Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Chest ; 162(5): 982-994, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1914240

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma has been one of the most common treatments for COVID-19, but most clinical trial data to date have not supported its efficacy. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is rigorously selected COVID-19 convalescent plasma with neutralizing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies an efficacious treatment for adults hospitalized with COVID-19? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, blinded, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial among adults hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection and acute respiratory symptoms for < 14 days. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned to receive one unit of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (n = 487) or placebo (n = 473). The primary outcome was clinical status (disease severity) 14 days following study infusion measured with a seven-category ordinal scale ranging from discharged from the hospital with resumption of normal activities (lowest score) to death (highest score). The primary outcome was analyzed with a multivariable ordinal regression model, with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) < 1.0 indicating more favorable outcomes with convalescent plasma than with placebo. In secondary analyses, trial participants were stratified according to the presence of endogenous anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies ("serostatus") at randomization. The trial included 13 secondary efficacy outcomes, including 28-day mortality. RESULTS: Among 974 randomized patients, 960 were included in the primary analysis. Clinical status on the ordinal outcome scale at 14 days did not differ between the convalescent plasma and placebo groups in the overall population (aOR, 1.04; one-seventh support interval [1/7 SI], 0.82-1.33), in patients without endogenous antibodies (aOR, 1.15; 1/7 SI, 0.74-1.80), or in patients with endogenous antibodies (aOR, 0.96; 1/7 SI, 0.72-1.30). None of the 13 secondary efficacy outcomes were different between groups. At 28 days, 89 of 482 (18.5%) patients in the convalescent plasma group and 80 of 465 (17.2%) patients in the placebo group had died (aOR, 1.04; 1/7 SI, 0.69-1.58). INTERPRETATION: Among adults hospitalized with COVID-19, including those seronegative for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, treatment with convalescent plasma did not improve clinical outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04362176; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , COVID-19/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , Hospitalization , Treatment Outcome
2.
Kans J Med ; 15: 91-96, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1766216

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Numerous inflammatory markers may serve a role in prognostication of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection. Early in the pandemic, our health system created an admission order set which included daily d-dimer, c-reactive protein (CRP), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and ferritin. Given more available outcomes data, limiting standing order of labs that do not affect daily management could result in significant cost savings to the health system without adverse patient outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine ordering and utilization patterns of inflammatory markers by physicians caring for patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection. Methods: An anonymous 10-question survey was distributed to 125 physicians (Infectious Disease, Hospitalist, Pulmonary and Critical Care faculty). Responses were tallied and values greater than 50% were identified as the majority of the surveyed group. Results: Of the 125 physicians surveyed, 77 (62%) responded. A total of 57.1% (44/77) of physicians reported ordering daily inflammatory markers for 3 - 10 days from admission. Another 31.2% (24/77) ordered markers until clinical improvement or hospital discharge. D-dimer was used for care decisions by 83.1% (64/77) of respondents; 93.8% (60/64) of those reported utilizing it in determining anticoagulation dose. CRP was used by 61% (47/77) of physicians to help identify a secondary infection or determine steroid dose or duration. LDH and ferritin were not used for management decisions by the majority of physicians. Inflammatory markers were not used routinely after isolation precautions had been discontinued, even when ongoing care required mechanical ventilation. Conclusions: Of the markers studied, both d-dimer and CRP were considered useful by most respondents. LDH and ferritin were used less frequently and were not considered as useful in guiding medical decision making. Discontinuation of standing daily LDH and ferritin orders is believed to have potential to result in cost savings to the health care system with no adverse patient outcomes.

3.
J Clin Tuberc Other Mycobact Dis ; 23: 100238, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1198877

ABSTRACT

A global multi-disciplinary faculty was established to work collaboratively and provide virtual technical assistance, using a point-of-care continuing education model, to clinicians across the world engaged in the care of patients with either HIV infection or tuberculosis. Ancillary offerings included live or virtual lectures, case-based conferences, and courses. In spite of the considerable disruption of the program due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we engaged and assisted a substantial number of clinicians across the world and provided meaningful contributions to their continuous professional development and patient care. In light of the ongoing pandemic, virtual technical assistance models such as this should be scaled to continue essential high-quality HIV/TB services.

4.
Trials ; 22(1): 221, 2021 Mar 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1143248

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma is being used widely as a treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma is unclear. METHODS: The Passive Immunity Trial for Our Nation (PassITON) is a multicenter, placebo-controlled, blinded, randomized clinical trial being conducted in the USA to provide high-quality evidence on the efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma as a treatment for adults hospitalized with symptomatic disease. Adults hospitalized with COVID-19 with respiratory symptoms for less than 14 days are eligible. Enrolled patients are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to 1 unit (200-399 mL) of COVID-19 convalescent plasma that has demonstrated neutralizing function using a SARS-CoV-2 chimeric virus neutralization assay. Study treatments are administered in a blinded fashion and patients are followed for 28 days. The primary outcome is clinical status 14 days after study treatment as measured on a 7-category ordinal scale assessing mortality, respiratory support, and return to normal activities of daily living. Key secondary outcomes include mortality and oxygen-free days. The trial is projected to enroll 1000 patients and is designed to detect an odds ratio ≤ 0.73 for the primary outcome. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide the most robust data available to date on the efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma for the treatment of adults hospitalized with acute moderate to severe COVID-19. These data will be useful to guide the treatment of COVID-19 patients in the current pandemic and for informing decisions about whether developing a standardized infrastructure for collecting and disseminating convalescent plasma to prepare for future viral pandemics is indicated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04362176 . Registered on 24 April 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Hospitalization , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , Host-Pathogen Interactions , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL