Safety profile of plasma for fractionation donated in the United Kingdom, with respect to variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.

Plasma-derived medicinal products (PDMPs) are life-saving and life-improving therapies, but the raw material is in short supply: Europe depends on importation from countries including the United States. Plasma from donors resident in the United Kingdom has not been fractionated since 1999 when a precautionary measure was introduced in response to the outbreak of variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD). Cases of vCJD have been far fewer than originally predicted in the 1990s. Since the introduction of leucodepletion in 1999, and accounting for the incubation period, more than 40 million UK-derived blood components have been issued with no reports of TT vCJD. In February 2021, the UK Government authorized manufacture of immunoglobulin from UK plasma. Following separate reviews concluding no significant difference in the risk posed, the United States, Australia, Ireland and Hong Kong also lifted their deferrals of blood donors with a history of living in the United Kingdom. Other countries are actively reviewing their position. Demand is rising for PDMPs, and Europe faces a threat of supply shortages. Industry and patient groups are clear that using UK plasma would bring significant immediate benefits to patients and to the resilience of the European supply chain. From this scientific review, we conclude that UK plasma is safe for fractionation and urge blood regulators and operators to take account of this safety profile when considering fractionation of UK plasma, and to revise their guidelines on the deferral of donors who have lived in, or received a transfusion in, the United Kingdom.

Effect of Convalescent Plasma on Organ Support-Free Days in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: The evidence for benefit of convalescent plasma for critically ill patients with COVID-19 is inconclusive. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether convalescent plasma would improve outcomes for critically ill adults with COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The ongoing Randomized, Embedded, Multifactorial, Adaptive Platform Trial for Community-Acquired Pneumonia (REMAP-CAP) enrolled and randomized 4763 adults with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 between March 9, 2020, and January 18, 2021, within at least 1 domain; 2011 critically ill adults were randomized to open-label interventions in the immunoglobulin domain at 129 sites in 4 countries. Follow-up ended on April 19, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: The immunoglobulin domain randomized participants to receive 2 units of high-titer, ABO-compatible convalescent plasma (total volume of 550 mL ± 150 mL) within 48 hours of randomization (n = 1084) or no convalescent plasma (n = 916). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary ordinal end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of intensive care unit-based organ support) up to day 21 (range, -1 to 21 days; patients who died were assigned -1 day). The primary analysis was an adjusted bayesian cumulative logistic model. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio (OR) greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Futility was defined as the posterior probability of an OR less than 1.2 (threshold for trial conclusion of futility >95%). An OR greater than 1 represented improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both. The prespecified secondary outcomes included in-hospital survival; 28-day survival; 90-day survival; respiratory support-free days; cardiovascular support-free days; progression to invasive mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal mechanical oxygenation, or death; intensive care unit length of stay; hospital length of stay; World Health Organization ordinal scale score at day 14; venous thromboembolic events at 90 days; and serious adverse events. RESULTS: Among the 2011 participants who were randomized (median age, 61 [IQR, 52 to 70] years and 645/1998 [32.3%] women), 1990 (99%) completed the trial. The convalescent plasma intervention was stopped after the prespecified criterion for futility was met. The median number of organ support-free days was 0 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the convalescent plasma group and 3 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the no convalescent plasma group. The in-hospital mortality rate was 37.3% (401/1075) for the convalescent plasma group and 38.4% (347/904) for the no convalescent plasma group and the median number of days alive and free of organ support was 14 (IQR, 3 to 18) and 14 (IQR, 7 to 18), respectively. The median-adjusted OR was 0.97 (95% credible interval, 0.83 to 1.15) and the posterior probability of futility (OR <1.2) was 99.4% for the convalescent plasma group compared with the no convalescent plasma group. The treatment effects were consistent across the primary outcome and the 11 secondary outcomes. Serious adverse events were reported in 3.0% (32/1075) of participants in the convalescent plasma group and in 1.3% (12/905) of participants in the no convalescent plasma group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among critically ill adults with confirmed COVID-19, treatment with 2 units of high-titer, ABO-compatible convalescent plasma had a low likelihood of providing improvement in the number of organ support-free days. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707.

