%) who received control plasma (absolute risk reduction, 3.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 1.0 to 5.8; P = 0.005), which corresponded to a relative risk reduction of 54%. Evidence of efficacy in vaccinated participants cannot be inferred from these data because 53 of the 54 participants with Covid-19 who were hospitalized were unvaccinated and 1 participant was partially vaccinated. A total of 16 grade 3 or 4 adverse events (7 in the convalescent-plasma group and 9 in the control-plasma group) occurred in participants who were not hospitalized. CONCLUSIONS: In participants with Covid-19, most of whom were unvaccinated, the administration of convalescent plasma within 9 days after the onset of symptoms reduced the risk of disease progression leading to hospitalization. (Funded by the Department of Defense and others; CSSC-004 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04373460.).

How do I implement an outpatient program for the administration of convalescent plasma for COVID-19?

Convalescent plasma, collected from donors who have recovered from a pathogen of interest, has been used to treat infectious diseases, particularly in times of outbreak, when alternative therapies were unavailable. The COVID-19 pandemic revived interest in the use of convalescent plasma. Large observational studies and clinical trials that were executed during the pandemic provided insight into how to use convalescent plasma, whereby high levels of antibodies against the pathogen of interest and administration early within the time course of the disease are critical for optimal therapeutic effect. Several studies have shown outpatient administration of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) to be both safe and effective, preventing clinical progression in patients when administered within the first week of COVID-19. The United States Food and Drug Administration expanded its emergency use authorization (EUA) to allow for the administration of CCP in an outpatient setting in December 2021, at least for immunocompromised patients or those on immunosuppressive therapy. Outpatient transfusion of CCP and infusion of monoclonal antibody therapies for a highly transmissible infectious disease introduces nuanced challenges related to infection prevention. Drawing on our experiences with the clinical and research use of CCP, we describe the logistical considerations and workflow spanning procurement of qualified products, infrastructure, staffing, transfusion, and associated management of adverse events. The purpose of this description is to facilitate the efforts of others intent on establishing outpatient transfusion programs for CCP and other antibody-based therapies.

Knowledge and perception of health care workers regarding COVID-19 in different parts of Gujarat state

Introduction: The World Health Organization declared the 2019-20 coronavirus outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) on 30 January 2020 and a pandemic on 11 March 2020. A poor understanding of the disease among healthcare workers may implicate in delayed treatment and the rapid spread of infection.

Adaptive immune responses in vaccinated patients with symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Alpha infection.

Benchmarks for protective immunity from infection or severe disease after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are still being defined. Here, we characterized virus neutralizing and ELISA antibody levels, cellular immune responses, and viral variants in 4 separate groups: healthy controls (HCs) weeks (early) or months (late) following vaccination in comparison with symptomatic patients with SARS-CoV-2 after partial or full mRNA vaccination. During the period of the study, most symptomatic breakthrough infections were caused by the SARS-CoV-2 Alpha variant. Neutralizing antibody levels in the HCs were sustained over time against the vaccine parent virus but decreased against the Alpha variant, whereas IgG titers and T cell responses against the parent virus and Alpha variant declined over time. Both partially and fully vaccinated patients with symptomatic infections had lower virus neutralizing antibody levels against the parent virus than the HCs, similar IgG antibody titers, and similar virus-specific T cell responses measured by IFN-γ. Compared with HCs, neutralization activity against the Alpha variant was lower in the partially vaccinated infected patients and tended to be lower in the fully vaccinated infected patients. In this cohort of breakthrough infections, parent virus neutralization was the superior predictor of breakthrough infections with the Alpha variant of SARS-CoV-2.

