Early High-Titer Plasma Therapy to Prevent Severe Covid-19 in Older Adults.
18 Feb 2021-The New England Journal of Medicine (Massachusetts Medical Society)-Vol. 384, Iss: 7, pp 610-618
TL;DR: In this paper, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of convalescent plasma with high IgG titers against SARS-CoV-2 in older adult patients within 72 hours after the onset of mild Covid-19 symptoms was conducted.
Abstract: Background Therapies to interrupt the progression of early coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) remain elusive. Among them, convalescent plasma administered to hospitalized patients has been unsuccessful, perhaps because antibodies should be administered earlier in the course of illness. Methods We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of convalescent plasma with high IgG titers against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in older adult patients within 72 hours after the onset of mild Covid-19 symptoms. The primary end point was severe respiratory disease, defined as a respiratory rate of 30 breaths per minute or more, an oxygen saturation of less than 93% while the patient was breathing ambient air, or both. The trial was stopped early at 76% of its projected sample size because cases of Covid-19 in the trial region decreased considerably and steady enrollment of trial patients became virtually impossible. Results A total of 160 patients underwent randomization. In the intention-to-treat population, severe respiratory disease developed in 13 of 80 patients (16%) who received convalescent plasma and 25 of 80 patients (31%) who received placebo (relative risk, 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29 to 0.94; P = 0.03), with a relative risk reduction of 48%. A modified intention-to-treat analysis that excluded 6 patients who had a primary end-point event before infusion of convalescent plasma or placebo showed a larger effect size (relative risk, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.81). No solicited adverse events were observed. Conclusions Early administration of high-titer convalescent plasma against SARS-CoV-2 to mildly ill infected older adults reduced the progression of Covid-19. (Funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Fundacion INFANT Pandemic Fund; Direccion de Sangre y Medicina Transfusional del Ministerio de Salud number, PAEPCC19, Plataforma de Registro Informatizado de Investigaciones en Salud number, 1421, and ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04479163.).
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, structural and cellular foundations for understanding the multistep SARS-CoV-2 entry process, including S protein synthesis, S protein structure, conformational transitions necessary for association of the spike (S) protein with ACE2, engagement of the receptor-binding domain of the S protein with ACS, proteolytic activation of S protein, endocytosis and membrane fusion are provided.
Abstract: The unprecedented public health and economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic caused by infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been met with an equally unprecedented scientific response. Much of this response has focused, appropriately, on the mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2 entry into host cells, and in particular the binding of the spike (S) protein to its receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), and subsequent membrane fusion. This Review provides the structural and cellular foundations for understanding the multistep SARS-CoV-2 entry process, including S protein synthesis, S protein structure, conformational transitions necessary for association of the S protein with ACE2, engagement of the receptor-binding domain of the S protein with ACE2, proteolytic activation of the S protein, endocytosis and membrane fusion. We define the roles of furin-like proteases, transmembrane protease, serine 2 (TMPRSS2) and cathepsin L in these processes, and delineate the features of ACE2 orthologues in reservoir animal species and S protein adaptations that facilitate efficient human transmission. We also examine the utility of vaccines, antibodies and other potential therapeutics targeting SARS-CoV-2 entry mechanisms. Finally, we present key outstanding questions associated with this critical process.
988 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine was used to protect against SARS-CoV-2 against variants of concern (VOC) in individuals over eighty years of age.
Abstract: Although two-dose mRNA vaccination provides excellent protection against SARS-CoV-2, there is little information about vaccine efficacy against variants of concern (VOC) in individuals above eighty years of age1. Here we analysed immune responses following vaccination with the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine2 in elderly participants and younger healthcare workers. Serum neutralization and levels of binding IgG or IgA after the first vaccine dose were lower in older individuals, with a marked drop in participants over eighty years old. Sera from participants above eighty showed lower neutralization potency against the B.1.1.7 (Alpha), B.1.351 (Beta) and P.1. (Gamma) VOC than against the wild-type virus and were more likely to lack any neutralization against VOC following the first dose. However, following the second dose, neutralization against VOC was detectable regardless of age. The frequency of SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific memory B cells was higher in elderly responders (whose serum showed neutralization activity) than in non-responders after the first dose. Elderly participants showed a clear reduction in somatic hypermutation of class-switched cells. The production of interferon-γ and interleukin-2 by SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific T cells was lower in older participants, and both cytokines were secreted primarily by CD4 T cells. We conclude that the elderly are a high-risk population and that specific measures to boost vaccine responses in this population are warranted, particularly where variants of concern are circulating. Individuals over eighty years of age are less likely to mount a good immune response against SARS-CoV-2 (measured by neutralization titres) after the first dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine, but achieve good neutralization after the second dose.