Improving blood-prescribing decisions: Evaluating the efficacy of a blood guidelines app.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of an app providing national blood transfusion guidelines on prescribing decisions. BACKGROUND: National, regional and local audits in England consistently show inappropriate use of all blood components; around 15%-20% of red blood cells (RBC) and 20%-30% of platelets and fresh frozen plasma (FFP). Hospital transfusion guidelines may be difficult to locate and not agree with national guidelines. We developed and tested a dedicated app providing national evidence-based guidelines for use at the point of care to help clinicians make better decisions when authorising blood. METHODS/MATERIALS: We identified areas of blood authorisation with high frequency of component use and evidence of widespread unnecessary authorisation. We developed seven representative clinical scenarios where the transfusion of blood components may or may not benefit the adult patient. Responding doctors were invited to select their authorisation choice via an online questionnaire, initially without and then with access to the app. Adherence to guidelines was assessed with and without aid of the app. RESULTS: Using the app, doctors were much more likely to select the correct decision, in accordance with national guidance. Compared with baseline measurements, decisions improved by 67% for RBC, 58% for platelets and 73% for FFP. These improvements were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Apps such as "Blood Components" can help doctors do "the right thing rather than the wrong thing". Further studies are required to assess the impact of using the app in clinical practice and the effect on blood component management and financial savings.

Prophylactic platelet transfusions prior to surgery for people with a low platelet count.

BACKGROUND: People with thrombocytopenia often require a surgical procedure. A low platelet count is a relative contraindication to surgery due to the risk of bleeding. Platelet transfusions are used in clinical practice to prevent and treat bleeding in people with thrombocytopenia. Current practice in many countries is to correct thrombocytopenia with platelet transfusions prior to surgery. Alternatives to platelet transfusion are also used prior surgery. OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical effectiveness and safety of prophylactic platelet transfusions prior to surgery for people with a low platelet count. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following major data bases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 2), PubMed (e-publications only), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, the Transfusion Evidence Library and ongoing trial databases to 11 December 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs), as well as non-RCTs and controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs), that met Cochrane EPOC (Effective Practice and Organisation of Care) criteria, that involved the transfusion of platelets prior to surgery (any dose, at any time, single or multiple) in people with low platelet counts. We excluded studies on people with a low platelet count who were actively bleeding. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane for data collection. We were only able to combine data for two outcomes and we presented the rest of the findings in a narrative form. MAIN RESULTS: We identified five RCTs, all conducted in adults; there were no eligible non-randomised studies. Three completed trials enrolled 180 adults and two ongoing trials aim to include 627 participants. The completed trials were conducted between 2005 and 2009. The two ongoing trials are scheduled to complete recruitment by October 2019. One trial compared prophylactic platelet transfusions to no transfusion in people with thrombocytopenia in an intensive care unit (ICU). Two small trials, 108 participants, compared prophylactic platelet transfusions to other alternative treatments in people with liver disease. One trial compared desmopressin to fresh frozen plasma or one unit of platelet transfusion or both prior to surgery. The second trial compared platelet transfusion prior to surgery with two types of thrombopoietin mimetics: romiplostim and eltrombopag. None of the included trials were free from methodological bias. No included trials compared different platelet count thresholds for administering a prophylactic platelet transfusion prior to surgery. None of the included trials reported on all the review outcomes and the overall quality per reported outcome was very low.None of the three completed trials reported: all-cause mortality at 90 days post surgery; mortality secondary to bleeding, thromboembolism or infection; number of red cell or platelet transfusions per participant; length of hospital stay; or quality of life.None of the trials included children or people who needed major surgery or emergency surgical procedures.Platelet transfusion versus no platelet transfusion (1 trial, 72 participants)We were very uncertain whether giving a platelet transfusion prior to surgery had any effect on all-cause mortality within 30 days (1 trial, 72 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 1.45; very-low quality evidence). We were very uncertain whether giving a platelet transfusion prior to surgery had any effect on the risk of major (1 trial, 64 participants; RR 1.60, 95% CI 0.29 to 8.92; very low-quality evidence), or minor bleeding (1 trial, 64 participants; RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.85; very-low quality evidence). No serious adverse events occurred in either study arm (1 trial, 72 participants, very low-quality evidence).Platelet transfusion versus alternative to platelet transfusion (2 trials, 108 participants)We were very uncertain whether giving a platelet transfusion prior to surgery compared to an alternative has any effect on the risk of major (2 trials, 108 participants; no events; very low-quality evidence), or minor bleeding (desmopressin: 1 trial, 36 participants; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.06 to 13.23; very-low quality evidence: thrombopoietin mimetics: 1 trial, 65 participants; no events; very-low quality evidence). We were very uncertain whether there was a difference in transfusion-related adverse effects between the platelet transfused group and the alternative treatment group (desmopressin: 1 trial, 36 participants; RR 2.70, 95% CI 0.12 to 62.17; very-low quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Findings of this review were based on three small trials involving minor surgery in adults with thrombocytopenia. We found insufficient evidence to recommend the administration of preprocedure prophylactic platelet transfusions in this situation with a lack of evidence that transfusion resulted in a reduction in postoperative bleeding or all-cause mortality. The small number of trials meeting the inclusion criteria and the limitation in reported outcomes across the trials precluded meta-analysis for most outcomes. Further adequately powered trials, in people of all ages, of prophylactic platelet transfusions compared with no transfusion, other alternative treatments, and considering different platelet thresholds prior to planned and emergency surgical procedures are required. Future trials should include major surgery and report on bleeding, adverse effects, mortality (as a long-term outcome) after surgery, duration of hospital stay and quality of life measures.

