Convalescent plasma for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and the effect of plasma antibodies: a randomized controlled, open-label trial

The efficacy of convalescent plasma for COVID-19 is unclear. While most randomized controlled trials have shown negative results, uncontrolled studies have suggested that the antibody content may influence patient outcomes. We conducted an open-label, randomized controlled trial of convalescent plasma for adults with COVID-19 receiving oxygen within 12 days of respiratory symptom onset. Patients were allocated 2:1 to 500 mL of convalescent plasma or standard of care. The composite primary outcome was intubation or death by 30 days. The effect of convalescent plasma antibodies on the primary outcome was assessed by logistic regression. The trial was terminated at 78% of planned enrollment after meeting stopping criteria for futility. 940 patients were randomized and 921 patients were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. Intubation or death occurred in 199/614 (32.4%) in the convalescent plasma arm and 86/307 (28.0%) in the standard of care arm; relative risk (RR) 1.16 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94-1.43; p=0.18). Patients in the convalescent plasma arm had more serious adverse events (33.4% vs. 26.4%; RR=1.27, 95% CI 1.02-1.57, p=0.034). The antibody content significantly modulated the therapeutic effect of convalescent plasma. In multivariate analysis, each standard log increase in neutralization or antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity independently reduced the potential harmful effect of plasma (OR=0.74; 0.57-0.95 and OR=0.66; 0.50-0.87, respectively), while IgG against the full transmembrane Spike protein increased it (OR=1.53, 95% CI 1.14-2.05). Convalescent plasma did not reduce the risk of intubation or death at 30 days among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Transfusion of convalescent plasma with unfavourable antibody profiles may be associated with worse clinical outcomes compared to standard care. Trial registrationCONvalescent Plasma for Hospitalized Adults With COVID-19 Respiratory Illness (CONCOR-1); NCT04348656; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04348656

Therapeutic Anticoagulation in Non-Critically Ill Patients with Covid-19

BackgroundThrombo-inflammation may contribute to morbidity and mortality in Covid-19. We hypothesized that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation may improve outcomes in non-critically ill patients hospitalized for Covid-19. MethodsIn an open-label adaptive multiplatform randomized controlled trial, non-critically ill patients hospitalized for Covid-19, defined by the absence of critical care-level organ support at enrollment, were randomized to a pragmatic strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin or usual care pharmacological thromboprophylaxis. The primary outcome combined survival to hospital discharge and days free of organ support through 21 days, which was evaluated with Bayesian statistical models according to baseline D-dimer. ResultsThe trial was stopped when prespecified criteria for superiority were met for therapeutic-dose anticoagulation in groups defined by high ([≥]2-fold elevated) and low (<2-fold elevated) D-dimer. Among 2219 participants in the final analysis, the probability that therapeutic anticoagulation increased organ support-free days compared to thromboprophylaxis was 99.0% (adjusted odds ratio 1.29, 95% credible interval 1.04 to 1.61). The adjusted absolute increase in survival to hospital discharge without organ support with therapeutic-dose anticoagulation was 4.6% (95% credible interval 0.7 to 8.1). In the primary adaptive stopping groups, the final probabilities of superiority for therapeutic anticoagulation were 97.3% in the high D-dimer group and 92.9% in the low D-dimer group. Major bleeding occurred in 1.9% and 0.9% of participants randomized to therapeutic anticoagulation and thromboprophylaxis, respectively. ConclusionsIn non-critically ill patients with Covid-19, an initial strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin increases the probability of survival to hospital discharge with reduced use of organ support. Trial registration numbers: NCT02735707, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, NCT04372589

Therapeutic Anticoagulation in Critically Ill Patients with Covid-19-Preliminary Report