438 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors evaluated the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and found no significant difference in 28-day mortality between the two groups.
383 citations
TL;DR: To continually assess, as more evidence becomes available, whether convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin transfusion is effective and safe in treatment of people with COVID-19, a first living update of this review is published.
Abstract: Background Convalescent plasma and hyperimmune immunoglobulin may reduce mortality in patients with viral respiratory diseases, and are currently being investigated in trials as potential therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A thorough understanding of the current body of evidence regarding the benefits and risks is required. OBJECTIVES: To continually assess, as more evidence becomes available, whether convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin transfusion is effective and safe in treatment of people with COVID-19. Search methods We searched the World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 Global Research Database, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention COVID-19 Research Article Database and trial registries to identify completed and ongoing studies on 4 June 2020. Selection criteria We followed standard Cochrane methodology. We included studies evaluating convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin for people with COVID-19, irrespective of study design, disease severity, age, gender or ethnicity. We excluded studies including populations with other coronavirus diseases (severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)) and studies evaluating standard immunoglobulin. Data collection and analysis We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), the Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for controlled non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs), and the assessment criteria for observational studies, provided by Cochrane Childhood Cancer for non-controlled NRSIs. MAIN RESULTS: This is the first living update of our review. We included 20 studies (1 RCT, 3 controlled NRSIs, 16 non-controlled NRSIs) with 5443 participants, of whom 5211 received convalescent plasma, and identified a further 98 ongoing studies evaluating convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin, of which 50 are randomised. We did not identify any completed studies evaluating hyperimmune immunoglobulin. Overall risk of bias of included studies was high, due to study design, type of participants, and other previous or concurrent treatments. Effectiveness of convalescent plasma for people with COVID-19 We included results from four controlled studies (1 RCT (stopped early) with 103 participants, of whom 52 received convalescent plasma; and 3 controlled NRSIs with 236 participants, of whom 55 received convalescent plasma) to assess effectiveness of convalescent plasma. Control groups received standard care at time of treatment without convalescent plasma. All-cause mortality at hospital discharge (1 controlled NRSI, 21 participants) We are very uncertain whether convalescent plasma has any effect on all-cause mortality at hospital discharge (risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.31; very low-certainty evidence). Time to death (1 RCT, 103 participants; 1 controlled NRSI, 195 participants) We are very uncertain whether convalescent plasma prolongs time to death (RCT: hazard ratio (HR) 0.74, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.82; controlled NRSI: HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.96; very low-certainty evidence). Improvement of clinical symptoms, assessed by need for respiratory support (1 RCT, 103 participants; 1 controlled NRSI, 195 participants) We are very uncertain whether convalescent plasma has any effect on improvement of clinical symptoms at seven days (RCT: RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.30 to 3.19), 14 days (RCT: RR 1.85, 95% CI 0.91 to 3.77; controlled NRSI: RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.29), and 28 days (RCT: RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.81; very low-certainty evidence). Quality of life No studies reported this outcome. Safety of convalescent plasma for people with COVID-19 We included results from 1 RCT, 3 controlled NRSIs and 10 non-controlled NRSIs assessing safety of convalescent plasma. Reporting of adverse events and serious adverse events was variable. The controlled studies reported on adverse events and serious adverse events only in participants receiving convalescent plasma. The duration of follow-up varied. Some, but not all, studies included death as a serious adverse event. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events (13 studies, 201 participants) The studies did not report the grade of adverse events. Thirteen studies (201 participants) reported on adverse events of possible grade 3 or 4 severity. The majority of these adverse events were allergic or respiratory events. We are very uncertain whether or not convalescent plasma therapy affects the risk of moderate to severe adverse events (very low-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events (14 studies, 5201 participants) Fourteen studies (5201 participants) reported on serious adverse events. The majority of participants were from one non-controlled NRSI (5000 participants), which reported only on serious adverse events limited to the first four hours after convalescent plasma transfusion. This study included death as a serious adverse event; they reported 15 deaths, four of which they classified as potentially, probably or definitely related to transfusion. Other serious adverse events reported in all studies were predominantly allergic or respiratory in nature, including anaphylaxis, transfusion-associated dyspnoea, and transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI). We are very uncertain whether or not convalescent plasma affects the number of serious adverse events. Authors' conclusions We are very uncertain whether convalescent plasma is beneficial for people admitted to hospital with COVID-19. For safety outcomes we also included non-controlled NRSIs. There was limited information regarding adverse events. Of the controlled studies, none reported on this outcome in the control group. There is only very low-certainty evidence for safety of convalescent plasma for COVID-19. While major efforts to conduct research on COVID-19 are being made, problems with recruiting the anticipated number of participants into these studies are conceivable. The early termination of the first RCT investigating convalescent plasma, and the multitude of studies registered in the past months illustrate this. It is therefore necessary to critically assess the design of these registered studies, and well-designed studies should be prioritised. Other considerations for these studies are the need to report outcomes for all study arms in the same way, and the importance of maintaining comparability in terms of co-interventions administered in all study arms. There are 98 ongoing studies evaluating convalescent plasma and hyperimmune immunoglobulin, of which 50 are RCTs. This is the first living update of the review, and we will continue to update this review periodically. These updates may show different results to those reported here.