Prophylactic platelet transfusions prior to surgery for people with a low platelet count.

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To determine the clinical effectiveness and safety of prophylactic platelet transfusions prior to surgery for people with a low platelet count or platelet dysfunction (inherited or acquired).

False-positive pregnancy test after transfusion of solvent/detergent-treated plasma.

BACKGROUND: The transmission of pathogens, antibodies, and proteins is a possible consequence of blood product transfusion. A female patient had an unexpected positive serum ß-human chorionic gonadotropin result, indicative of pregnancy, after she had received a transfusion with 1 unit of platelet concentrate, 4 units of red blood cells, and 4 units of pooled solvent/detergent-treated plasma (Octaplas). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: To investigate the possibility of passive transfusion of ß-human chorionic gonadotropin from the plasma transfusion, one additional unit from the same batch was thawed and analyzed. To validate the ß-human chorionic gonadotropin assay for use in solvent/detergent-treated plasma and to investigate any interference in the assay, dilution experiments were performed using the implicated plasma batch diluted with male and non-pregnant female sera. Also, plasma from a known pregnant woman was diluted with Octaplas (tested negative for ß-human chorionic gonadotropin) and with a male serum to validate the assay for use in solvent/detergent-treated plasma. RESULTS: The implicated solvent/detergent-treated plasma had a mean ß-human chorionic gonadotropin level of 91.5 mIU/mL. Results from the dilution experiments revealed an excellent correlation (r > 0.99) between ß-human chorionic gonadotropin measurement in solvent/detergent-treated plasma and male serum and no over or under recovery of the expected results. Further measurements of ß-human chorionic gonadotropin levels in the female recipient revealed an estimated half-life of 6 hours. CONCLUSION: This case demonstrates the importance of considering the possibility of passive transmission of analytes to a patient from the transfusion of blood products. Furthermore, the measurement of ß-human chorionic gonadotropin is valid in solvent/detergent-treated plasma using a Roche Cobas analyzer.

Guideline on the investigation and management of acute transfusion reactions. Prepared by the BCSH Blood Transfusion Task Force.

Although acute non-haemolytic febrile or allergic reactions (ATRs) are a common complication of transfusion and often result in little or no morbidity, prompt recognition and management are essential. The serious hazards of transfusion haemovigilance organisation (SHOT) receives 30-40 reports of anaphylactic reactions each year. Other serious complications of transfusion, such as acute haemolysis, bacterial contamination, transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI) or transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO) may present with similar clinical features to ATR. This guideline describes the approach to a patient developing adverse symptoms and signs related to transfusion, including initial recognition, establishing a likely cause, treatment, investigations, planning future transfusion and reporting within the hospital and to haemovigilance organisations. Key recommendations are that adrenaline should be used as first line treatment of anaphylaxis, and that transfusions should only be carried out where patients can be directly observed and where staff are trained in manging complications of transfusion, particularly anaphylaxis. Management of ATRs is not dependent on classification but should be guided by symptoms and signs. Patients who have experienced an anaphylactic reaction should be discussed with an allergist or immunologist, in keeping with UK resuscitation council guidelines.

Recombinant factor VIIa for the prevention and treatment of bleeding in patients without haemophilia.

