Outpatient COVID-19 convalescent plasma recipient antibody thresholds correlated to reduced hospitalizations within a randomized trial.

BACKGROUNDCOVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) virus-specific antibody levels that translate into recipient posttransfusion antibody levels sufficient to prevent disease progression are not defined.METHODSThis secondary analysis correlated donor and recipient antibody levels to hospitalization risk among unvaccinated, seronegative CCP recipients within the outpatient, double-blind, randomized clinical trial that compared CCP to control plasma. The majority of COVID-19 CCP arm hospitalizations (15/17, 88%) occurred in this unvaccinated, seronegative subgroup. A functional cutoff to delineate recipient high versus low posttransfusion antibody levels was established by 2 methods: (i) analyzing virus neutralization-equivalent anti-Spike receptor-binding domain immunoglobulin G (anti-S-RBD IgG) responses in donors or (ii) receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.RESULTSSARS-CoV-2 anti-S-RBD IgG antibody was volume diluted 21.3-fold into posttransfusion seronegative recipients from matched donor units. Virus-specific antibody delivered was approximately 1.2 mg. The high-antibody recipients transfused early (symptom onset within 5 days) had no hospitalizations. A CCP-recipient analysis for antibody thresholds correlated to reduced hospitalizations found a statistical significant association between early transfusion and high antibodies versus all other CCP recipients (or control plasma), with antibody cutoffs established by both methods-donor-based virus neutralization cutoffs in posttransfusion recipients (0/85 [0%] versus 15/276 [5.6%]; P = 0.03) or ROC-based cutoff (0/94 [0%] versus 15/267 [5.4%]; P = 0.01).CONCLUSIONIn unvaccinated, seronegative CCP recipients, early transfusion of plasma units in the upper 30% of study donors' antibody levels reduced outpatient hospitalizations. High antibody level plasma units, given early, should be reserved for therapeutic use.TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov NCT04373460.FUNDINGDepartment of Defense (W911QY2090012); Defense Health Agency; Bloomberg Philanthropies; the State of Maryland; NIH (3R01AI152078-01S1, U24TR001609-S3, 1K23HL151826NIH); the Mental Wellness Foundation; the Moriah Fund; Octapharma; the Healthnetwork Foundation; the Shear Family Foundation; the NorthShore Research Institute; and the Rice Foundation.

Rationale and Design of the mTECH-Rehab Randomized Controlled Trial: Impact of a Mobile Technology Enabled Corrie Cardiac Rehabilitation Program on Functional Status and Cardiovascular Health.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is an evidence-based, guideline-recommended intervention for patients recovering from a cardiac event, surgery or procedure that improves morbidity, mortality, and functional status. CR is traditionally provided in-center, which limits access and engagement, most notably among underrepresented racial and ethnic groups due to barriers including cost, scheduling, and transportation access. This study is designed to evaluate the Corrie Hybrid CR, a technology-based, multicomponent health equity-focused intervention as an alternative to traditional in-center CR among patients recovering from a cardiac event, surgery, or procedure compared with usual care alone. METHODS: The mTECH-Rehab (Impact of a Mobile Technology Enabled Corrie CR Program) trial will randomize 200 patients who either have diagnosis of myocardial infarction or who undergo coronary artery bypass grafting surgery, percutaneous coronary intervention, heart valve repair, or replacement presenting to 4 hospitals in a large academic health system in Maryland, United States, to the Corrie Hybrid CR program combined with usual care CR (intervention group) or usual care CR alone (control group) in a parallel arm, randomized controlled trial. The Corrie Hybrid CR program leverages 5 components: (1) a patient-facing mobile application that encourages behavior change, patient empowerment, and engagement with guideline-directed therapy; (2) Food and Drug Administration-approved smart devices that collect health metrics; (3) 2 upfront in-center CR sessions to facilitate personalization, self-efficacy, and evaluation for the safety of home exercise, followed by a combination of in-center and home-based sessions per participant preference; (4) a clinician dashboard to track health data; and (5) weekly virtual coaching sessions delivered over 12 weeks for education, encouragement, and risk factor modification. The primary outcome is the mean difference between the intervention versus control groups in distance walked on the 6-minute walk test (ie, functional capacity) at 12 weeks post randomization. Key secondary and exploratory outcomes include improvement in a composite cardiovascular health metric, CR engagement, quality of life, health factors (including low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, hemoglobin A1c, weight, diet, smoking cessation, blood pressure), and psychosocial factors. Approval for the study was granted by the local institutional review board. Results of the trial will be published once data collection and analysis have been completed. CONCLUSIONS: The Corrie Hybrid CR program has the potential to improve functional status, cardiovascular health, and CR engagement and advance equity in access to cardiac rehabilitation. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT05238103.

