Rh disease in Mexico: evaluating regional and institutional differences in treatment availability and disease management.

BACKGROUND: Rh disease occurs following maternal alloimmunization, which can develop due to RhD blood group antigen incompatibility between a mother and her fetus. Despite developing robust clinical protocols for effective immunoprophylaxis over the last 50+ years, a significant global burden of Rh disease still exists, particularly in low/middle-income countries such as Mexico. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study examined disparities in the allocation of maternal and child health resources, as well as clinical knowledge regarding Rh disease, to gain insight into why Rh disease remains prevalent in Mexico. To this end, an 11-question survey was sent to members of the Federación Mexicana de Colegios de Obstetricia y Ginecología (FEMECOG) to evaluate their knowledge of the availability and implementation of anti-RhD immunoglobulin prophylaxis in their practices and institutions, and about managing Rh disease by monitoring fetal anemia risk and providing intrauterine treatment when necessary. Responses were separated by region, and chi-square two-by-two contingency tests were performed to evaluate regional and institutional differences. RESULTS: Significant variations in prevention and treatment were found within the Mexican healthcare system, particularly, with regard to providing anti-RhD immunoglobulin to prevent alloimmunization, which is critically important for preventing Rh disease. Specifically, Regions 5, 6, and 7 were most lacking in this regard. DISCUSSION: This study highlights differences in the Mexican healthcare system in preventing and treating Rh disease. Closing the gap in the availability of anti-RhD immunoglobulin should take priority in future efforts aimed at providing equitable care, because this will lead to the more preferable outcome of preventing Rh disease, rather than forcing patients to seek out more complex measures for treating Rh disease after it develops. These data can be used to create strategies to understand and eliminate these healthcare disparities.

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.

G6PD Deficiency in an HIV Clinic Setting in the Dominican Republic.

Because human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients receive prophylaxis with oxidative drugs, those with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency may experience hemolysis. However, G6PD deficiency has not been studied in the Dominican Republic, where many individuals have African ancestry. Our objective was to determine the prevalence of G6PD deficiency in Dominican HIV-infected patients and to attempt to develop a cost-effective algorithm for identifying such individuals. To this end, histories, chart reviews, and G6PD testing were performed for 238 consecutive HIV-infected adult clinic patients. The overall prevalence of G6PD deficiency (8.8%) was similar in males (9.3%) and females (8.5%), and higher in Haitians (18%) than Dominicans (6.4%; P = 0.01). By logistic regression, three clinical variables predicted G6PD status: maternal country of birth (P = 0.01) and a history of hemolysis (P = 0.01) or severe anemia (P = 0.03). Using these criteria, an algorithm was developed, in which a patient subset was identified that would benefit most from G6PD screening, yielding a sensitivity of 94.7% and a specificity of 97.2%, increasing the pretest probability (8.8-15.1%), and halving the number of patients needing testing. This algorithm may provide a cost-effective strategy for improving care in resource-limited settings.