BACKGROUND: Recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) is licensed for use in patients with haemophilia and inhibitory allo-antibodies and for prophylaxis and treatment of patients with congenital factor VII deficiency. It is also used for off-license indications to prevent bleeding in operations where blood loss is likely to be high, and/or to stop bleeding that is proving difficult to control by other means. This is the third version of the 2007 Cochrane review on the use of recombinant factor VIIa for the prevention and treatment of bleeding in patients without haemophilia, and has been updated to incorporate recent trial data. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of rFVIIa when used therapeutically to control active bleeding or prophylactically to prevent (excessive) bleeding in patients without haemophilia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and other medical databases up to 23 March 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rFVIIa with placebo, or one dose of rFVIIa with another, in any patient population (except haemophilia). Outcomes were mortality, blood loss or control of bleeding, red cell transfusion requirements, number of patients transfused and thromboembolic adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed potentially relevant studies for inclusion, extracted data and examined risk of bias. We considered prophylactic and therapeutic rFVIIa studies separately. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-nine RCTs were included: 28 were placebo-controlled, double-blind RCTs and one compared different doses of rFVIIa. In the 'Risk of bias' assessment, most studies were found to have some threats to validity although therapeutic RCTs were found to be less prone to bias than prophylactic RCTs.Sixteen trials involving 1361 participants examined the prophylactic use of rFVIIa; 729 received rFVIIa. There was no evidence of mortality benefit (risk ratio (RR) 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 1.97). There was decreased blood loss (mean difference (MD) -297 mL; 95% CI -416 to -178) and decreased red cell transfusion requirements (MD -261 mL; 95% CI -367 to -154) with rFVIIa treatment; however, these values were likely overestimated due to the inability to incorporate data from trials (four RCTs in the outcome of blood loss and three RCTs in the outcome of transfusion requirements) showing no difference of rFVIIa treatment compared to placebo. There was a trend in favour of rFVIIa in the number of participants transfused (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.01). However, there was a trend against rFVIIa with respect to thromboembolic adverse events (RR 1.35; 95% CI 0.82 to 2.25).Thirteen trials involving 2929 participants examined the therapeutic use of rFVIIa; 1878 received rFVIIa. There were no outcomes where any observed advantage or disadvantage of rFVIIa over placebo could not have been observed by chance alone. There was a trend in favour of rFVIIa for reducing mortality (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06). However, there was a trend against rFVIIa for increased thromboembolic adverse events (RR 1.14; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.47).When all trials were pooled together to examine the risk of thromboembolic events, a significant increase in total arterial events was observed (RR 1.45; 95% CI 1.02 to 2.05). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of rFVIIa as a more general haemostatic drug, either prophylactically or therapeutically, remains unproven. The results indicate increased risk of arterial events in patients receiving rFVIIa. The use of rFVIIa outside its current licensed indications should be restricted to clinical trials.

Recombinant factor VIIa for the prevention and treatment of bleeding in patients without haemophilia.

BACKGROUND: Recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) is licensed for use in patients with haemophilia and inhibitory allo-antibodies. It is also increasingly being used for off-license indications to prevent bleeding in operations where blood loss is likely to be high, and/or to stop bleeding that is proving difficult to control by other means. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of rFVIIa when used therapeutically to control active bleeding, or prophylactically to prevent (excessive) bleeding in patients without haemophilia. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and other specialised databases up to 25 February 2009. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rFVIIa with placebo, or one dose of rFVIIa with another, in any patient population (except haemophilia). Outcomes were mortality, blood loss or control of bleeding, red cell transfusion requirements, number of patients transfused and thromboembolic adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed potentially relevant studies for inclusion, extracted data and examined risk of bias. We considered prophylactic and therapeutic rFVIIa studies separately. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-five RCTs were included: 24 were placebo-controlled double-blind RCTs and one compared different doses of rFVIIa.Fourteen trials involving 1137 participants examined the prophylactic use of rFVIIa; 713 received rFVIIa. There was no evidence of mortality benefit (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.50 to 2.24). There was decreased blood loss (WMD -272 mL; 95% CI -399 to -146) and decreased red cell transfusion requirements (WMD -243 mL; 95% CI -393 to -92) with rFVIIa treatment; however these values were likely overestimated due to the inability to incorporate data from trials showing no difference of rFVIIa treatment compared to placebo. There was a trend in favour of rFVIIa in the number of participants transfused (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.02). But there was a trend against rFVIIa with respect to thromboembolic adverse events (RR 1.32; 95% CI 0.84 to 2.06).Eleven trials involving 2366 participants examined the therapeutic use of rFVIIa; 1507 received rFVIIa. There were no outcomes where any observed advantage, or disadvantage, of rFVIIa over placebo could not have been observed by chance alone. There was a trend in favour of rFVIIa for reducing mortality (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.77 to 1.03). However, there was a trend against rFVIIa for increased thromboembolic adverse events (RR 1.21; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.58). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of rFVIIa as a more general haemostatic drug, either prophylactically or therapeutically, remains unproven. The use of rFVIIa outside its current licensed indications should be restricted to clinical trials.