Mechanistic Evaluation of Diffusion Weighted Hyperintense Lesions After Large Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Subgroup Analysis of MISTIE III.

BACKGROUND: Ischemic lesions on diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) are common after acute spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) but are poorly understood for large ICH volumes (> 30 mL). We hypothesized that large blood pressure drops and effect modification by cerebral small vessel disease markers on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are associated with DWI lesions. METHODS: This was an exploratory analysis of participants in the Minimally Invasive Surgery Plus Alteplase for Intracerebral Hemorrhage Evacuation phase 3 trial with protocolized brain MRI scans within 7 days from ICH. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess biologically relevant factors associated with DWI lesions, and relationships between DWI lesions and favorable ICH outcomes (modified Rankin Scale 0-3). RESULTS: Of 499 enrolled patients, 300 had MRI at median 7.5 days (interquartile range 7-8), and 178 (59%) had DWI lesions. The incidence of DWI lesions was higher in patients with systolic blood pressure (SBP) reduction ≥ 80 mm Hg in first 24 h (76%). In adjusted models, factors associated with DWI lesions were as follows: admission intraventricular hematoma volume (p = 0.03), decrease in SBP ≥ 80 mm Hg from admission to day 1 (p = 0.03), and moderate-to-severe white matter disease (p = 0.01). Patients with DWI lesions had higher odds of severe disability at 1 month (p = 0.04), 6 months (p = 0.036), and 12 months (p < 0.01). No evidence of effect modification by cerebral small vessel disease on blood pressure was found. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with large hypertensive ICH, white matter disease, intraventricular hemorrhage volume, and large reductions in SBP over the first 24 h were independently associated with DWI lesions. Further investigation of potential hemodynamic mechanisms of ischemic injury after large ICH is warranted.

Early antibody treatment, inflammation, and risk of post-COVID conditions.

IMPORTANCE: Approximately 20% of individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 experienced long-term health effects, as defined PCC. However, it is unknown if there are any early biomarkers associated with PCC or whether early intervention treatments may decrease the risk of PCC. In a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, this study demonstrates that among outpatients with SARS-CoV-2, increased IL-6 at time of infection is associated with increased odds of PCC. In addition, among individuals treated early, within 5 days of symptom onset, with COVID-19 convalescent plasma, there was a trend for decreased odds of PCC after adjusting for other demographic and clinical characteristics. Future treatment studies should be considered to evaluate the effect of early treatment and anti-IL-6 therapies on PCC development.

Transfusion reactions associated with COVID-19 convalescent plasma in outpatient clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) is an important therapeutic option for outpatients at high risk of hospitalization from SARS-CoV-2 infection. We assessed the safety of outpatient CCP transfusions administered during clinical trials. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We analyzed data pertaining to transfusion-related reactions from two randomized controlled trials in the U.S. that evaluated the efficacy of CCP versus control plasma in various ambulatory settings. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess whether CCP was associated with transfusion reactions, after adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: The combined study reported 79/1351 (5.9%) adverse events during the transfusion visit, with the majority 62/1351 (4.6%) characterized by mild, allergic-type findings of urticaria, and/or pruritus consistent with minor allergic transfusion reactions; the other reported events were attributed to the patients' underlying disease, COVID-19, or vasovagal in nature. We found no difference in the likelihood of allergic transfusion reactions between those receiving CCP versus control plasma (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.43-1.31). Risk of urticaria and/or pruritus increased with a pre-existing diagnosis of asthma (AOR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.16-4.67). We did not observe any CCP-attributed antibody disease enhancement in participants with COVID-19 or increased risk of infection. There were no life-threatening severe transfusion reactions and no patients required hospitalization related to transfusion-associated complications. DISCUSSION: Outpatient plasma administration was safely performed for nearly 1400 participants. CCP is a safe therapeutic option for outpatients at risk of hospitalization from COVID-19.

