A randomized double-blind controlled trial of convalescent plasma in adults with severe COVID-19.

BACKGROUNDAlthough convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), data from randomized controlled trials that support its efficacy are limited.METHODSWe conducted a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial among adults hospitalized with severe and critical COVID-19 at 5 sites in New York City (USA) and Rio de Janeiro (Brazil). Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive a single transfusion of either convalescent plasma or normal control plasma. The primary outcome was clinical status at 28 days following randomization, measured using an ordinal scale and analyzed using a proportional odds model in the intention-to-treat population.RESULTSOf 223 participants enrolled, 150 were randomized to receive convalescent plasma and 73 to receive normal control plasma. At 28 days, no significant improvement in the clinical scale was observed in participants randomized to convalescent plasma (OR 1.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83-2.68, P = 0.180). However, 28-day mortality was significantly lower in participants randomized to convalescent plasma versus control plasma (19/150 [12.6%] versus 18/73 [24.6%], OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22-0.91, P = 0.034). The median titer of anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody in infused convalescent plasma units was 1:160 (IQR 1:80-1:320). In a subset of nasopharyngeal swab samples from Brazil that underwent genomic sequencing, no evidence of neutralization-escape mutants was detected.CONCLUSIONIn adults hospitalized with severe COVID-19, use of convalescent plasma was not associated with significant improvement in day 28 clinical status. However, convalescent plasma was associated with significantly improved survival. A possible explanation is that survivors remained hospitalized at their baseline clinical status.TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04359810.FUNDINGAmazon Foundation, Skoll Foundation.

Correction to: Evaluating the efficacy and safety of human anti-SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma in severely ill adults with COVID-19: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Evaluating the efficacy and safety of human anti-SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma in severely ill adults with COVID-19: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of human anti-SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma in hospitalized adults with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a prospective, single-center, phase 2, randomized, controlled trial that is blinded to participants and clinical outcome assessor. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible participants include adults (≥ 18 years) with evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by PCR test of nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab within 14 days of randomization, evidence of infiltrates on chest radiography, peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO2) ≤ 94% on room air, and/or need for supplemental oxygen, non-invasive mechanical ventilation, or invasive mechanical ventilation, who are willing and able to provide written informed consent prior to performing study procedures or who have a legally authorized representative available to do so. Exclusion criteria include participation in another clinical trial of anti-viral agent(s)* for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), receipt of any anti-viral agent(s)* with possible activity against SARS-CoV-2 <24 hours prior to plasma infusion, mechanical ventilation (including extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [ECMO]) for ≥ 5 days, severe multi-organ failure, history of allergic reactions to transfused blood products per NHSN/CDC criteria, known IgA deficiency, and pregnancy. Included participants will be hospitalized at the time of randomization and plasma infusion. *Use of remdesivir as treatment for COVID-19 is permitted. The study will be undertaken at Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York, USA. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: The investigational treatment is anti-SARS-CoV-2 human convalescent plasma. To procure the investigational treatment, volunteers who recovered from COVID-19 will undergo testing to confirm the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody to the spike trimer at a 1:400 dilution. Donors will also be screened for transfusion-transmitted infections (e.g. HIV, HBV, HCV, WNV, HTLV-I/II, T. cruzi, ZIKV). If donors have experienced COVID-19 symptoms within 28 days, they will be screened with a nasopharyngeal swab to confirm they are SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative. Plasma will be collected using standard apheresis technology by the New York Blood Center. Study participants will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive one unit (200 - 250 mL) of anti-SARS-CoV-2 plasma versus one unit (200 - 250 mL) of the earliest available control plasma. The control plasma cannot be tested for presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody prior to the transfusion, but will be tested for anti- SARS-CoV-2 antibody after the transfusion to allow for a retrospective per-protocol analysis. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary endpoint is time to clinical improvement. This is defined as time from randomization to either discharge from the hospital or improvement by one point on the following seven-point ordinal scale, whichever occurs first. 1. Not hospitalized with resumption of normal activities 2. Not hospitalized, but unable to resume normal activities 3. Hospitalized, not requiring supplemental oxygen 4. Hospitalized, requiring supplemental oxygen 5. Hospitalized, requiring high-flow oxygen therapy or non-invasive mechanical ventilation 6. Hospitalized, requiring ECMO, invasive mechanical ventilation, or both 7. Death This scale, designed to assess clinical status over time, was based on that recommended by the World Health Organization for use in determining efficacy end-points in clinical trials in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. A recent clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of lopinavir- ritonavir for patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 used a similar ordinal scale, as have recent clinical trials of novel therapeutics for severe influenza, including a post-hoc analysis of a trial evaluating immune plasma. The primary safety endpoints are cumulative incidence of grade 3 and 4 adverse events and cumulative incidence of serious adverse events during the study period. RANDOMIZATION: Study participants will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive anti-SARS-CoV-2 plasma versus control plasma using a web-based randomization platform. Treatment assignments will be generated using randomly permuted blocks of different sizes to minimize imbalance while also minimizing predictability. BLINDING (MASKING): The study participants and the clinicians who will evaluate post-treatment outcomes will be blinded to group assignment. The blood bank and the clinical research team will not be blinded to group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMIZED (SAMPLE SIZE): We plan to enroll 129 participants, with 86 in the anti-SARS-CoV-2 arm, and 43 in the control arm. Among the participants, we expect ~70% or n = 72 will achieve clinical improvement. This will yield an 80% power for a one-sided Wald test at 0.15 level of significance under the proportional hazards model with a hazard ratio of 1.5. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol AAAS9924, Version 17APR2020, 4/17/2020 Start of recruitment: April 20, 2020 Recruitment is ongoing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04359810 Date of trial registration: April 24, 2020 Retrospectively registered FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Correction to: Evaluating the efficacy and safety of human anti-SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma in severely ill adults with COVID-19: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Neuropathological changes in essential tremor: 33 cases compared with 21 controls.

