Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 1.010
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
Transfus Clin Biol ; 28(3): 306-307, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1616794
2.
Eur J Intern Med ; 95: 13-16, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1616475

ABSTRACT

Immunotherapy with convalescent plasma (CP) has been used in the past in several different infectious diseases and proposed as a potential therapeutic option in patients with COVID-19. However, a clear benefit was never demonstrated and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) conducted in different populations of COVID-19 patients showed contrasting results. In general, current evidences suggest that CP in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 does not reduce the progression to severe respiratory failure or death within 30 days. However, currently published RCTs have several limitations. The administration of plasma with low titer of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs), the use of suboptimal surrogate serological tests to determine NAbs titer, the delayed administration of CP from the onset of COVID-19 symptoms and the lack of information about antibody titer of recipients before CP infusion, are all limiting factors that may have affected the study results. Thus, a potential benefit of early (within the first 72 h from onset of symptoms), high titer CP in patients with mild COVID-19 (pO2/FiO2>300) cannot be definitively excluded. However, immunotherapy with monoclonal antibodies developed from CP demonstrated efficacy in reducing progression to severe COVID-19 and hospitalization and are today recommended in the early phase of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Plasma , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Eur J Neurol ; 28(10): 3418-3425, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1605552

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Myasthenia gravis (MG) patients could be a vulnerable group in the pandemic era of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) mainly due to respiratory muscle weakness, older age and long-term immunosuppressive treatment. We aimed to define factors predicting the severity of COVID-19 in MG patients and risk of MG exacerbation during COVID-19. METHODS: We evaluated clinical features and outcomes after COVID-19 in 93 MG patients. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients (38%) had severe pneumonia and we recorded 10 deaths (11%) due to COVID-19. Higher forced vital capacity (FVC) values tested before COVID-19 were shown to be protective against severe infection (95% CI 0.934-0.98) as well as good control of MG measured by the quantified myasthenia gravis score (95% CI 1.047-1.232). Long-term chronic corticosteroid treatment worsened the course of COVID-19 in MG patients (95% CI 1.784-111.43) and this impact was positively associated with dosage (p = 0.005). Treatment using azathioprine (95% CI 0.448-2.935), mycophenolate mofetil (95% CI 0.91-12.515) and ciclosporin (95% CI 0.029-2.212) did not influence the course of COVID-19. MG patients treated with rituximab had a high risk of death caused by COVID-19 (95% CI 3.216-383.971). Exacerbation of MG during infection was relatively rare (15%) and was not caused by remdesivir, convalescent plasma or favipiravir (95% CI 0.885-10.87). CONCLUSIONS: As the most important predictors of severe COVID-19 in MG patients we identified unsatisfied condition of MG with lower FVC, previous long-term corticosteroid treatment especially in higher doses, older age, the presence of cancer, and recent rituximab treatment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections , Myasthenia Gravis , Aged , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Myasthenia Gravis/complications , Myasthenia Gravis/drug therapy , Myasthenia Gravis/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(52): e28470, 2021 Dec 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1592821

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The outbreak of novel coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2), which causes the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is the most important current health problem. The number of patients is increasing worldwide. Pneumonia is the most life-threatening complication of the disease. Prolonged viral shedding in hematological patients with COVID-19 has been demonstrated; however, data on COVID-19 patients receiving anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapy are limited. Accordingly, focusing on humoral immunity, herein, we present 4 COVID-19 patients who were on anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody treatment and had prolonged pneumonia. PATIENT CONCERNS: Two of 4 patients were on rituximab and the other 2 were on obinutuzumab therapy. DIAGNOSIS: The polymerase chain reaction test results for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 were positive for all 4 patients and their COVID pneumonia lasted for >50 days. INTERVENTIONS: Although all patients were treated with an adequate amount of convalescent plasma, prolonged polymerase chain reaction positivity and prolonged pneumonia were possibly due to the lack of ability of the immune system to initiate its antibody response. OUTCOMES: Despite the administration of standard therapies, recurrent pneumonia observed in the present case series of non-neutropenic patients, in whom primary malignancies were under control. CONCLUSIONS: It is suggested that further investigations should be performed to understand the underlying pathophysiology.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Pneumonia/epidemiology , Rituximab/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , Female , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Middle Aged , Polymerase Chain Reaction , Recurrence , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
5.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ; 119(1)2022 01 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1599544

