2
|
Peng HT, Rhind SG, Beckett A. Convalescent Plasma for the Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Quantitative Analysis. JMIR Public Health Surveill 2021; 7:e25500. [PMID: 33825689 PMCID: PMC8245055 DOI: 10.2196/25500] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2020] [Accepted: 02/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by a novel coronavirus termed SARS-CoV-2, has spread quickly worldwide. Convalescent plasma (CP) obtained from patients following recovery from COVID-19 infection and development of antibodies against the virus is an attractive option for either prophylactic or therapeutic treatment, since antibodies may have direct or indirect antiviral activities and immunotherapy has proven effective in principle and in many clinical reports. OBJECTIVE We seek to characterize the latest advances and evidence in the use of CP for COVID-19 through a systematic review and quantitative analysis, identify knowledge gaps in this setting, and offer recommendations and directives for future research. METHODS PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were continuously searched for studies assessing the use of CP for COVID-19, including clinical studies, commentaries, reviews, guidelines or protocols, and in vitro testing of CP antibodies. The screening process and data extraction were performed according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Quality appraisal of all clinical studies was conducted using a universal tool independent of study designs. A meta-analysis of case-control and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted using a random-effects model. RESULTS Substantial literature has been published covering various aspects of CP therapy for COVID-19. Of the references included in this review, a total of 243 eligible studies including 64 clinical studies, 79 commentary articles, 46 reviews, 19 guidance and protocols, and 35 in vitro testing of CP antibodies matched the criteria. Positive results have been mostly observed so far when using CP for the treatment of COVID-19. There were remarkable heterogeneities in the CP therapy with respect to patient demographics, donor antibody titers, and time and dose of CP administration. The studies assessing the safety of CP treatment reported low incidence of adverse events. Most clinical studies, in particular case reports and case series, had poor quality. Only 1 RCT was of high quality. Randomized and nonrandomized data were found in 2 and 11 studies, respectively, and were included for meta-analysis, suggesting that CP could reduce mortality and increase viral clearance. Despite promising pilot studies, the benefits of CP treatment can only be clearly established through carefully designed RCTs. CONCLUSIONS There is developing support for CP therapy, particularly for patients who are critically ill or mechanically ventilated and resistant to antivirals and supportive care. These studies provide important lessons that should inform the planning of well-designed RCTs to generate more robust knowledge for the efficacy of CP in patients with COVID-19. Future research is necessary to fill the knowledge gap regarding prevention and treatment for patients with COVID-19 with CP while other therapeutics are being developed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Henry T Peng
- Defence Research and Development Canada, Toronto Research Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Shawn G Rhind
- Defence Research and Development Canada, Toronto Research Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Andrew Beckett
- St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Royal Canadian Medical Services, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Schlickeiser S, Schwarz T, Steiner S, Wittke K, Al Besher N, Meyer O, Kalus U, Pruß A, Kurth F, Zoller T, Witzenrath M, Sander LE, Müller MA, Scheibenbogen C, Volk HD, Drosten C, Corman VM, Hanitsch LG. Disease Severity, Fever, Age, and Sex Correlate With SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibody Responses. Front Immunol 2021; 11:628971. [PMID: 33584731 PMCID: PMC7878374 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.628971] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2020] [Accepted: 12/29/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Clinical trials on the use of COVID-19 convalescent plasma remain inconclusive. While data on safety is increasingly available, evidence for efficacy is still sparse. Subgroup analyses hint to a dose-response relationship between convalescent plasma neutralizing antibody levels and mortality. In particular, patients with primary and secondary antibody deficiency might benefit from this approach. However, testing of neutralizing antibodies is limited to specialized biosafety level 3 laboratories and is a time- and labor-intense procedure. In this single center study of 206 COVID-19 convalescent patients, clinical data, results of commercially available ELISA testing of SARS-CoV-2 spike-IgG and -IgA, and levels of neutralizing antibodies, determined by plaque reduction neutralization testing (PRNT), were analyzed. At a medium time point of 58 days after symptom onset, only 12.6% of potential plasma donors showed high levels of neutralizing antibodies (PRNT50 ≥ 1:320). Multivariable proportional odds logistic regression analysis revealed need for hospitalization due to COVID-19 (odds ratio 6.87; p-value 0.0004) and fever (odds ratio 3.00; p-value 0.0001) as leading factors affecting levels of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody titers in convalescent plasma donors. Using penalized estimation, a predictive proportional odds logistic regression model including the most important variables hospitalization, fever, age, sex, and anosmia or dysgeusia was developed. The predictive discrimination for PRNT50 ≥ 1:320 was reasonably good with AUC: 0.86 (with 95% CI: 0.79-0.92). Combining clinical and ELISA-based pre-screening, assessment of neutralizing antibodies could be spared in 75% of potential donors with a maximal loss of 10% of true positives (PRNT50 ≥ 1:320).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephan Schlickeiser
- Institute of Medical Immunology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
- Berlin Institute of Health Center for Regenerative Therapies (BCRT), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Tatjana Schwarz
- Institute of Medical Immunology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
- Institute of Virology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, and German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF), Partner Site Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Sophie Steiner
- Institute of Medical Immunology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Kirsten Wittke
- Institute of Medical Immunology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Nabeel Al Besher
- Institute of Transfusion Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Oliver Meyer
- Institute of Transfusion Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Ulrich Kalus
- Institute of Transfusion Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Axel Pruß
- Institute of Transfusion Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Florian Kurth
- Department of Infectious Diseases and Respiratory Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
- Department of Tropical Medicine, Bernhard Nocht Institute for Tropical Medicine, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Thomas Zoller
- Department of Infectious Diseases and Respiratory Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Martin Witzenrath
- Department of Infectious Diseases and Respiratory Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
- German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Partner Site Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Leif Erik Sander
- Department of Infectious Diseases and Respiratory Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
- German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Partner Site Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Marcel A. Müller
- Institute of Virology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, and German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF), Partner Site Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Carmen Scheibenbogen
- Institute of Medical Immunology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Hans-Dieter Volk
- Institute of Medical Immunology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
- Berlin Institute of Health Center for Regenerative Therapies (BCRT), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
- Berlin Center for Advanced Therapies (BeCAT), Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Christian Drosten
- Institute of Virology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, and German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF), Partner Site Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Victor M. Corman
- Institute of Virology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, and German Centre for Infection Research (DZIF), Partner Site Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Leif G. Hanitsch
- Institute of Medical Immunology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|