BackgroundThrombosis may contribute to morbidity and mortality in Covid-19. We hypothesized that therapeutic anticoagulation would improve outcomes in critically ill patients with Covid-19. MethodsWe conducted an open-label, adaptive, multiplatform, randomized, clinical trial. Patients with severe Covid-19, defined as the requirement for organ support with high flow nasal cannula, non-invasive ventilation, invasive ventilation, vasopressors, or inotropes, were randomized to receive therapeutic anticoagulation with heparin or pharmacological thromboprophylaxis as per local usual care. The primary outcome was an ordinal scale combining in-hospital mortality (assigned -1) and days free of organ support to day 21. ResultsTherapeutic anticoagulation met the pre-defined criteria for futility in patients with severe Covid-19. The primary outcome was available for 1,074 participants (529 randomized to therapeutic anticoagulation and 545 randomized to usual care pharmacological thromboprophylaxis). Median organ support-free days were 3 days (interquartile range -1, 16) in patients assigned to therapeutic anticoagulation and 5 days (interquartile range -1, 16) in patients assigned to usual care pharmacological thromboprophylaxis (adjusted odds ratio 0.87, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.70-1.08, posterior probability of futility [odds ratio<1.2] 99.8%). Hospital survival was comparable between groups (64.3% vs. 65.3%, adjusted odds ratio 0.88, 95% CrI 0.67-1.16). Major bleeding occurred in 3.1% of patients assigned to therapeutic anticoagulation and 2.4% of patients assigned to usual care pharmacological thromboprophylaxis. ConclusionsIn patients with severe Covid-19, therapeutic anticoagulation did not improve hospital survival or days free of organ support compared to usual care pharmacological thromboprophylaxis. Trial registration numbers NCT02735707, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, NCT04372589

Post-exposure Prophylaxis or Preemptive Therapy for SARS-Coronavirus-2: Study Protocol for a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial

BackgroundThe severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in December 2019 causing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Currently, there are a lack of evidence-based therapies to prevent COVID-19 following exposure, or to prevent worsening of symptoms following confirmed infection. We describe the design of a clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine for post-exposure prophylaxis and pre-emptive therapy for COVID-19. MethodsWe will conduct two nested multicenter international double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine for: 1) post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) of asymptomatic household contacts or healthcare workers exposed to COVID-19 within the past four days, and 2) pre-emptive therapy (PET) for symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19 with a total symptom duration of less than 4 days. We will recruit 1500 patients for each the PEP and PET trials. Participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive 5 days of hydroxychloroquine or placebo. The primary PEP trial outcome will be the incidence of symptomatic COVID-19 disease. The primary PET trial outcome will be an ordinal scale of disease severity (not hospitalized; hospitalized without intensive care, hospitalization with intensive care, or death). Participant screening, informed consent, and follow up will be exclusively internet-based with appropriate regulatory and research ethics board approvals in Canada and the United States. DiscussionThese complementary randomized control trials are innovatively designed and adequately powered to rapidly answer urgent questions regarding the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine to reduce transmission and disease severity of COVID-19 during a pandemic. In-person participant follow-up will not be conducted in order to facilitate social distancing strategies and reduce risks of exposure to study personnel. Innovative trial approaches are needed to urgently assess therapeutic options to mitigate the global impact of this pandemic. Trials Registrationclinicaltrials.gov (NCT04308668); 16 March 2020.

N95 Mask Decontamination using Standard Hospital Sterilization Technologies

The response to the COVID-19 epidemic is generating severe shortages of personal protective equipment around the world. In particular, the supply of N95 respirator masks has become severely depleted, with supplies having to be rationed and health care workers having to use masks for prolonged periods in many countries. We sought to test the ability of 5 different decontamination methods: autoclave treatment, ethylene oxide gassing, low temperature hydrogen peroxide gas plasma treatment, vaporous hydrogen peroxide exposure and peracetic acid dry fogging to decontaminate a variety of different N95 masks of experimental contamination with SARS-CoV-2 or Vesicular stomatitis virus as a surrogate. In addition, we sought to determine whether masks would tolerate repeated cycles of decontamination while maintaining structural and functional integrity. We found that one cycle of treatment with all modalities was effective in decontamination and was associated with no structural or functional deterioration. Vaporous hydrogen peroxide, peracetic acid dry fogging and autoclave treatments were associated with no loss of structural or functional integrity to a minimum of 10 cycles for the mask models tested. The molded N95 masks however tolerated only 1 cycle of autoclaving. The successful application of autoclaving for layered fabric, pleated masks may be of particular use to institutions globally due to the virtually universal accessibility of autoclaves in health care settings.