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a highly transmissible coronavirus responsible for the global COVID-19 pandemic. Herein, we provide evidence that SARS-CoV-2 spreads through cell-cell contact in cultures, mediated by the spike glycoprotein. SARS-CoV-2 spike is more efficient in facilitating cell-to-cell transmission than is SARS-CoV spike, which reflects, in part, their differential cell-cell fusion activity. Interestingly, treatment of cocultured cells with endosomal entry inhibitors impairs cell-to-cell transmission, implicating endosomal membrane fusion as an underlying mechanism. Compared with cell-free infection, cell-to-cell transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is refractory to inhibition by neutralizing antibody or convalescent sera of COVID-19 patients. While angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 enhances cell-to-cell transmission, we find that it is not absolutely required. Notably, despite differences in cell-free infectivity, the authentic variants of concern (VOCs) B.1.1.7 (alpha) and B.1.351 (beta) have similar cell-to-cell transmission capability. Moreover, B.1.351 is more resistant to neutralization by vaccinee sera in cell-free infection, whereas B.1.1.7 is more resistant to inhibition by vaccinee sera in cell-to-cell transmission. Overall, our study reveals critical features of SARS-CoV-2 spike-mediated cell-to-cell transmission, with important implications for a better understanding of SARS-CoV-2 spread and pathogenesis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/transmission , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Virus Internalization , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 , Animals , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/therapy , Cell Fusion , Chlorocebus aethiops , HEK293 Cells , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Vero Cells
6.
Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob ; 20(1): 85, 2021 Dec 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1598520

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that antibody responses play a role in the resolution of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with primary or secondary antibody deficiency are at increased risk of persistent infection. This challenging clinical scenario is associated with adverse patient outcome and potentially creates an ecological niche for the evolution of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants with immune evasion capacity. Case reports and/or series have implied a therapeutic role for convalescent plasma (CP) to secure virological clearance, although concerns have been raised about the effectiveness of CP and its potential to drive viral evolution, and it has largely been withdrawn from clinical use in the UK. CASE PRESENTATION: We report two cases in which persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection was cleared following administration of the monoclonal antibody combination casirivimab and imdevimab (REGN-COV2, Ronapreve). A 55-year-old male with follicular lymphoma, treated with B cell depleting therapy, developed SARS-CoV-2 infection in September 2020 which then persisted for over 200 days. He was hospitalised on four occasions with COVID-19 and suffered debilitating fatigue and malaise throughout. There was no clinical response to antiviral therapy with remdesivir or CP, and SARS-CoV-2 was consistently detected in nasopharyngeal swabs. Intrahost evolution of several spike variants of uncertain significance was identified by viral sequence analysis. Delivery of REGN-COV2, in combination with remdesivir, was associated with clinical improvement and viral clearance within 6 days, which was sustained for over 150 days despite immunotherapy for relapsed follicular lymphoma. The second case, a 68-year-old female with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia on ibrutinib, also developed persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection. Despite a lack of response to remdesivir, infection promptly cleared following REGN-COV2 in combination with remdesivir, accompanied by resolution of inflammation and full clinical recovery that has been maintained for over 290 days. CONCLUSIONS: These cases highlight the potential benefit of REGN-COV2 as therapy for persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection in antibody deficient individuals, including after failure of CP treatment. Formal clinical studies are warranted to assess the effectiveness of REGN-COV2 in antibody-deficient patients, especially in light of the emergence of variants of concern, such as Omicron, that appear to evade REGN-COV2 neutralisation.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , /virology , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Neutralizing , COVID-19/therapy , Drug Combinations , Female , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Lymphoma, Follicular , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
7.
Curr Med Sci ; 41(6): 1052-1064, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1588743