Efficacy and Safety of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma in Hospitalized Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: There is clinical equipoise for COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) use in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Objective: To determine the safety and efficacy of CCP compared with placebo in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 receiving noninvasive supplemental oxygen. Design, Setting, and Participants: CONTAIN COVID-19, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of CCP in hospitalized adults with COVID-19, was conducted at 21 US hospitals from April 17, 2020, to March 15, 2021. The trial enrolled 941 participants who were hospitalized for 3 or less days or presented 7 or less days after symptom onset and required noninvasive oxygen supplementation. Interventions: A unit of approximately 250 mL of CCP or equivalent volume of placebo (normal saline). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was participant scores on the 11-point World Health Organization (WHO) Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement on day 14 after randomization; the secondary outcome was WHO scores determined on day 28. Subgroups were analyzed with respect to age, baseline WHO score, concomitant medications, symptom duration, CCP SARS-CoV-2 titer, baseline SARS-CoV-2 serostatus, and enrollment quarter. Outcomes were analyzed using a bayesian proportional cumulative odds model. Efficacy of CCP was defined as a cumulative adjusted odds ratio (cOR) less than 1 and a clinically meaningful effect as cOR less than 0.8. Results: Of 941 participants randomized (473 to placebo and 468 to CCP), 556 were men (59.1%); median age was 63 years (IQR, 52-73); 373 (39.6%) were Hispanic and 132 (14.0%) were non-Hispanic Black. The cOR for the primary outcome adjusted for site, baseline risk, WHO score, age, sex, and symptom duration was 0.94 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.75-1.18) with posterior probability (P[cOR<1] = 72%); the cOR for the secondary adjusted outcome was 0.92 (95% CrI, 0.74-1.16; P[cOR<1] = 76%). Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested heterogeneity of treatment effect: at day 28, cORs were 0.72 (95% CrI, 0.46-1.13; P[cOR<1] = 93%) for participants enrolled in April-June 2020 and 0.65 (95% CrI, 0.41 to 1.02; P[cOR<1] = 97%) for those not receiving remdesivir and not receiving corticosteroids at randomization. Median CCP SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing titer used in April to June 2020 was 1:175 (IQR, 76-379). Any adverse events (excluding transfusion reactions) were reported for 39 (8.2%) placebo recipients and 44 (9.4%) CCP recipients (P = .57). Transfusion reactions occurred in 2 (0.4) placebo recipients and 8 (1.7) CCP recipients (P = .06). Conclusions and Relevance: In this trial, CCP did not meet the prespecified primary and secondary outcomes for CCP efficacy. However, high-titer CCP may have benefited participants early in the pandemic when remdesivir and corticosteroids were not in use. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04364737.

Screening donors for COVID-19 convalescent plasma.

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma is used as a treatment for COVID-19. Only limited data describe the efforts to recruit COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) donors. We describe our experience engaging persons recovered from COVID-19 to donate CCP. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of the CCP recruitment for an 11-hospital health system in Houston, Texas. We sought CCP donations from: a) "volunteers" responding to advertisements in social media, press releases, and websites and b) "referred" individuals directed to the program or identified from hospitalization records. We determined the proportions of donor candidates who passed initial telephone health screening, who qualified after diagnostic testing, who presented to the regional CCP donation center, and who completed CCP donation. RESULTS: There were 900 CCP donor candidates, including 363 volunteers and 537 referred donors. Of 360 contacted volunteers, 186 (5.7%) were excluded by interview; 133 were referred for additional diagnostic screening, 97 completed donor antibody and antigen testing, and 87 were qualified for CCP donation, resulting in 35 CCP donations (9.7% of initial telephone contacts). Among 533 referred donors, 448 (84.1%) were excluded by interview, 71 were referred for additional screening, 48 completed donor antibody and antigen testing, and 40 were qualified for CCP donation, resulting in one CCP donation (0.2% of initial telephone contacts). CONCLUSION: In this community, screening of a high number of candidates yielded a limited number of CCP donations. These observations have important implications for CCP donor recruitment and community pandemic planning.

Reprocessing N95s with hydrogen peroxide vaporization: A robust system from collection to dispensing.

The SARS-CoV2 pandemic has created extreme shortages of N95 mask necessitating the need for rapid development of reuse and reprocessing plans. Our aim was to create a process to recapture, reprocess, and redistribute N95 masks using hydrogen peroxide vapor as a real time disinfection method within a large hospital system. We were able to recapture and reprocess 29, 706 N95 masks using hydrogen peroxide vapor with approximately 25% loss due to damage.