Use of recombinant factor VIIa for the prevention and treatment of bleeding in patients without hemophilia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The benefits and risks of off-label use of recombinant factor VIIa in patients without hemophilia are contested. We performed a systematic review to assess the effectiveness and safety of such use. METHODS: We searched electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials comparing recombinant factor VIIa with placebo in any patient population except those with hemophilia up to January 2010. Eligible articles were assessed for inclusion, data were extracted, and study quality was evaluated. Outcomes included mortality, blood loss, requirements for red blood cell transfusion, number of patients transfused and thromboembolic events. RESULTS: We identified 26 trials: 14 on off-label prophylactic use of recombinant factor VIIa (n = 1137) and 12 on off-label therapeutic use (n = 2538). In the studies on prophylactic use, we found no significant difference in mortality or thromboembolic events between the treatment and placebo groups. We found modest benefits favouring recombinant factor VIIa in blood loss (weighted mean difference -276 mL, 95% confidence interval [CI] -411 to -141 mL), red blood cell transfusion (weighted mean difference -281 mL, 95% CI -433 to -129 mL) and number of patients transfused (relative risk 0.71, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.99). In the therapeutic trials, we found a nonsignificant decrease in mortality and a nonsignificant increase in thromboembolic events but no difference in control of bleeding or red blood cell transfusion. INTERPRETATION: Clinically significant benefits of recombinant factor VIIa as a general hemostatic agent in patients without hemophilia remain unproven. Given its potential risks, such use cannot be recommended, and in most cases, it should be restricted to clinical trials.

Reaction to anti-D immunoglobulin - can we manage it?

Approximately one in six women are blood group RhD negative and are offered anti-D immunoglobulin prophylaxis to prevent sensitization and decrease the risk of haemolytic disease of the newborn in subsequent pregnancies. It has been thought that anti-D is harmless, but there is a risk of anaphylaxis. We describe a case of a woman with a possible immunological reaction to anti-D in her first pregnancy. A multidisciplinary team managed her second pregnancy, offering her evidence-based advice, where available, so that she could reach an informed decision regarding administration of anti-D or not. Women value individual tailored information rather than a 'one-size-fits-all' approach.

Evidence for the use of recombinant factor VIIa in the prevention and treatment of bleeding in patients without hemophilia.

Use of recombinant Factor VIIa (rFVIIa) has extended to nonhemophiliac patients anticipated to be at risk of major bleeding (prophylactic) or who have uncontrolled bleeding (therapeutic). The aim of this review was to systematically appraise randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence for effectiveness of rFVIIa, by updating and extending the earlier Cochrane Systematic Review. Up to January 2007, 17 RCTs were identified in which rFVIIa was used to try to reduce bleeding in patients undergoing planned high blood loss surgery or in acute situations such as trauma, gastrointestinal bleeding, and intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). Overall, there was little evidence of rFVIIa benefit during planned surgical procedures. Although use in ICH was impressive as both bleed progression and mortality were reduced, preliminary results from a subsequent phase III trial have found no outcome benefit. Selected subgroup analysis or secondary outcome results for other therapeutic trials appeared promising but were usually associated with methodological limitations. The thromboembolic adverse event incidence in subjects who received rFVIIa is of concern and occurred despite a common trial exclusion criterion of patients with a history of previous thromboembolic or vasoocclusive disease. The reasons for increasing use of this drug off license remain unclear, and the results of further trials are required to establish effectiveness.

European collaborative study of the antenatal management of feto-maternal alloimmune thrombocytopenia.

The aims of this study were to determine whether the severity of fetomaternal alloimmune thrombocytopenia (FMAIT) in the current pregnancy could be predicted from the history of FMAIT in previous pregnancies, and to assess the effects of different types of antenatal intervention. Fifty-six fetuses were studied that all had a sibling affected by FMAIT due to human platelet antigen 1a (HPA-1a) alloimmunization. Cases with a sibling history of antenatal intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) or severe thrombocytopenia (platelet counts of < 20 x 109/l) had significantly lower pretreatment platelet counts than cases whose siblings had less severe thrombocytopenia or postnatal ICH. Maternal therapy resulted in a platelet count exceeding 50 x 109/l in 67% of cases. None of the fetuses managed by serial platelet intrauterine transfusions (IUT) suffered ICH following treatment. However, several serious complications arose with fetal blood sampling (FBS). Overall, intervention improved outcome, as three study cases suffered from antenatal ICH and three others died whereas 15 study cases had a sibling with an ICH, eight of whom died. The results of this study suggest that the start of therapy can be stratified on the basis of the sibling history of FMAIT, and support the use of maternal therapy as first-line treatment.