ABSTRACT

The ongoing Coronavirus disease 19 pandemic has likely changed the world in ways not seen in the past. Neutralizing antibody (NAb) assays play an important role in the management of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak. Using these tools, we can assess the presence and duration of antibody-mediated protection in naturally infected individuals, screen convalescent plasma preparations for donation, test the efficacy of immunotherapy, and analyze NAb titers and persistence after vaccination to predict vaccine-induced protective effects. This review briefly summarizes the various methods used for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 NAbs and compares their advantages and disadvantages to facilitate their development and clinical application.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Serological Testing/methods , COVID-19/immunology , Neutralization Tests/methods , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Serological Testing/trends , COVID-19 Vaccines/pharmacology , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Neutralization Tests/trends , Pandemics/prevention & control
8.
Int J Surg ; 97: 106204, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1587512

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has resulted in a catastrophic pandemic and severely impacted people's livelihoods worldwide. In addition, the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants has posed a severe threat to humankind. Due to the dearth of therapeutic options during the commencement of the pandemic, convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) played a significant part in the management of patients with severe form of COVID-19. Several recent studies have proposed various protective effects of CPT, such as antiviral, anti-inflammatory, anti-thrombotic, and immunomodulatory actions, curtailing the devastating consequences of the SARS-CoV-2 infection. On the contrary, several clinical studies have raised some serious concerns about the effectiveness and reliability of CPT in the management of patients with COVID-19. The protective effects of CPT in severely ill patients are yet to be proved. Moreover, the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants has raised concerns about the effectiveness of CPT against COVID-19. Therefore, to establish concrete evidence of the efficacy of CPT and adjudicate its inclusion in the management of COVID-19, an updated review of present literature is required, which could help in the development of an efficient therapeutic regimen to treat COVID-19 amid the emergence of new viral variants.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Reproducibility of Results
9.
Front Immunol ; 12: 766821, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1581335

ABSTRACT

As severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants continue to emerge and spread around the world, antibodies and vaccines to confer broad and potent neutralizing activity are urgently needed. Through the isolation and characterization of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) from individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2, we identified one antibody, P36-5D2, capable of neutralizing the major SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. Crystal and electron cryo-microscopy (cryo-EM) structure analyses revealed that P36-5D2 targeted to a conserved epitope on the receptor-binding domain of the spike protein, withstanding the three key mutations-K417N, E484K, and N501Y-found in the variants that are responsible for escape from many potent neutralizing mAbs, including some already approved for emergency use authorization (EUA). A single intraperitoneal (IP) injection of P36-5D2 as a prophylactic treatment completely protected animals from challenge of infectious SARS-CoV-2 Alpha and Beta. Treated animals manifested normal body weight and were devoid of infection-associated death up to 14 days. A substantial decrease of the infectious virus in the lungs and brain, as well as reduced lung pathology, was found in these animals compared to the controls. Thus, P36-5D2 represents a new and desirable human antibody against the current and emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/pharmacology , Antibodies, Neutralizing/pharmacology , Antibodies, Viral/pharmacology , COVID-19/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Animals , Antibodies, Monoclonal/chemistry , Antibodies, Monoclonal/immunology , Antibodies, Neutralizing/chemistry , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/chemistry , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , HEK293 Cells , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Mice
10.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(1)2021 Dec 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1580858