Despite its being one of the most commonly observed neurological disorders, neuropathological studies of essential tremor (ET) are rare. There have been surprisingly few autopsy studies and even fewer case-control comparisons. The primary objective was to describe and quantify the pathological changes in 33 ET and 21 control brains. A secondary objective was to correlate clinical and pathological features. We examined autopsy tissue from the Essential Tremor Centralized Brain Repository. Eight (24.2%) of the 33 ET brains had Lewy bodies in the brainstem, mainly in the locus ceruleus. However, the majority of ET brains (25/33, 75.8%) had no Lewy bodies, but had pathological changes in the cerebellum. The mean number of Purkinje cells per 100x field was reduced in ET cases without Lewy bodies (6.6 +/- 2.4 versus 9.6 +/- 3.4, P < 0.01), and there were approximately 7x more Purkinje cell torpedoes per section (12.6 +/- 7.9 versus 1.7 +/- 1.4, P < 0.001) compared to controls. ET cases without Lewy bodies also had degeneration of the dentate nucleus (two cases). Other findings in ET cases were Purkinje cell heterotopias and dendrite swellings. Lewy body ET cases were older than ET cases without Lewy bodies. Several trends were observed in ET cases without Lewy bodies, including a younger age of onset of tremor and higher proportions with gait difficulty and family history of ET. The pathological changes of ET seem to be heterogeneous and degenerative. The majority have cerebellar changes without Lewy bodies; a smaller proportion has brainstem Lewy bodies. The clinical differences between cases with versus without Lewy bodies require additional study.

Intention tremor of the head in patients with essential tremor.

Patients with essential tremor (ET) have kinetic arm tremor; this tremor can also have an intentional component. We are unaware of reports of intention tremor of the head in ET. Our aims were to describe, provide electrophysiological data and video documentation of, and estimate the prevalence of intention tremor of the head in our sample. Ten (9.0%; 95% confidence interval = 4.7%-14.3%) of 111 patients had intention tremor of the head; in 7 it involved the neck and in 3 the chin. These patients trended toward having more severe kinetic arm tremor and they had more severe intention tremor of the arms. These observations provide further support for the evolving view that the cerebellum may be involved in ET.

