Estimates of actual and potential lives saved in the United States from the use of COVID-19 convalescent plasma.

In the Spring of 2020, the United States of America (USA) deployed COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) to treat hospitalized patients. Over 500,000 patients were treated with CCP during the first year of the pandemic. In this study, we estimated the number of actual inpatient lives saved by CCP treatment in the United States of America based on CCP weekly use, weekly national mortality data, and CCP mortality reduction data from meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials and real-world data. We also estimate the potential number of lives saved if CCP had been deployed for 100% of hospitalized patients or used in 15 to 75% of outpatients. Depending on the assumptions modeled in stratified analyses, we estimated that CCP saved between 16,476 and 66,296 lives. The CCP ideal use might have saved as many as 234,869 lives and prevented 1,136,133 hospitalizations. CCP deployment was a successful strategy for ameliorating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA. This experience has important implications for convalescent plasma use in future infectious disease emergencies.

Similar evolutionary trajectories in an environmental Cryptococcus neoformans isolate after human and murine infection.

A pet cockatoo was the suspected source of Cryptococcus neoformans recovered from an immunocompromised patient with cryptococcosis based on molecular analyses available in 2000. Here, we report whole genome sequence analysis of the clinical and cockatoo strains. Both are closely related MATα strains belonging to the VNII lineage, confirming that the human infection likely originated from pet bird exposure. The two strains differ by 61 single nucleotide polymorphisms, including eight nonsynonymous changes involving seven genes. To ascertain whether changes in these genes are selected for during mammalian infection, we passaged the cockatoo strain in mice. Remarkably, isolates obtained from mouse tissue possess a frameshift mutation in one of the seven genes altered in the human sample (LQVO5_000317), a gene predicted to encode an SWI-SNF chromatin-remodeling complex protein. In addition, both cockatoo and patient strains as well as mouse-passaged isolates obtained from brain tissue had a premature stop codon in a homologue of ZFC3 (LQVO5_004463), a predicted single-zinc finger containing protein, which is associated with larger capsules when deleted and reverted to a full-length protein in the mouse-passaged isolates obtained from lung tissue. The patient strain and mouse-passaged isolates show variability in virulence factors, with differences in capsule size, melanization, rates of nonlytic expulsion from macrophages, and amoeba predation resistance. Our results establish that environmental strains undergo genomic and phenotypic changes during mammalian passage, suggesting that animal virulence can be a mechanism for genetic change and that the genomes of clinical isolates may provide a readout of mutations acquired during infection.

COVID-19 therapeutics.

SUMMARYSince the emergence of COVID-19 in 2020, an unprecedented range of therapeutic options has been studied and deployed. Healthcare providers have multiple treatment approaches to choose from, but efficacy of those approaches often remains controversial or compromised by viral evolution. Uncertainties still persist regarding the best therapies for high-risk patients, and the drug pipeline is suffering fatigue and shortage of funding. In this article, we review the antiviral activity, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, and safety of COVID-19 antiviral therapies. Additionally, we summarize the evidence from randomized controlled trials on efficacy and safety of the various COVID-19 antivirals and discuss unmet needs which should be addressed.

Early Outpatient Treatment for Covid-19 with Convalescent Plasma.

BACKGROUND: Polyclonal 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. METHODS: In 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. RESULTS: Participants 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. CONCLUSIONS: In 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.).

Convalescent Plasma for Immunocompromised Patients.

COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) is an important therapeutic option for immunocompromised patients with COVID-19. Such patients are at increased risk for serious complications of infection and may also develop a unique syndrome of persistent infection. This article reviews the rationale for CCP utilization in immunocompromised patients and the evidence for its value in immunosuppressed patients with both acute and persistent COVID-19. Both historical precedence and understanding of the mechanisms of action of antibody treatment support this use, as do several lines of evidence derived from case series, comparative studies, randomized trials, and systematic reviews of the literature. A summary of recommendations from multiple practice guidelines is also provided.

Single monoclonal antibodies should not be used for COVID-19 therapy: a call for antiviral stewardship.

