RESUMO
BACKGROUNDThe efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma (CCP) for preventing infection in exposed, uninfected individuals is unknown. We hypothesized that CCP might prevent infection when administered before symptoms or laboratory evidence of infection. METHODSThis double-blinded, phase 2 randomized, controlled trial (RCT) compared the efficacy and safety of prophylactic high titer ([≥]1:320) CCP with standard plasma. Asymptomatic participants aged [≥]18 years with close contact exposure to a person with confirmed COVID-19 in the previous 120 hours and negative SARS-CoV-2 test within 24 hours before transfusion were eligible. The primary outcome was development of SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS180 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 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positivity at screening. 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. There were 28 adverse events in CCP and 58 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=0.49) and COVID-19 (26.3 vs. 25.9 days; p=0.35) were similar for both groups. CONCLUSIONIn this trial, which enrolled persons with recent exposure to a person with confirmed COVID-19, high titer CCP as post-exposure prophylaxis appeared safe, but did not prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection. Trial RegistrationClinicaltrial.gov number NCT04323800.
RESUMO
Convalescent plasma is currently one of the leading treatments for COVID-19, but there is a paucity of data identifying therapeutic efficacy. A comprehensive analysis of the antibody responses in potential plasma donors and an understanding of the clinical and demographic factors that drive variant antibody responses is needed. Among 126 potential convalescent plasma donors, the humoral immune response was evaluated by a SARS-CoV-2 virus neutralization assay using Vero-E6-TMPRSS2 cells, commercial IgG and IgA ELISA to Spike (S) protein S1 domain (Euroimmun), IgA, IgG and IgM indirect ELISAs to the full-length S or S-receptor binding domain (S-RBD), and an IgG avidity assay. Multiple linear regression and predictive models were utilized to assess the correlations between antibody responses with demographic and clinical characteristics. IgG titers were greater than either IgM or IgA for S1, full length S, and S-RBD in the overall population. Of the 126 plasma samples, 101 (80%) had detectable neutralizing titers. Using neutralization titer as the reference, the sensitivity of the IgG ELISAs ranged between 95-98%, but specificity was only 20-32%. Male sex, older age, and hospitalization with COVID-19 were all consistently associated with increased antibody responses across the serological assays. Neutralizing antibody titers were reduced over time in contrast to overall antibody responses. There was substantial heterogeneity in the antibody response among potential convalescent plasma donors, but sex, age and hospitalization emerged as factors that can be used to identify individuals with a high likelihood of having strong antiviral antibody levels. One Sentence SummaryThere is substantial heterogeneity in the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 infection, with greater antibody responses being associated with male sex, advancing age, and hospitalization with COVID-19.