Search

BackgroundPolyclonal 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.MethodsIn 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.ResultsParticipants 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.ConclusionsIn 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.).

BackgroundIn a previous trial of antiretroviral therapy (ART) involving pregnant women with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, those randomly assigned to receive tenofovir, emtricitabine, and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (TDF-FTC-LPV/r) had infants at greater risk for very premature birth and death within 14 days after delivery than those assigned to receive zidovudine, lamivudine, and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (ZDV-3TC-LPV/r).MethodsUsing data from two U.S.-based cohort studies, we compared the risk of adverse birth outcomes among infants with in utero exposure to ZDV-3TC-LPV/r, TDF-FTC-LPV/r, or TDF-FTC with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r). We evaluated the risk of preterm birth (

BackgroundRandomized-trial data on the risks and benefits of antiretroviral therapy (ART) as compared with zidovudine and single-dose nevirapine to prevent transmission of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in HIV-infected pregnant women with high CD4 counts are lacking.MethodsWe randomly assigned HIV-infected women at 14 or more weeks of gestation with CD4 counts of at least 350 cells per cubic millimeter to zidovudine and single-dose nevirapine plus a 1-to-2-week postpartum "tail" of tenofovir and emtricitabine (zidovudine alone); zidovudine, lamivudine, and lopinavir-ritonavir (zidovudine-based ART); or tenofovir, emtricitabine, and lopinavir-ritonavir (tenofovir-based ART). The primary outcomes were HIV transmission at 1 week of age in the infant and maternal and infant safety.ResultsThe median CD4 count was 530 cells per cubic millimeter among 3490 primarily black African HIV-infected women enrolled at a median of 26 weeks of gestation (interquartile range, 21 to 30). The rate of transmission was significantly lower with ART than with zidovudine alone (0.5% in the combined ART groups vs. 1.8%; difference, -1.3 percentage points; repeated confidence interval, -2.1 to -0.4). However, the rate of maternal grade 2 to 4 adverse events was significantly higher with zidovudine-based ART than with zidovudine alone (21.1% vs. 17.3%, P=0.008), and the rate of grade 2 to 4 abnormal blood chemical values was higher with tenofovir-based ART than with zidovudine alone (2.9% vs. 0.8%, P=0.03). Adverse events did not differ significantly between the ART groups (P>0.99). A birth weight of less than 2500 g was more frequent with zidovudine-based ART than with zidovudine alone (23.0% vs. 12.0%, P

The author comments on the Strategies for Management of Antiretroviral Therapy (SMART) trial that was carried out to determine whether withholding therapy for long periods would result in human immunodeficiency viruses (HIV)-associated complications. According to the author, the results of the SMART study underscore the benefit of using adequately powered randomized trials to evaluate new treatment strategies in clinical medicine.

Background: Peripartum administration of single-dose nevirapine reduces mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) but selects for nevirapine-resistant virus., Methods: In seven African countries, women infected with HIV-1 whose CD4+ T-cell counts were below 200 per cubic millimeter and who either had or had not taken single-dose nevirapine at least 6 months before enrollment were randomly assigned to receive antiretroviral therapy with tenofovir–emtricitabine plus nevirapine or tenofovir-emtricitabine plus lopinavir boosted by a low dose of ritonavir. The primary end point was the time to confirmed virologic failure or death., Results: A total of 241 women who had been exposed to single-dose nevirapine began the study treatments (121 received nevirapine and 120 received ritonavir-boosted lopinavir). Significantly more women in the nevirapine group reached the primary end point than in the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group (26% vs. 8%) (adjusted P=0.001). Virologic failure occurred in 37 (28 in the nevirapine group and 9 in the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group), and 5 died without prior virologic failure (4 in the nevirapine group and 1 in the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group). The group differences appeared to decrease as the interval between single-dose nevirapine exposure and the start of antiretroviral therapy increased. Retrospective bulk sequencing of baseline plasma samples showed nevirapine resistance in 33 of 239 women tested (14%). Among 500 women without prior exposure to single-dose nevirapine, 34 of 249 in the nevirapine group (14%) and 36 of 251 in the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group (14%) had virologic failure or died., Conclusions: In women with prior exposure to peripartum single-dose nevirapine (but not in those without prior exposure), ritonavir-boosted lopinavir plus tenofovir–emtricitabine was superior to nevirapine plus tenofovir–emtricitabine for initial antiretroviral therapy. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the National Research Center; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00089505.).