317 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors show that compromised immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein correlate with neutralizing capacity and protection, are not affected by heterologous boosting of influenza or common cold immunity, and can last up to 8 months.
Abstract: Understanding how antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 evolve during infection may provide important insight into therapeutic approaches and vaccination for COVID-19. Here we profile the antibody responses of 162 COVID-19 symptomatic patients in the COVID-BioB cohort followed longitudinally for up to eight months from symptom onset to find SARS-CoV-2 neutralization, as well as antibodies either recognizing SARS-CoV-2 spike antigens and nucleoprotein, or specific for S2 antigen of seasonal beta-coronaviruses and hemagglutinin of the H1N1 flu virus. The presence of neutralizing antibodies within the first weeks from symptoms onset correlates with time to a negative swab result (p = 0.002), while the lack of neutralizing capacity correlates with an increased risk of a fatal outcome (p = 0.008). Neutralizing antibody titers progressively drop after 5–8 weeks but are still detectable up to 8 months in the majority of recovered patients regardless of age or co-morbidities, with IgG to spike antigens providing the best correlate of neutralization. Antibody responses to seasonal coronaviruses are temporarily boosted, and parallel those to SARS-CoV-2 without dampening the specific response or worsening disease progression. Our results thus suggest compromised immune responses to the SARS-CoV-2 spike to be a major trait of COVID-19 patients with critical conditions, and thereby inform on the planning of COVID-19 patient care and therapy prioritization. Antibody responses are critical for protection from developing severe COVID-19 following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here the authors show that antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein correlate with neutralizing capacity and protection, are not affected by heterologous boosting of influenza or common cold immunity, and can last up to 8 months.
259 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: In hospitalized adult patients with severe Covid-19, no benefit was observed with lopinavir–ritonavir treatment beyond standard care, and future trials in patients withsevere illness may help to confirm or exclude the possibility of a treatment benefit.
Abstract: Background No therapeutics have yet been proven effective for the treatment of severe illness caused by SARS-CoV-2. Methods We conducted a randomized, controlled, open-label trial involvin...
4,293 citations
TL;DR: A range of clinical factors associated with COVID-19-related death is quantified in one of the largest cohort studies on this topic so far and includes people of white ethnicity, Black and South Asian people were at higher risk, even after adjustment for other factors.
Abstract: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly affected mortality worldwide1. There is unprecedented urgency to understand who is most at risk of severe outcomes, and this requires new approaches for the timely analysis of large datasets. Working on behalf of NHS England, we created OpenSAFELY-a secure health analytics platform that covers 40% of all patients in England and holds patient data within the existing data centre of a major vendor of primary care electronic health records. Here we used OpenSAFELY to examine factors associated with COVID-19-related death. Primary care records of 17,278,392 adults were pseudonymously linked to 10,926 COVID-19-related deaths. COVID-19-related death was associated with: being male (hazard ratio (HR) 1.59 (95% confidence interval 1.53-1.65)); greater age and deprivation (both with a strong gradient); diabetes; severe asthma; and various other medical conditions. Compared with people of white ethnicity, Black and South Asian people were at higher risk, even after adjustment for other factors (HR 1.48 (1.29-1.69) and 1.45 (1.32-1.58), respectively). We have quantified a range of clinical factors associated with COVID-19-related death in one of the largest cohort studies on this topic so far. More patient records are rapidly being added to OpenSAFELY, we will update and extend our results regularly.
4,263 citations
TL;DR: Among patients with severe or life-threatening COVID-19, convalescent plasma therapy added to standard treatment, compared with standard treatment alone, did not result in a statistically significant improvement in time to clinical improvement within 28 days.