ABSTRACT

Passive immunotherapy with convalescent COVID-19 plasma (CCP) is used as a therapeutic procedure in many countries, including Serbia. In this study, we analyzed the association between demographic factors, COVID-19 severity and the reactivity of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (Abs) in Serbian CCP donors. Individuals (n = 468) recovered from confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, and who were willing to donate their plasma for passive immunization of COVID-19 patients were enrolled in the study. Plasma samples were tested for the presence of IgG reactive to SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein (S1) and nucleocapsid antigens. Individuals were characterized according to age, gender, comorbidities, COVID-19 severity, ABO blood type and RhD factor. Total of 420 candidates (420/468; 89.74%) reached the levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG that qualified them for inclusion in CCP donation program. Further statistical analysis showed that male individuals (p = 0.034), older age groups (p < 0.001), existence of hypertension (p = 0.008), and severe COVID-19 (p = 0.000) are linked with higher levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 Abs. These findings will guide the selection of CCP donors in Serbia. Further studies need to be conducted to assess the neutralization potency and clinical efficiency of CCP collected from Serbian donors with high anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG reactivity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , Antibodies, Viral , Blood Donors , COVID-19/therapy , Demography , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Male , SARS-CoV-2
11.
BMC Infect Dis ; 21(1): 1278, 2021 Dec 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1577249

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Preliminary studies revealed the safety and effectiveness of convalescent plasma (CP) therapy for patients with coronavirus. In this study, we aimed to evaluate and summarize the available evidence on CP therapy, identify the research gap regarding the immunological response to CP therapy and pave the road for future studies. METHODS: This study was conducted according to the Hilary Arksey and Lisa O'Malley framework. To find out the relevant studies, we searched PubMed, Scopus and Embase databases up to 30th May 2021. Data have been extracted according to three categories: (1) patients' characteristics, (2) clinical and immunological responses to CP therapy and (3) pre-infusion screening of the CP samples. RESULTS: A total of 12,553 articles were identified. One hundred fifty-four studies met the inclusion criteria for full-text review. More than half of the included studies (112 studies, (75.6%)) concluded satisfactory outcomes and or safety of CP infusion in patients. Results of studies showed the efficacy of CP therapy in clinical improvement (101 studies), decreasing in the level of inflammatory factors (62 studies), elimination or decreasing in viral load (60 studies), and induction or increase in antibody response (37 studies). Despite these promising results, the results of the 49 studies revealed that CP therapy was ineffective in the survival of patients, clinical improvement, viral infection elimination or decrease in the inflammatory factor levels. Furthermore, the adaptive immune response was evaluated in 3 studies. Information related to the pre-infusion screening for human leukocyte antigen/human neutrophil antigen (HLA/HNA) antibodies was not reported in most of the studies. Our gap analysis revealed that the influence of the CP infusion on the adaptive immune and inflammatory responses in patients with coronavirus needs further investigation. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of most included studies, CP infusion was safe and resulted in clinical improvement of patients and decreasing the viral load. The effect of the CP infusion on adaptive immune response and inflammatory cytokines in patients with coronavirus needs further investigation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Blood Transfusion , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Plasma , SARS-CoV-2
12.
Rev Med Virol ; 31(6): e2231, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1574317

ABSTRACT

The Spike protein is the target of both antibody-based therapeutics (convalescent plasma, polyclonal serum, monoclonal antibodies) and vaccines. Mutations in Spike could affect efficacy of those treatments. Hence, monitoring of mutations is necessary to forecast and readapt the inventory of therapeutics. Different phylogenetic nomenclatures have been used for the currently circulating SARS-CoV-2 clades. The Spike protein has different hotspots of mutation and deletion, the most dangerous for immune escape being the ones within the receptor binding domain (RBD), such as K417N/T, N439K, L452R, Y453F, S477N, E484K, and N501Y. Convergent evolution has led to different combinations of mutations among different clades. In this review we focus on the main variants of concern, that is, the so-called UK (B.1.1.7), South African (B.1.351) and Brazilian (P.1) strains.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Neutralizing/therapeutic use , COVID-19/therapy , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/genetics , Antibodies, Monoclonal/chemistry , Antibodies, Monoclonal/metabolism , Antibodies, Neutralizing/chemistry , Antibodies, Neutralizing/metabolism , Antibodies, Viral/chemistry , Antibodies, Viral/metabolism , Antibodies, Viral/therapeutic use , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Gene Expression , Humans , Immune Evasion , Immunization, Passive/methods , Mutation , Phylogeny , Protein Binding , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2/classification , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , South Africa/epidemiology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , United Kingdom/epidemiology
13.
Vox Sang ; 116(7): 766-773, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1573880