Losartan in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in North America: An individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) have been hypothesized to benefit patients with COVID-19 via the inhibition of viral entry and other mechanisms. We conducted an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis assessing the effect of starting the ARB losartan in recently hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We searched ClinicalTrials.gov in January 2021 for U.S./Canada-based trials where an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/ARB was a treatment arm, targeted outcomes could be extrapolated, and data sharing was allowed. Our primary outcome was a 7-point COVID-19 ordinal score measured 13 to 16 days post-enrollment. We analyzed data by fitting multilevel Bayesian ordinal regression models and standardizing the resulting predictions. RESULTS: 325 participants (156 losartan vs 169 control) from 4 studies contributed IPD. Three were randomized trials; one used non-randomized concurrent and historical controls. Baseline covariates were reasonably balanced for the randomized trials. All studies evaluated losartan. We found equivocal evidence of a difference in ordinal scores 13-16 days post-enrollment (model-standardized odds ratio [OR] 1.10, 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.76-1.71; adjusted OR 1.15, 95% CrI 0.15-3.59) and no compelling evidence of treatment effect heterogeneity among prespecified subgroups. Losartan had worse effects for those taking corticosteroids at baseline after adjusting for covariates (ratio of adjusted ORs 0.29, 95% CrI 0.08-0.99). Hypotension serious adverse event rates were numerically higher with losartan. CONCLUSIONS: In this IPD meta-analysis of hospitalized COVID-19 patients, we found no convincing evidence for the benefit of losartan versus control treatment, but a higher rate of hypotension adverse events with losartan.

Outpatient COVID-19 convalescent plasma recipient antibody thresholds correlated to reduced hospitalizations within a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) viral specific antibody levels that translate into recipient post-transfusion antibody levels sufficient to prevent disease progression is not defined. METHODS: This secondary analysis correlated donor and recipient antibody levels to hospitalization risk among unvaccinated, seronegative CCP recipients within the outpatient, double blind, randomized clinical trial that compared CCP to control plasma. The majority of COVID-19 CCP arm hospitalizations (15/17, 88%) occurred in this unvaccinated, seronegative subgroup. A functional cutoff to delineate recipient high versus low post-transfusion antibody levels was established by two methods: 1) analyzing virus neutralization-equivalent anti-S-RBD IgG responses in donors or 2) receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 anti-S-RBD IgG antibody was diluted by a factor of 21.3 into post-transfusion seronegative recipients from matched donor units. Viral specific antibody delivered approximated 1.2 mg. The high antibody recipients transfused early (symptom onset within 5 days) had no hospitalizations. A CCP recipient analysis for antibody thresholds correlated to reduced hospitalizations found a significant association with Fisher's exact test between early and high antibodies versus all other CCP recipients (or control plasma) with antibody cutoffs established by both methods-donor virus neutralization-based cutoff: (0/85; 0% versus 15/276; 5.6%) p=0.03 or ROC based cutoff: (0/94; 0% versus 15/267; 5.4%) p=0.01. CONCLUSION: In unvaccinated, seronegative CCP recipients, early transfusion of plasma units corresponding to the upper 30% of all study donors reduced outpatient hospitalizations. These high antibody level plasma units, given early, should be reserved for therapeutic use.Trial registration: NCT04373460. FUNDING: Defense Health Agency and others.

Early Treatment, Inflammation and Post-COVID Conditions.

Background: Post-COVID conditions (PCC) are common and have significant morbidity. Risk factors for PCC include advancing age, female sex, obesity, and diabetes mellitus. Little is known about early treatment, inflammation, and PCC. Methods: Among 883 individuals with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection participating in a randomized trial of CCP vs. control plasma with available biospecimens and symptom data, the association between early COVID treatment, cytokine levels and PCC was evaluated. Cytokine and chemokine levels were assessed at baseline, day 14 and day 90 using a multiplexed sandwich immuosassay (Mesoscale Discovery). Presence of any self-reported PCC symptoms was assessed at day 90. Associations between COVID treatment, cytokine levels and PCC were examined using multivariate logistic regression models. Results: One-third of the 882 participants had day 90 PCC symptoms, with fatigue (14.5%) and loss of smell (14.5%) being most common. Cytokine levels decreased from baseline to day 90. In a multivariable analysis including diabetes, body mass index, race, and vaccine status, female sex (adjusted odds ratio[AOR]=2.70[1.93-3.81]), older age (AOR=1.32[1.17-1.50]), and elevated baseline levels of IL-6 (AOR=1.59[1.02-2.47]) were associated with development of PCC.There was a trend for decreased PCC in those with early CCP treatment (≤5 days after symptom onset) compared to late CCP treatment. Conclusion: Increased IL-6 levels were associated with the development of PCC and there was a trend for decreased PCC with early CCP treatment in this predominately unvaccinated population. Future treatment studies should evaluate the effect of early treatment and anti-IL-6 therapies on PCC development.