The COVID-19 pandemic saw the largest deployment of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for an infectious disease in history. mAbs to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein proved safe and were initially effective for COVID-19 therapy, but each was defeated by continued SARS-CoV-2 evolution, leading to their withdrawal. This was a setback for people with impaired immunity who cannot mount an effective antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 and often cannot clear the virus. New mAbs have now been developed for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PreEP) in immunosuppressed people. Here we argue that while mAb use for PreEP is justified, single mAbs should not be used for COVID-19 therapy. In contrast to PreEP where the viral inoculum is small, immunosuppressed people with COVID-19 have large viral burden that can harbor mAb-escape variants that single-agent mAb treatments can rapidly select for resistance. Selection of mAb-escape variants has potential risks for patients, society and the feasibility of mAb therapy itself.

2024 Clinical Practice Guideline Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America on the Management of COVID-19: Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibody Pemivibart for Pre-exposure Prophylaxis.

This article provides a focused update to the clinical practice guideline on the treatment and management of patients with coronavirus disease 2019, developed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. The guideline panel presents a recommendation on the use of the anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 neutralizing antibody pemivibart as pre-exposure prophylaxis. The recommendation is based on evidence derived from a systematic review and adheres to a standardized methodology for rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Information on pemivibart is included in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Emergency Use Authorization for this agent.

Minimizing risk while maximizing opportunity: The infectious disease organ offer process survey.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to understand how transplant infectious disease (TID) physicians assess a potential donor with known or suspected infection and describe posttransplant management. METHODS: We designed a survey of 10 organ offer scenarios and asked questions pertaining to organ acceptability for transplantation and management posttransplant. The survey was distributed to TID clinicians via transplant society listservs and email. Responses were recorded in REDCap, and descriptive statistics were employed. RESULTS: One hundred thirteen infectious disease physicians responded to the survey, of whom 85 completed all cases. Respondents were generally in agreement regarding organ acceptability, although some divergence was seen when evaluating lungs from donors with influenza, tuberculosis, or multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter infection. Posttransplant management showed more variation. Areas of optimization were identified: (1) Further understanding of where risk-mitigation strategies within the donor offer process may improve donor acceptability and therefore organ utilization; (2) importance of recipient considerations in assessing degree of infectious risk; and (3) gaps in evidenced-based data regarding optimal posttransplant management of recipients. CONCLUSION: Evaluation of donor offers by TID clinicians is a complex process. Although the survey does not itself serve to make recommendations regarding best practices, it highlights areas where generation of data to inform acceptance and management practices may allow for improved organ utilization and recipient management.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Convalescent Plasma Utilization in the United States: Data From the National Inpatient Sample.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescent plasma (CCP) use between October and December 2020 was characterized using the National Inpatient Sample database. CCP was administered in 18.0% of COVID-19-associated hospitalizations and was strongly associated with older age and increased disease severity. There were disparities in the receipt of CCP by race and ethnicity, geography, and insurance.

Guidance on the Use of Convalescent Plasma to Treat Immunocompromised Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescent plasma (CCP) is a safe and effective treatment for COVID-19 in immunocompromised (IC) patients. IC patients have a higher risk of persistent infection, severe disease, and death from COVID-19. Despite the continued clinical use of CCP to treat IC patients, the optimal dose, frequency/schedule, and duration of CCP treatment has yet to be determined, and related best practices guidelines are lacking. A group of individuals with expertise spanning infectious diseases, virology and transfusion medicine was assembled to render an expert opinion statement pertaining to the use of CCP for IC patients. For optimal effect, CCP should be recently and locally collected to match circulating variant. CCP should be considered for the treatment of IC patients with acute and protracted COVID-19; dosage depends on clinical setting (acute vs protracted COVID-19). CCP containing high-titer severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies, retains activity against circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants, which have otherwise rendered monoclonal antibodies ineffective.