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: ABO blood group may affect risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or severity of COVID-19. We sought to determine whether IgG, IgA and neutralizing antibody (nAb) to SARS-CoV-2 vary by ABO blood group. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Among eligible convalescent plasma donors, ABO blood group was determined via agglutination of reagent A1 and B cells, IgA and IgG were quantified using the Euroimmun anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA, and nAb titres were quantified using a microneutralization assay. Differences in titre distribution were examined by ABO blood group using non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis tests. Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) of high nAb titre (≥1:160) were estimated by blood group using multivariable modified Poisson regression models that adjusted for age, sex, hospitalization status and time since SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. RESULTS: Of the 202 potential donors, 65 (32%) were blood group A, 39 (19%) were group B, 13 (6%) were group AB, and 85 (42%) were group O. Distribution of nAb titres significantly differed by ABO blood group, whereas there were no significant differences in anti-spike IgA or anti-spike IgG titres by ABO blood group. There were significantly more individuals with high nAb titre (≥1:160) among those with blood group B, compared with group O (aPR = 1·9 [95%CI = 1·1-3·3], P = 0·029). Fewer individuals had a high nAb titre among those with blood group A, compared with group B (aPR = 0·6 [95%CI = 0·4-1·0], P = 0·053). CONCLUSION: Eligible CCP donors with blood group B may have relatively higher neutralizing antibody titres. Additional studies evaluating ABO blood groups and antibody titres that incorporate COVID-19 severity are needed.


Subject(s)
ABO Blood-Group System , COVID-19 , Antibodies, Viral , Antibody Formation , Blood Donors , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , Immunization, Passive , SARS-CoV-2
14.
Anal Methods ; 13(36): 4019-4037, 2021 09 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1573622

ABSTRACT

The emergence of a pandemic scale respiratory illness (COVID-19: coronavirus disease 2019) and the lack of the world's readiness to prevent its spread resulted in an unprecedented rise of biomedical diagnostic industries, as they took lead to provide efficient diagnostic solutions for COVID-19. However, these circumstances also led to numerous emergency use authorizations without appropriate evaluation that compromised standards, which could result in a larger than usual number of false-positive or false-negative results, leading to unwanted ambiguity in already confusing realities of the pandemic-hit closures of the world economy. This review is aimed at comparing the claimed or reported clinical sensitivity and clinical specificity of commercially available rapid antibody diagnostics with independently evaluated clinical performance results of the tests. Thereby, we not only present the types of modern antibody diagnostics and their working principles but summarize their experimental evaluations and observed clinical efficiencies to highlight the research, development, and commercialization issues with future challenges. Still, it must be emphasized that the serological or antibody tests do not serve the purpose of early diagnosis but are more suitable for epidemiology and screening populaces with an active immune response, recognizing convalescent plasma donors, and determining vaccine efficacy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adaptive Immunity , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Sensitivity and Specificity
15.
Biosens Bioelectron ; 199: 113883, 2022 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1568530

ABSTRACT

The global effort against the COVID-19 pandemic dictates that routine quantitative detection of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies is vital for assessing immunity following periodic revaccination against new viral variants. Here, we report a dual-detection fluorescent immunochromatographic assay (DFIA), with a built-in self-calibration process, that enables rapid quantitative detection of neutralizing antibodies that block binding between the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). Thus, this assay is based on the inhibition of binding between ACE2 and the RBD of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein by neutralizing antibodies, and the affinity of anti-human immunoglobulins for these neutralizing antibodies. Our self-calibrating DFIA shows improved precision and sensitivity with a wider dynamic linear range, due to the incorporation of a ratiometric algorithm of two-reverse linkage signals responding to an analyte. This was evident by the fact that no positive results (0/14) were observed in verified negative samples, while 22 positives were detected in 23 samples from verified convalescent plasma. A comparative analysis of the ability to detect neutralizing antibodies in 266 clinical serum samples including those from vaccine recipients, indicated that the overall percent agreement between DFIA and the commercial ELISA kit was 90.98%. Thus, the proposed DFIA provides a more reliable and accurate rapid test for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infections and vaccinations in the community. Therefore, the DFIA based strategy for detecting biomarkers, which uses a ratiometric algorithm based on affinity and inhibition reactions, may be applied to improve the performance of immunochromatographic assays.


Subject(s)
Biosensing Techniques , COVID-19 , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Immunoassay , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus
16.
Biosens Bioelectron ; 199: 113868, 2022 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1561218

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 vaccination efficacy depends on serum levels of the neutralizing antibodies (NAs) specific to the receptor-binding domain of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein. Therefore, a high-throughput rapid assay capable of measuring the total SARS-CoV-2 NA level is urgently needed for COVID-19 serodiagnosis, convalescent plasma therapy, vaccine development, and assessment. Here, we developed a novel nanoplasmonic immunosorbent assay (NanoPISA) platform for one-step rapid quantification of SARS-CoV-2 NAs in clinical serum samples for high-throughput evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. The NanoPISA platform enhanced by the use of nanoporous hollow gold nanoparticle coupling was able to detect SARS-CoV-2 NAs with a limit of detection of 0.2 pM within 15 min without washing steps. The one-step NanoPISA for SARS-CoV-2 NA detection in clinical specimens yielded good results, comparable with those obtained in the gold-standard seroneutralization test and the surrogate virus-neutralizing enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Collectively, the one-step NanoPISA might be a rapid and high-throughput NA-quantification platform for evaluating the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.


Subject(s)
Biosensing Techniques , COVID-19 , Metal Nanoparticles , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Vaccines , Gold , Humans , Immunization, Passive , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
17.
Viruses ; 13(12)2021 12 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1555015

ABSTRACT

We have developed a monoclonal antibody (mAb) cocktail (ZRC-3308) comprising of ZRC3308-A7 and ZRC3308-B10 in the ratio 1:1 for COVID-19 treatment. The mAbs were designed to have reduced immune effector functions and increased circulation half-life. mAbs showed good binding affinities to non-competing epitopes on RBD of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and were found neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1, B.1.1.7, B.1.351, B.1.617.2, and B.1.617.2 AY.1 in vitro. The mAb cocktail demonstrated effective prophylactic and therapeutic activity against SARS-CoV-2 infection in Syrian hamsters. The antibody cocktail appears to be a promising candidate for prophylactic use and for therapy in early COVID-19 cases that have not progressed to severe disease.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/immunology , COVID-19/therapy , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Animals , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Neutralizing/therapeutic use , Antibody Affinity , Binding Sites , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cricetinae , Disease Models, Animal , Epitopes , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Mesocricetus , Mutation , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/genetics , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology
18.
J Med Case Rep ; 15(1): 564, 2021 Nov 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1533278

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, the cause of coronavirus disease 2019, has become a global pandemic. Currently, there is no definitive treatment for coronavirus disease 2019. Convalescent plasma therapy has become a potential specific curative method, while vaccines as protection modalities require further work. CASE PRESENTATION: Eight non-intubated Indonesian patients, ages ranging from 40 to 74 years old, with coronavirus disease 2019 confirmed by viral Ribonucleid Acid (RNA) real-time polymerase chain reaction tests were included. Four patients were administered two doses of 200 mL convalescent plasma, and the other four patients were administered one dose of convalescent plasma with an antibody titer of 1:320, within the first 14 days since symptoms occurred. The median times from illness onset to convalescent plasma therapy and from the first day of hospital admission to convalescent plasma therapy were 13 and 6.5 days, respectively. All patients showed improvements in clinical symptoms, laboratory parameters, thorax imaging, negative conversion of polymerase chain reaction results, and decreased oxygen supplementation within 1 week after convalescent plasma therapy. Patients with two convalescent plasma doses tended to have faster recovery than those with one convalescent plasma dose. No severe adverse effects were observed in any patient. CONCLUSION: This is the first case series in Indonesia showing that convalescent plasma therapy is safe and well tolerated and that early convalescent plasma therapy before the patient is intubated could potentially prevent disease progression, increase the recovery rate, and shorten the inpatient time of stay.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Indonesia , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
19.
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
20.
JAMA ; 326(17): 1690-1702, 2021 Nov 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525402

ABSTRACT

Importance: The evidence for benefit of convalescent plasma for critically ill patients with COVID-19 is inconclusive. Objective: To determine whether convalescent plasma would improve outcomes for critically ill adults with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: The ongoing Randomized, Embedded, Multifactorial, Adaptive Platform Trial for Community-Acquired Pneumonia (REMAP-CAP) enrolled and randomized 4763 adults with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 between March 9, 2020, and January 18, 2021, within at least 1 domain; 2011 critically ill adults were randomized to open-label interventions in the immunoglobulin domain at 129 sites in 4 countries. Follow-up ended on April 19, 2021. Interventions: The immunoglobulin domain randomized participants to receive 2 units of high-titer, ABO-compatible convalescent plasma (total volume of 550 mL ± 150 mL) within 48 hours of randomization (n = 1084) or no convalescent plasma (n = 916). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary ordinal end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of intensive care unit-based organ support) up to day 21 (range, -1 to 21 days; patients who died were assigned -1 day). The primary analysis was an adjusted bayesian cumulative logistic model. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio (OR) greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Futility was defined as the posterior probability of an OR less than 1.2 (threshold for trial conclusion of futility >95%). An OR greater than 1 represented improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both. The prespecified secondary outcomes included in-hospital survival; 28-day survival; 90-day survival; respiratory support-free days; cardiovascular support-free days; progression to invasive mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal mechanical oxygenation, or death; intensive care unit length of stay; hospital length of stay; World Health Organization ordinal scale score at day 14; venous thromboembolic events at 90 days; and serious adverse events. Results: Among the 2011 participants who were randomized (median age, 61 [IQR, 52 to 70] years and 645/1998 [32.3%] women), 1990 (99%) completed the trial. The convalescent plasma intervention was stopped after the prespecified criterion for futility was met. The median number of organ support-free days was 0 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the convalescent plasma group and 3 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the no convalescent plasma group. The in-hospital mortality rate was 37.3% (401/1075) for the convalescent plasma group and 38.4% (347/904) for the no convalescent plasma group and the median number of days alive and free of organ support was 14 (IQR, 3 to 18) and 14 (IQR, 7 to 18), respectively. The median-adjusted OR was 0.97 (95% credible interval, 0.83 to 1.15) and the posterior probability of futility (OR <1.2) was 99.4% for the convalescent plasma group compared with the no convalescent plasma group. The treatment effects were consistent across the primary outcome and the 11 secondary outcomes. Serious adverse events were reported in 3.0% (32/1075) of participants in the convalescent plasma group and in 1.3% (12/905) of participants in the no convalescent plasma group. Conclusions and Relevance: Among critically ill adults with confirmed COVID-19, treatment with 2 units of high-titer, ABO-compatible convalescent plasma had a low likelihood of providing improvement in the number of organ support-free days. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , ABO Blood-Group System , Adult , Aged , Critical Illness/therapy , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Length of Stay , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Failure , Vasoconstrictor Agents/therapeutic use
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...