Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
EuropePMC; 2020.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-309410

ABSTRACT

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed an enormous burden on health care systems around the world. In the past, the administration of convalescent plasma of patients having recovered from SARS and severe influenza to patients actively having the disease, showed promising effects on mortality and appeared safe. Whether or not this also holds true for the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus is currently unknown. Methods: DAWn-Plasma is a multicentre nation-wide, randomized, open-label, phase II proof-of-concept clinical trial, evaluating the clinical efficacy and safety of the addition of convalescent plasma to the standard of care in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Belgium. Patients hospitalized with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 are eligible when they are symptomatic (i.e. clinical or radiological signs) and have been diagnosed with COVID-19 in the 72 hours before study inclusion through a PCR (nasal/nasopharyngeal swab or bronchoalveolar lavage) or a chest-CT scan showing features compatible with COVID-19 in the absence of an alternative diagnosis. Patients are randomized in a 2:1 ratio to either standard of care and convalescent plasma (active treatment group) or standard of care only. The active treatment group receives 2 units of 200 to 250 mL of convalescent plasma within 12 hours after randomization, with a second administration of 2 units 24 to 36 hours after ending the first administration. The trial aims to include 483 patients and will recruit from 25 centres across Belgium. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients that require mechanical ventilation or have died at day 15. The main secondary endpoints are clinical status on day 15 and day 30 after randomization, as defined by the WHO Progression 10-point ordinal scale, and safety of the administration of convalescent plasma. Discussion: This trial will either provide support or discourage the use of convalescent plasma as early intervention for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, Identifier: NCT04429854. Registered 12 June 2020 - Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04429854.

2.
BMC Infect Dis ; 21(1): 1170, 2021 Nov 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526605

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX ). METHODS: In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. RESULTS: A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
3.
Transfusion ; 61(10): 2981-2990, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1402981

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) ideally contains high titers of (neutralizing) anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Several scalable immunoassays for CCP selection have been developed. We designed an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) that measures neutralizing antibodies (of all isotypes) in plasma by determining the level of competition between CCP and a mouse neutralizing antibody for binding to the receptor binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Plasma was collected from 72 convalescent individuals and inhibition of viral infection was determined by plaque reduction neutralization (PRNT50). The level of neutralizing antibodies was measured in the novel competition ELISA and in a commercially available ELISA that measures inhibition of recombinant ACE2 binding to immobilized RBD. These results were compared with a high throughput chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA). RESULTS: The results from both ELISAs were correlating, in particular for high titer CCP (PRNT50 ≥ 1:160) (Spearman r = .73, p < .001). Moderate correlation was found between the competition ELISA and CMIA (r = .57 for high titer and r = .62 for low titer CCP, p < .001). Receiver operator characteristic analysis showed that the competition ELISA selected CCP with a sensitivity and specificity of 61% and 100%, respectively. However, discrimination between low and high titer CCP had a lower resolution (sensitivity: 34% and specificity: 89%). CONCLUSION: The competition ELISA screens for neutralizing antibodies in CCP by competition for just a single epitope. It exerts a sensitivity of 61% with no false identifications. These ELISA designs can be used for epitope mapping or for selection of CCP.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/immunology , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/methods , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Humans
4.
Eur Respir J ; 59(2)2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1376571

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Several randomised clinical trials have studied convalescent plasma for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using different protocols, with different severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) neutralising antibody titres, at different time-points and severities of illness. METHODS: In the prospective multicentre DAWn-plasma trial, adult patients hospitalised with COVID-19 were randomised to 4 units of open-label convalescent plasma combined with standard of care (intervention group) or standard of care alone (control group). Plasma from donors with neutralising antibody titres (50% neutralisation titre (NT50)) ≥1/320 was the product of choice for the study. RESULTS: Between 2 May 2020 and 26 January 2021, 320 patients were randomised to convalescent plasma and 163 patients to the control group according to a 2:1 allocation scheme. A median (interquartile range) volume of 884 (806-906) mL) convalescent plasma was administered and 80.68% of the units came from donors with neutralising antibody titres (NT50) ≥1/320. Median time from onset of symptoms to randomisation was 7 days. The proportion of patients alive and free of mechanical ventilation on day 15 was not different between both groups (convalescent plasma 83.74% (n=267) versus control 84.05% (n=137)) (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.59-1.66; p=0.9772). The intervention did not change the natural course of antibody titres. The number of serious or severe adverse events was similar in both study arms and transfusion-related side-effects were reported in 19 out of 320 patients in the intervention group (5.94%). CONCLUSIONS: Transfusion of 4 units of convalescent plasma with high neutralising antibody titres early in hospitalised COVID-19 patients did not result in a significant improvement of clinical status or reduced mortality.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 , Immunization, Passive , Adult , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , COVID-19/therapy , Hospitalization , Humans , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
5.
BMC Pulm Med ; 20(1): 317, 2020 Dec 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1331939