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.

Development, implementation, and dissemination of operational innovations across the trial innovation network.

Improving the quality and conduct of multi-center clinical trials is essential to the generation of generalizable knowledge about the safety and efficacy of healthcare treatments. Despite significant effort and expense, many clinical trials are unsuccessful. The National Center for Advancing Translational Science launched the Trial Innovation Network to address critical roadblocks in multi-center trials by leveraging existing infrastructure and developing operational innovations. We provide an overview of the roadblocks that led to opportunities for operational innovation, our work to develop, define, and map innovations across the network, and how we implemented and disseminated mature innovations.

Hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: An individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Results from observational studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have led to the consensus that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) are not effective for COVID-19 prevention or treatment. Pooling individual participant data, including unanalyzed data from trials terminated early, enables more detailed investigation of the efficacy and safety of HCQ/CQ among subgroups of hospitalized patients. METHODS: We searched ClinicalTrials.gov in May and June 2020 for US-based RCTs evaluating HCQ/CQ in hospitalized COVID-19 patients in which the outcomes defined in this study were recorded or could be extrapolated. The primary outcome was a 7-point ordinal scale measured between day 28 and 35 post enrollment; comparisons used proportional odds ratios. Harmonized de-identified data were collected via a common template spreadsheet sent to each principal investigator. The data were analyzed by fitting a prespecified Bayesian ordinal regression model and standardizing the resulting predictions. RESULTS: Eight of 19 trials met eligibility criteria and agreed to participate. Patient-level data were available from 770 participants (412 HCQ/CQ vs 358 control). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. We did not find evidence of a difference in COVID-19 ordinal scores between days 28 and 35 post-enrollment in the pooled patient population (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% credible interval, 0.76-1.24; higher favors HCQ/CQ), and found no convincing evidence of meaningful treatment effect heterogeneity among prespecified subgroups. Adverse event and serious adverse event rates were numerically higher with HCQ/CQ vs control (0.39 vs 0.29 and 0.13 vs 0.09 per patient, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this individual participant data meta-analysis reinforce those of individual RCTs that HCQ/CQ is not efficacious for treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients.

One-Year Outcome Trajectories and Factors Associated with Functional Recovery Among Survivors of Intracerebral and Intraventricular Hemorrhage With Initial Severe Disability.

Importance: Patients who survive severe intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) typically have poor functional outcome in the short term and understanding of future recovery is limited. Objective: To describe 1-year recovery trajectories among ICH and IVH survivors with initial severe disability and assess the association of hospital events with long-term recovery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This post hoc analysis pooled all individual patient data from the Clot Lysis: Evaluating Accelerated Resolution of Intraventricular Hemorrhage phase 3 trial (CLEAR-III) and the Minimally Invasive Surgery Plus Alteplase for Intracerebral Hemorrhage Evacuation (MISTIE-III) phase 3 trial in multiple centers across the US, Canada, Europe, and Asia. Patients were enrolled from August 1, 2010, to September 30, 2018, with a follow-up duration of 1 year. Of 999 enrolled patients, 724 survived with a day 30 modified Rankin Scale score (mRS) of 4 to 5 after excluding 13 participants with missing day 30 mRS. An additional 9 patients were excluded because of missing 1-year mRS. The final pooled cohort included 715 patients (71.6%) with day 30 mRS 4 to 5. Data were analyzed from July 2019 to January 2022. Exposures: CLEAR-III participants randomized to intraventricular alteplase vs placebo. MISTIE-III participants randomized to stereotactic thrombolysis of hematoma vs standard medical care. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was 1-year mRS. Patients were dichotomized into good outcome at 1 year (mRS 0 to 3) vs poor outcome at 1 year (mRS 4 to 6). Multivariable logistic regression models assessed associations between prospectively adjudicated hospital events and 1-year good outcome after adjusting for demographic characteristics, ICH and IVH severity, and trial cohort. Results: Of 715 survivors, 417 (58%) were male, and the overall mean (SD) age was 60.3 (11.7) years. Overall, 174 participants (24.3%) were Black, 491 (68.6%) were White, and 49 (6.9%) were of other races (including Asian, Native American, and Pacific Islander, consolidated owing to small numbers); 98 (13.7%) were of Hispanic ethnicity. By 1 year, 129 participants (18%) had died and 308 (43%) had achieved mRS 0 to 3. In adjusted models for the combined cohort, diabetes (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.50; 95% CI, 0.26-0.96), National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (aOR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.90-0.96), severe leukoaraiosis (aOR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.16-0.54), pineal gland shift (aOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-0.99]), acute ischemic stroke (aOR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.21-0.94), gastrostomy (aOR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.17-0.50), and persistent hydrocephalus by day 30 (aOR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.14-0.98) were associated with lack of recovery. Resolution of ICH (aOR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.08-3.04) and IVH (aOR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.02-4.68) by day 30 were associated with recovery to good outcome. In the CLEAR-III model, cerebral perfusion pressure less than 60 mm Hg (aOR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.13-0.71), sepsis (aOR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.00-0.80), and prolonged mechanical ventilation (aOR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.92-1.00 per day), and in MISTIE-III, need for intracranial pressure monitoring (aOR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.12-0.98), were additional factors associated with poor outcome. Thirty-day event-based models strongly predicted 1-year outcome (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.83-0.90), with significantly improved discrimination over models using baseline severity factors alone (AUC, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.71-0.80; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Among survivors of severe ICH and IVH with initial poor functional outcome, more than 40% recovered to good outcome by 1 year. Hospital events were strongly associated with long-term functional recovery and may be potential targets for intervention. Avoiding early pessimistic prognostication and delaying prognostication until after treatment may improve ability to predict future recovery.