Essential tremor centralized brain repository: diagnostic validity and clinical characteristics of a highly selected group of essential tremor cases.

We studied essential tremor (ET) cases enrolled in the Essential Tremor Centralized Brain Repository to (1) assess the validity of their diagnoses and (2) characterize the clinical features in a group of highly selected cases who might reflect a far end of the disease spectrum. Our over-arching goal was to provide a perspective of ET that complements that derived from population-based and clinic-based studies. Based on a history and videotaped examination, 94 of 100 ET cases had their diagnoses confirmed; most of the remainder had Parkinson's disease. When compared with ET cases ascertained through populations and clinics, a large proportion had been prescribed medication for tremor (87.2%), had a family history of tremor (88.3%), had rest tremor (33.0%), or had neck tremor (60.6%). One patient had facial tremor, which has not been reported previously. As has been reported once before, a large proportion wore hearing aids (26.9% of the 67 participants age>or=70). In summary, diagnostic validity was high. In terms of their clinical characteristics, the high proportion of cases with severe tremor and varied disease manifestations (neck tremor, rest tremor) make these cases a valuable resource in pathological studies; the high proportion with familial tremor would provide an enriched sample for genetic studies.

Essential tremor associated with focal nonnigral Lewy bodies: a clinicopathologic study.

BACKGROUND: Essential tremor is one of the most common neurological diseases. Its links with Parkinson disease (PD) are often debated. There have been few published postmortem studies. OBJECTIVE: To study our first case of essential tremor through the recently established Essential Tremor Centralized Brain Repository. DESIGN: Report of a case of a patient with a diagnosis of severe essential tremor for 46 years who exhibited no signs of parkinsonism. RESULTS: On postmortem examination, gross brain sections showed no abnormalities. Results of microscopic examination of hematoxylin-eosin-stained sections revealed that the locus coeruleus contained multiple Lewy bodies (LBs), although none were found in the substantia nigra, dorsal vagal nuclei, thalamus, substantia innominata, inferior olivary nucleus, or cerebellum. Immunochemical staining using antibodies directed against alpha-synuclein confirmed the presence of many LBs in the locus ceruleus and showed rare LBs in the substantia innominata and dorsal vagal nuclei. There were no LBs in the substantia nigra. CONCLUSIONS: Our patient had a very focal presence of LBs in the locus ceruleus, an anatomically restricted form of LB disease. This study provides support for the link between essential tremor and LB disease and raises the question as to what proportion of patients with essential tremor might have unusual forms of LB disease.

Feasibility and validity of a modified finger-nose-finger test.

In essential tremor (ET) research, it is important to obtain standardized, objective data on tremor severity. Often, it is not possible to carry out in-person or videotaped neurological examinations. In place of these, handwriting samples can be collected, but they do not capture all of the variance in tremor severity. Although additional tests of tremor severity (finger-nose-finger [FNF] test) might be of use, these would need to be modified to allow ET patients to mail their results to the study investigator for rating. We modified the standard FNF test (sFNF) by asking subjects to hold a pen during this activity and mark a paper target. The purpose of this report was to determine whether the modified FNF (mFNF) test was feasible and valid. Of 70 subjects, 65 (92.9%) were able to complete the mFNF, demonstrating that it was feasible. The scores of the mFNF correlated highly with those of the sFNF (r = 0.56-0.85; all P < 0.001), indicating the mFNF is a valid measure of tremor severity. In addition, using the regression equation, sFNF = 0.174(mFNF) + 0.743, a sFNF score can be derived easily from the mFNF score. The mFNF may be used to collect valuable data on tremor severity in pathological, genetic, and epidemiological field studies of ET, in which in-person or videotaped neurological examinations are not possible.