Search

Background and Objective: Convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) may reduce the risk of disease progression among patients with COVID-19. This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CPT in preventing ICU admission among hospitalized COVID-19 patients., Methods: In this open-label randomized controlled trial, we randomly assigned hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 in a 1:1 ratio to receive convalescent plasma as an adjunct to standard of care or standard of care alone. The primary endpoint was ICU admission within first 28 days of enrolment. Primary safety endpoints include rapid deterioration of respiratory or clinical status within four hours of convalescent plasma transfusion and cumulative incidence of serious adverse events during the study period including transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI), transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO), severe allergic reactions, and transfusion-related infections., Results: A total of 22 patients were assigned to receive convalescent plasma as an adjunct to standard of care and 22 to receive standard of care alone. The median time from onset of COVID-19 symptoms to study enrolment was eight days (IQR, 4 to 10). Two patients (9.1%) in the CPT group and one patient (4.5%) in the control group were admitted to the ICU. The primary outcome measure, ICU admission, was not different between the two groups (q-value >0.9). No patient who received convalescent plasma had rapid deterioration of respiratory/clinical status within four hours of transfusion and none developed TRALI, TACO, anaphylaxis, severe allergic reactions, or transfusion-related infections. There was also no significant difference in the secondary outcomes of 28-day mortality (two patients in the CPT group and none in the control group, q-value >0.90), dialysis-free days, vasopressor-free days, and ICU-free days., Conclusions: Among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, no significant differences were observed in the need for ICU admission between patients given CPT as adjunct to standard of care and those who received standard of care alone. Interpretation is limited by early termination of the trial which may have been underpowered to detect a clinically important difference., Competing Interests: All authors declared no conflicts of interest., (© 2024 Acta Medica Philippina.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine the predictors of mortality and describe laboratory trends among adults with confirmed COVID-19., Methods: The medical records of adult patients admitted to a referral hospital with COVID-19 were retrospectively reviewed. Demographic and clinical characteristics, and laboratory parameters, were compared between survivors and non-survivors. Predictors of mortality were determined by multivariate analysis. Mean laboratory values were plotted across illness duration., Results: Of 1215 patients, 203 (16.7%) had mild, 488 (40.2%) moderate, 183 (15.1%) severe, and 341 (28.1%) critical COVID-19 on admission. In-hospital mortality was 18.2% (0% mild, 6.1% moderate, 15.8% severe, 47.5% critical). Predictors of mortality were age ≥ 60 years, COPD, qSOFA score ≥ 2, WBC > 10 × 10 9 /L, absolute lymphocyte count < 1000, neutrophil ≥ 70%, PaO 2 /FiO 2 ratio ≤ 200, eGFR < 90 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , LDH > 600 U/L, and CRP > 12 mg/L. Non-survivors exhibited an increase in LDH and decreases in PaO 2 /FiO 2 ratio and eGFR during the 2nd-3rd week of illness., Conclusion: The overall mortality rate was high. Predictors of mortality were similar to those of other reports globally. Marked inflammation and worsening pulmonary and renal function were evident among non-survivors by the 2nd-3rd week of illness., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (© 2022 The Author(s).)

Objectives: To describe the clinical profile and outcomes of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) across the spectrum of disease severity., Methods: This retrospective study included adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection admitted to a referral hospital. Descriptive statistics, tests for trend, Kaplan-Meier curve and log-rank test were used to compare characteristics and outcomes across disease severity categories., Results: Of 1500 patients with COVID-19, 14.8% were asymptomatic, 13.5% had mild disease, 36.6% had moderate disease, 12.3% had severe disease and 22.7% had critical disease. Asymptomatic patients were admitted for a concurrent condition or for isolation. Patients aged >60 years, male gender and with co-morbidities had more severe disease. Fever, cough, shortness of breath, malaise, gastrointestinal symptoms and decreased sensorium were more common in patients with severe disease. Bilateral pulmonary infiltrates were common (51.1%), with sicker patients having more abnormal findings. The overall mortality rate was 15.1%. Adopting a symptom-based strategy reduced the length of hospitalization from a median of 13 [interquartile range (IQR) 7-21] days to 9 (IQR 5-14) days., Conclusion: The clinical profile and outcomes for this cohort of patients with COVID-19 was consistent with published reports. Asymptomatic infection was common, and universal testing may be a valuable strategy in the correct context, given the implications for infection control. A symptom-based strategy was found to reduce the length of hospitalization considerably., (© 2022 The Author(s).)

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 (I 2  = 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., (© 2021. The Author(s).)