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.).

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.

Hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: An individual participant data meta-analysis.

Background: Results from observational studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have led to the consensus that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) are not effective for COVID-19 prevention or treatment. Pooling individual participant data, including unanalyzed data from trials terminated early, enables more detailed investigation of the efficacy and safety of HCQ/CQ among subgroups of hospitalized patients. Methods: We searched ClinicalTrials.gov in May and June 2020 for US-based RCTs evaluating HCQ/CQ in hospitalized COVID-19 patients in which the outcomes defined in this study were recorded or could be extrapolated. The primary outcome was a 7-point ordinal scale measured between day 28 and 35 post enrollment; comparisons used proportional odds ratios. Harmonized de-identified data were collected via a common template spreadsheet sent to each principal investigator. The data were analyzed by fitting a prespecified Bayesian ordinal regression model and standardizing the resulting predictions. Results: Eight of 19 trials met eligibility criteria and agreed to participate. Patient-level data were available from 770 participants (412 HCQ/CQ vs 358 control). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. We did not find evidence of a difference in COVID-19 ordinal scores between days 28 and 35 post-enrollment in the pooled patient population (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% credible interval, 0.76-1.24; higher favors HCQ/CQ), and found no convincing evidence of meaningful treatment effect heterogeneity among prespecified subgroups. Adverse event and serious adverse event rates were numerically higher with HCQ/CQ vs control (0.39 vs 0.29 and 0.13 vs 0.09 per patient, respectively). Conclusions: The findings of this individual participant data meta-analysis reinforce those of individual RCTs that HCQ/CQ is not efficacious for treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients.

Randomized controlled trial transfusing convalescent plasma as post-exposure prophylaxis against SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BACKGROUND: The 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. METHODS: This 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. RESULTS: 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 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. CONCLUSION: In 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 REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrial.gov number NCT04323800 .