Transfusing Convalescent Plasma as Post-Exposure Prophylaxis Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection: A Double-Blinded, Phase 2 Randomized, Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) convalescent plasma (CCP) for preventing infection in exposed, uninfected individuals is unknown. CCP might prevent infection when administered before symptoms or laboratory evidence of infection. METHODS: This double-blinded, phase 2 randomized, controlled trial (RCT) compared the efficacy and safety of prophylactic high titer (≥1:320 by Euroimmun ELISA) CCP with standard plasma. Asymptomatic participants aged ≥18 years with close contact exposure to a person with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the previous 120 hours and negative SARS-CoV-2 test within 24 hours before transfusion were eligible. The primary outcome was new SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: In total, 180 participants were enrolled; 87 were assigned to CCP and 93 to control plasma, and 170 transfused at 19 sites across the United States from June 2020 to March 2021. Two were excluded for screening SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) positivity. Of the remaining 168 participants, 12/81 (14.8%) CCP and 13/87 (14.9%) control recipients developed SARS-CoV-2 infection; 6 (7.4%) CCP and 7 (8%) control recipients developed COVID-19 (infection with symptoms). There were no COVID-19-related hospitalizations in CCP and 2 in control recipients. Efficacy by restricted mean infection free time (RMIFT) by 28 days for all SARS-CoV-2 infections (25.3 vs 25.2 days; P = .49) and COVID-19 (26.3 vs 25.9 days; P = .35) was similar for both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of high-titer CCP as post-exposure prophylaxis, although appearing safe, did not prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04323800.

Absence of pathogenic viruses in COVID-19 convalescent plasma.

BACKGROUND: It is important to maintain the safety of blood products by avoiding the transfusion of units with known and novel viral pathogens. It is unknown whether COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) may contain pathogenic viruses (either newly acquired or reactivated) that are not routinely screened for by blood centers. METHODS: The DNA virome was characterized in potential CCP donors (n = 30) using viral genome specific PCR primers to identify DNA plasma virome members of the Herpesviridae [Epstein Barr Virus (EBV), cytomegalovirus (CMV), human herpesvirus 6A/B, human herpesvirus 7] and Anelloviridae [Torque teno viruses (TTV), Torque teno mini viruses (TTMV), and Torque teno midi viruses (TTMDV)] families. In addition, the RNA plasma virome was characterized using unbiased metagenomic sequencing. Sequencing was done on a HiSeq2500 using high output mode with a read length of 2X100 bp. The sequencing reads were taxonomically classified using Kraken2. CMV and EBV seroprevalence were evaluated using a chemiluminescent immunoassay. RESULTS: TTV and TTMDV were detected in 12 (40%) and 4 (13%) of the 30 study participants, respectively; TTMDV was always associated with infection with TTV. We did not observe TTMV DNAemia. Despite CMV and EBV seroprevalences of 33.3% and 93.3%, respectively, we did not detect Herpesviridae DNA among the study participants. Metagenomic sequencing did not reveal any human RNA viruses in CCP, including no evidence of circulating SARS-CoV-2. DISCUSSION: There was no evidence of pathogenic viruses, whether newly acquired or reactivated, in CCP despite the presence of non-pathogenic Anelloviridae. These results confirm the growing safety data supporting CCP.

Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Treatment and Management of Patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: There are many pharmacologic therapies that are being used or considered for treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), with rapidly changing efficacy and safety evidence from trials. OBJECTIVE: Develop evidence-based, rapid, living guidelines intended to support patients, clinicians, and other healthcare professionals in their decisions about treatment and management of patients with COVID-19. METHODS: In March 2020, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel of infectious disease clinicians, pharmacists, and methodologists with varied areas of expertise to regularly review the evidence and make recommendations about the treatment and management of persons with COVID-19. The process used a living guideline approach and followed a rapid recommendation development checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. A systematic review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted at regular intervals. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. RESULTS: Based on the most recent search conducted on May 31, 2022, the IDSA guideline panel has made 30 recommendations for the treatment and management of the following groups/populations: pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis, ambulatory with mild-to-moderate disease, hospitalized with mild-to-moderate, severe but not critical, and critical disease. As these are living guidelines, the most recent recommendations can be found online at: https://idsociety.org/COVID19guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: At the inception of its work, the panel has expressed the overarching goal that patients be recruited into ongoing trials. Since then, many trials were done which provided much needed evidence for COVID-19 therapies. There still remain many unanswered questions as the pandemic evolved which we hope future trials can answer.

Lessons Learned from Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Therapies: Critical Perspectives From the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) COVID-19 Treatment Guideline Panel.

Despite the challenges of the pandemic, there has been substantial progress with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) therapies. Pivotal COVID-19 trials like SOLIDARITY, RECOVERY, and ACCT-1 were rapidly conducted and data disseminated to support effective therapies. However, critical shortcomings remain on trial conduct, dissemination and interpretation of study results, and regulatory guidance in pandemic settings. The lessons that we learned have implications for both the current pandemic and future emerging infectious diseases. There is a need for establishing and standardizing clinical meaningful outcomes in therapeutic trials and for targeting defined populations and phenotypes that will most benefit from specific therapies. Standardized processes should be established for rapid and critical data review and dissemination to ensure scientific integrity. Clarity around the evidence standards needed for issuance of both emergency use authorization (EUA) and biologic license application (BLA) should be established and an infrastructure for executing rapid trials in epidemic settings maintained.