Abstract: Importance Convalescent plasma is a potential therapeutic option for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but further data from randomized clinical trials are needed. Objective To evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of convalescent plasma therapy for patients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants Open-label, multicenter, randomized clinical trial performed in 7 medical centers in Wuhan, China, from February 14, 2020, to April 1, 2020, with final follow-up April 28, 2020. The trial included 103 participants with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 that was severe (respiratory distress and/or hypoxemia) or life-threatening (shock, organ failure, or requiring mechanical ventilation). The trial was terminated early after 103 of a planned 200 patients were enrolled. Intervention Convalescent plasma in addition to standard treatment (n = 52) vs standard treatment alone (control) (n = 51), stratified by disease severity. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcome was time to clinical improvement within 28 days, defined as patient discharged alive or reduction of 2 points on a 6-point disease severity scale (ranging from 1 [discharge] to 6 [death]). Secondary outcomes included 28-day mortality, time to discharge, and the rate of viral polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results turned from positive at baseline to negative at up to 72 hours. Results Of 103 patients who were randomized (median age, 70 years; 60 [58.3%] male), 101 (98.1%) completed the trial. Clinical improvement occurred within 28 days in 51.9% (27/52) of the convalescent plasma group vs 43.1% (22/51) in the control group (difference, 8.8% [95% CI, −10.4% to 28.0%]; hazard ratio [HR], 1.40 [95% CI, 0.79-2.49];P = .26). Among those with severe disease, the primary outcome occurred in 91.3% (21/23) of the convalescent plasma group vs 68.2% (15/22) of the control group (HR, 2.15 [95% CI, 1.07-4.32];P = .03); among those with life-threatening disease the primary outcome occurred in 20.7% (6/29) of the convalescent plasma group vs 24.1% (7/29) of the control group (HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.30-2.63];P = .83) (Pfor interaction = .17). There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality (15.7% vs 24.0%; OR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.22-1.59];P = .30) or time from randomization to discharge (51.0% vs 36.0% discharged by day 28; HR, 1.61 [95% CI, 0.88-2.95];P = .12). Convalescent plasma treatment was associated with a negative conversion rate of viral PCR at 72 hours in 87.2% of the convalescent plasma group vs 37.5% of the control group (OR, 11.39 [95% CI, 3.91-33.18];P Conclusion and Relevance Among patients with severe or life-threatening COVID-19, convalescent plasma therapy added to standard treatment, compared with standard treatment alone, did not result in a statistically significant improvement in time to clinical improvement within 28 days. Interpretation is limited by early termination of the trial, which may have been underpowered to detect a clinically important difference. Trial Registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry:ChiCTR2000029757
1,112 citations
TL;DR: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to be severe, particularly in certain population groups, and the need to build on current efforts to collect and analyze case data, especially among those with underlying health conditions is underscored.
Abstract: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in 5,817,385 reported cases and 362,705 deaths worldwide through May, 30, 2020,† including 1,761,503 aggregated reported cases and 103,700 deaths in the United States.§ Previous analyses during February-early April 2020 indicated that age ≥65 years and underlying health conditions were associated with a higher risk for severe outcomes, which were less common among children aged <18 years (1-3). This report describes demographic characteristics, underlying health conditions, symptoms, and outcomes among 1,320,488 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases individually reported to CDC during January 22-May 30, 2020. Cumulative incidence, 403.6 cases per 100,000 persons,¶ was similar among males (401.1) and females (406.0) and highest among persons aged ≥80 years (902.0). Among 599,636 (45%) cases with known information, 33% of persons were Hispanic or Latino of any race (Hispanic), 22% were non-Hispanic black (black), and 1.3% were non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN). Among 287,320 (22%) cases with sufficient data on underlying health conditions, the most common were cardiovascular disease (32%), diabetes (30%), and chronic lung disease (18%). Overall, 184,673 (14%) patients were hospitalized, 29,837 (2%) were admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU), and 71,116 (5%) died. Hospitalizations were six times higher among patients with a reported underlying condition (45.4%) than those without reported underlying conditions (7.6%). Deaths were 12 times higher among patients with reported underlying conditions (19.5%) compared with those without reported underlying conditions (1.6%). The COVID-19 pandemic continues to be severe, particularly in certain population groups. These preliminary findings underscore the need to build on current efforts to collect and analyze case data, especially among those with underlying health conditions. These data are used to monitor trends in COVID-19 illness, identify and respond to localized incidence increase, and inform policies and practices designed to reduce transmission in the United States.
1,111 citations
TL;DR: In this interim analysis of a phase 2 trial, one of three doses of neutralizing antibody LY-CoV555 appeared to accelerate the natural decline in viral load over time, whereas the other doses had not by day 11.
Abstract: Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), which is most frequently mild yet can be severe and life-threatening. Vi...
1,081 citations