Baseline Characteristics of Patients With Cavernous Angiomas With Symptomatic Hemorrhage in Multisite Trial Readiness Project.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Brain cavernous angiomas with symptomatic hemorrhage (CASH) have a high risk of neurological disability from recurrent bleeding. Systematic assessment of baseline features and multisite validation of novel magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers are needed to optimize clinical trial design aimed at novel pharmacotherapies in CASH. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study included adults with unresected, adjudicated brain CASH within the prior year. Six US sites screened and enrolled patients starting August 2018. Baseline demographics, clinical and imaging features, functional status (modified Rankin Scale and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale), and patient quality of life outcomes (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 and EuroQol-5D) were summarized using descriptive statistics. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 scores were standardized against a reference population (mean 50, SD 10), and one-sample t test was performed for each domain. A subgroup underwent harmonized magnetic resonance imaging assessment of lesional iron content with quantitative susceptibility mapping and vascular permeability with dynamic contrast-enhanced quantitative perfusion. RESULTS: As of May 2020, 849 patients were screened and 110 CASH cases enrolled (13% prevalence of trial eligible cases). The average age at consent was 46±16 years, 53% were female, 41% were familial, and 43% were brainstem lesions. At enrollment, ≥90% of the cohort had independent functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score ≤2 and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score <5). However, perceived health problems affecting quality of life were reported in >30% of patients (EuroQol-5D). Patients had significantly worse Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 scores for anxiety (P=0.007), but better depression (P=0.002) and social satisfaction scores (P=0.012) compared with the general reference population. Mean baseline quantitative susceptibility mapping and permeability of CASH lesion were 0.45±0.17 ppm and 0.39±0.31 mL/100 g per minute, respectively, which were similar to historical CASH cases and consistent across sites. CONCLUSIONS: These baseline features will aid investigators in patient stratification and determining the most appropriate outcome measures for clinical trials of emerging pharmacotherapies in CASH.

Post-Stroke Depression in Patients with Large Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage.

OBJECTIVES: To determine factors associated with post-stroke depression (PSD) and relationship between PSD and functional outcomes in spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) using prospective data from a large clinical trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MISTIE III, a randomized, multicenter, placebo-controlled trial, was conducted to determine if minimally invasive surgery with thrombolysis improves outcome compared to standard medical care. Our primary outcome was post-stroke depression at 180 days. Secondary outcomes were change in blinded assessment of modified Rankin Scale (mRS) from 30 to 180 days, and from 180 to 365 days. Logistic regression models were used to assess the relationship between PSD and outcomes. RESULTS: Among 379 survivors at day 180, 308 completed Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, of which 111 (36%) were depressed. In the multivariable analysis, female sex (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR], 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.93 [1.07-3.48]), Hispanic ethnicity (3.05 [1.19-7.85]), intraventricular hemorrhage (1.88 [1.02-3.45]), right-sided lesions (3.00 [1.43-6.29]), impaired mini mental state examination at day 30 (2.50 [1.13-5.54]), and not being at home at day 30 (3.17 [1.05-9.57]) were significantly associated with higher odds of PSD. Patients with PSD were significantly more likely to have unchanged or worsening mRS from day 30 to 180 (42.3% vs. 25.9%; p=0.004), but not from day 180 to 365. CONCLUSIONS: We report high burden of PSD in patients with large volume ICH. Impaired cognition and not living at home may be more important than physical limitations in predicting PSD. Increased screening of high-risk post-stroke patients for depression, especially females and Hispanics may be warranted.

Intracerebral Hemorrhage Volume Reduction and Timing of Intervention Versus Functional Benefit and Survival in the MISTIE III and STICH Trials.

BACKGROUND: The extent of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) removal conferred survival and functional benefits in the minimally invasive surgery with thrombolysis in intracerebral hemorrhage evacuation (MISTIE) III trial. It is unclear whether this similarly impacts outcome with craniotomy (open surgery) or whether timing from ictus to intervention influences outcome with either procedure. OBJECTIVE: To compare volume evacuation and timing of surgery in relation to outcomes in the MISTIE III and STICH (Surgical Trial in Intracerebral Hemorrhage) trials. METHODS: Postoperative scans were performed in STICH II, but not in STICH I; therefore, surgical MISTIE III cases with lobar hemorrhages (n = 84) were compared to STICH II all lobar cases (n = 259) for volumetric analyses. All MISTIE III surgical patients (n = 240) were compared to both STICH I and II (n = 722) surgical patients for timing analyses. These were investigated using cubic spline modeling and multivariate risk adjustment. RESULTS: End-of-treatment ICH volume ≤28.8 mL in MISTIE III and ≤30.0 mL in STICH II had increased probability of modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0 to 3 at 180 d (P = .01 and P = .003, respectively). The effect in the MISTIE cohort remained significant after multivariate risk adjustments. Earlier surgery within 62 h of ictus had a lower probability of achieving an mRS 0 to 3 at 180 d with STICH I and II (P = .0004), but not with MISTIE III. This remained significant with multivariate risk adjustments. There was no impact of timing until intervention on mortality up to 47 h with either procedure. CONCLUSION: Thresholds of ICH removal influenced outcome with both procedures to a similar extent. There was a similar likelihood of achieving a good outcome with both procedures within a broad therapeutic time window.