Therapeutic Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) During Pandemics: Double-edged Swords.

Given the urgent need for treatments during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the US Food and Drug Administration issued emergency use authorizations (EUAs) for multiple therapies. In several instances, however, these EUAs were issued before sufficient evidence of a given therapy's efficacy and safety were available, potentially promoting ineffective or even harmful therapies and undermining the generation of definitive evidence. We describe the strengths and weaknesses of the different therapeutic EUAs issued during this pandemic. We also contrast them to the vaccine EUAs and suggest a framework and criteria for an evidence-based, trustworthy, and publicly transparent therapeutic EUA process for future pandemics.

Antibody attributes that predict the neutralization and effector function of polyclonal responses to SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: While antibodies can provide significant protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection and disease sequelae, the specific attributes of the humoral response that contribute to immunity are incompletely defined. METHODS: We employ machine learning to relate characteristics of the polyclonal antibody response raised by natural infection to diverse antibody effector functions and neutralization potency with the goal of generating both accurate predictions of each activity based on antibody response profiles as well as insights into antibody mechanisms of action. RESULTS: To this end, antibody-mediated phagocytosis, cytotoxicity, complement deposition, and neutralization were accurately predicted from biophysical antibody profiles in both discovery and validation cohorts. These models identified SARS-CoV-2-specific IgM as a key predictor of neutralization activity whose mechanistic relevance was supported experimentally by depletion. CONCLUSIONS: Validated models of how different aspects of the humoral response relate to antiviral antibody activities suggest desirable attributes to recapitulate by vaccination or other antibody-based interventions.

How do I implement an outpatient program for the administration of convalescent plasma for COVID-19?

Convalescent plasma, collected from donors who have recovered from a pathogen of interest, has been used to treat infectious diseases, particularly in times of outbreak, when alternative therapies were unavailable. The COVID-19 pandemic revived interest in the use of convalescent plasma. Large observational studies and clinical trials that were executed during the pandemic provided insight into how to use convalescent plasma, whereby high levels of antibodies against the pathogen of interest and administration early within the time course of the disease are critical for optimal therapeutic effect. Several studies have shown outpatient administration of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) to be both safe and effective, preventing clinical progression in patients when administered within the first week of COVID-19. The United States Food and Drug Administration expanded its emergency use authorization (EUA) to allow for the administration of CCP in an outpatient setting in December 2021, at least for immunocompromised patients or those on immunosuppressive therapy. Outpatient transfusion of CCP and infusion of monoclonal antibody therapies for a highly transmissible infectious disease introduces nuanced challenges related to infection prevention. Drawing on our experiences with the clinical and research use of CCP, we describe the logistical considerations and workflow spanning procurement of qualified products, infrastructure, staffing, transfusion, and associated management of adverse events. The purpose of this description is to facilitate the efforts of others intent on establishing outpatient transfusion programs for CCP and other antibody-based therapies.

EORTC/MSGERC Definitions of Invasive Fungal Diseases: Summary of Activities of the Intensive Care Unit Working Group.

The EORTC/MSGERC recently revised and updated the consensus definitions of invasive fungal disease (IFD). These definitions primarily focus on patients with cancer and stem cell or solid-organ transplant patients. They may therefore not be suitable for intensive care unit (ICU) patients. More in detail, while the definition of proven IFD applies to a broad range of hosts, the categories of probable and possible IFD were primarily designed for classical immunocompromised hosts and may therefore not be ideal for other populations. Moreover, the scope of the possible category of IFD has been diminished in the recently revised definitions for classically immunocompromised hosts. Diagnosis of IFD in the ICU presents many challenges, which are different for invasive candidiasis and for invasive aspergillosis. The aim of this article is to review progresses made in recent years and difficulties remaining in the development of definitions applicable in the ICU setting.

Achieving global equity for COVID-19 vaccines: Stronger international partnerships and greater advocacy and solidarity are needed.

Peter Figueroa and co-authors advocate for equity in the worldwide provision of COVID-19 vaccines.