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic reached Europe in early 2020. Convalescent plasma is used without a consistent evidence of efficacy. Our hypothesis is that passive immunization with plasma collected from patients having contracted COVID-19 and developed specific neutralizing antibodies may alleviate symptoms and reduce mortality in patients treated with mechanical ventilation for severe respiratory failure during the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. METHODS: We plan to include 500 adult patients, hospitalized in 16 Belgian intensive care units between September 2020 and 2022, diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, under mechanical ventilation for less than 5 days and a clinical frailty scale less than 6. The study treatment will be compared to standard of care and allocated by randomization in a 1 to 1 ratio without blinding. The main endpoint will be mortality at day 28. We will perform an intention to treat analysis. The number of patients to include is based on an expected mortality rate at day 28 of 40 percent and an expected relative reduction with study intervention of 30 percent with α risk of 5 percent and ß risk of 20 percent. DISCUSSION: This study will assess the efficacy of plasma in the population of mechanically ventilated patients. A stratification on the delay from mechanical ventilation and inclusion will allow to approach the optimal time use. Selecting convalescent plasmas with a high titer of neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 will allow a homogeneous study treatment. The inclusion in the study is based on the consent of the patient or his/her legal representative, and the approval of the Investigational Review Board of the University hospital of Liège, Belgium. A data safety monitoring board (DSMB) has been implemented. Interim analyses have been planned at 100, 2002, 300 and 400 inclusions in order to decide whether the trail should be discontinued prematurely for ethical issues. We plan to publish our results in a peer-reviewed journal and to present them at national and international conferences. FUNDING AND REGISTRATION: The trial is funded by the Belgian Health Care Knowledge Center KCE # COV201004 TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT04558476. Registered 14 September 2020-Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04558476.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Respiration, Artificial , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/therapy , Adult , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Belgium , COVID-19/mortality , Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Intensive Care Units , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/mortality , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
9.
Trials ; 21(1): 981, 2020 Nov 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-947944

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed an enormous burden on health care systems around the world. In the past, the administration of convalescent plasma of patients having recovered from SARS and severe influenza to patients actively having the disease showed promising effects on mortality and appeared safe. Whether or not this also holds true for the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus is currently unknown. METHODS: DAWn-Plasma is a multicentre nation-wide, randomized, open-label, phase II proof-of-concept clinical trial, evaluating the clinical efficacy and safety of the addition of convalescent plasma to the standard of care in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Belgium. Patients hospitalized with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 are eligible when they are symptomatic (i.e. clinical or radiological signs) and have been diagnosed with COVID-19 in the 72 h before study inclusion through a PCR (nasal/nasopharyngeal swab or bronchoalveolar lavage) or a chest-CT scan showing features compatible with COVID-19 in the absence of an alternative diagnosis. Patients are randomized in a 2:1 ratio to either standard of care and convalescent plasma (active treatment group) or standard of care only. The active treatment group receives 2 units of 200 to 250 mL of convalescent plasma within 12 h after randomization, with a second administration of 2 units 24 to 36 h after ending the first administration. The trial aims to include 483 patients and will recruit from 25 centres across Belgium. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients that require mechanical ventilation or have died at day 15. The main secondary endpoints are clinical status on day 15 and day 30 after randomization, as defined by the WHO Progression 10-point ordinal scale, and safety of the administration of convalescent plasma. DISCUSSION: This trial will either provide support or discourage the use of convalescent plasma as an early intervention for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04429854 . Registered on 12 June 2020 - Retrospectively registered.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/therapy , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Adult , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Belgium/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Combined Modality Therapy/methods , Female , Global Burden of Disease , Hospitalization/trends , Humans , Immunization, Passive/methods , Male , Mortality , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Safety , Standard of Care/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Outcome
10.
Nat Commun ; 11(1): 5838, 2020 11 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-933686

ABSTRACT

Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 causing COVID-19 has resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths. In search for key targets of effective therapeutics, robust animal models mimicking COVID-19 in humans are urgently needed. Here, we show that Syrian hamsters, in contrast to mice, are highly permissive to SARS-CoV-2 and develop bronchopneumonia and strong inflammatory responses in the lungs with neutrophil infiltration and edema, further confirmed as consolidations visualized by micro-CT alike in clinical practice. Moreover, we identify an exuberant innate immune response as key player in pathogenesis, in which STAT2 signaling plays a dual role, driving severe lung injury on the one hand, yet restricting systemic virus dissemination on the other. Our results reveal the importance of STAT2-dependent interferon responses in the pathogenesis and virus control during SARS-CoV-2 infection and may help rationalizing new strategies for the treatment of COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/physiology , Coronavirus Infections/pathology , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Disease Models, Animal , Pneumonia, Viral/pathology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , STAT2 Transcription Factor/metabolism , Signal Transduction , Animals , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/metabolism , Cricetinae , Immunity, Innate , Interferon Type I/genetics , Interferon Type I/metabolism , Lung/pathology , Lung/virology , Mice , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/immunology , Pneumonia, Viral/metabolism , SARS-CoV-2 , STAT2 Transcription Factor/genetics , Virus Replication
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL