Early administration of COVID-19 convalescent plasma with high titer antibody content by live viral neutralization assay is associated with modest clinical efficacy.

The efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) as a treatment for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 remains somewhat controversial; however, many studies have not evaluated CCP documented to have high neutralizing antibody titer by a highly accurate assay. To evaluate the correlation of the administration of CCP with titer determined by a live viral neutralization assay with 7- and 28-day death rates during hospitalization, a total of 23 118 patients receiving a single unit of CCP were stratified into two groups: those receiving high titer CCP (>250 50% inhibitory dilution, ID50; n = 13 636) or low titer CCP (≤250 ID50; n = 9482). Multivariable Cox regression was performed to assess risk factors. Non-intubated patients who were transfused with high titer CCP showed 1.1% and 1.7% absolute reductions in overall 7- and 28-day death rates, respectively, compared to those non-intubated patients receiving low titer CCP. No benefit of CCP was observed in intubated patients. The relative benefit of high titer CCP was confirmed in multivariable Cox regression. Administration of CCP with high titer antibody content determined by live viral neutralization assay to non-intubated patients is associated with modest clinical efficacy. Although shown to be only of modest clinical benefit, CCP may play a role in the future should viral variants develop that are not neutralized by other available therapeutics.

Development and Validation of a Treatment Benefit Index to Identify Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 Who May Benefit From Convalescent Plasma.

Importance: Identifying which patients with COVID-19 are likely to benefit from COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) treatment may have a large public health impact. Objective: To develop an index for predicting the expected relative treatment benefit from CCP compared with treatment without CCP for patients hospitalized for COVID-19 using patients' baseline characteristics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prognostic study used data from the COMPILE study, ie, a meta-analysis of pooled individual patient data from 8 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating CCP vs control in adults hospitalized for COVID-19 who were not receiving mechanical ventilation at randomization. A combination of baseline characteristics, termed the treatment benefit index (TBI), was developed based on 2287 patients in COMPILE using a proportional odds model, with baseline characteristics selected via cross-validation. The TBI was externally validated on 4 external data sets: the Expanded Access Program (1896 participants), a study conducted under Emergency Use Authorization (210 participants), and 2 RCTs (with 80 and 309 participants). Exposure: Receipt of CCP. Main Outcomes and Measures: World Health Organization (WHO) 11-point ordinal COVID-19 clinical status scale and 2 derivatives of it (ie, WHO score of 7-10, indicating mechanical ventilation to death, and WHO score of 10, indicating death) at day 14 and day 28 after randomization. Day 14 WHO 11-point ordinal scale was used as the primary outcome to develop the TBI. Results: A total of 2287 patients were included in the derivation cohort, with a mean (SD) age of 60.3 (15.2) years and 815 (35.6%) women. The TBI provided a continuous gradation of benefit, and, for clinical utility, it was operationalized into groups of expected large clinical benefit (B1; 629 participants in the derivation cohort [27.5%]), moderate benefit (B2; 953 [41.7%]), and potential harm or no benefit (B3; 705 [30.8%]). Patients with preexisting conditions (diabetes, cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases), with blood type A or AB, and at an early COVID-19 stage (low baseline WHO scores) were expected to benefit most, while those without preexisting conditions and at more advanced stages of COVID-19 could potentially be harmed. In the derivation cohort, odds ratios for worse outcome, where smaller odds ratios indicate larger benefit from CCP, were 0.69 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.48-1.06) for B1, 0.82 (95% CrI, 0.61-1.11) for B2, and 1.58 (95% CrI, 1.14-2.17) for B3. Testing on 4 external datasets supported the validation of the derived TBIs. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that the CCP TBI is a simple tool that can quantify the relative benefit from CCP treatment for an individual patient hospitalized with COVID-19 that can be used to guide treatment recommendations. The TBI precision medicine approach could be especially helpful in a pandemic.

Access to and safety of COVID-19 convalescent plasma in the United States Expanded Access Program: A national registry study.

BACKGROUND: The United States (US) Expanded Access Program (EAP) to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescent plasma was initiated in response to the rapid spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of COVID-19. While randomized clinical trials were in various stages of development and enrollment, there was an urgent need for widespread access to potential therapeutic agents. The objective of this study is to report on the demographic, geographical, and chronological characteristics of patients in the EAP, and key safety metrics following transfusion of COVID-19 convalescent plasma. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Mayo Clinic served as the central institutional review board for all participating facilities, and any US physician could participate as a local physician-principal investigator. Eligible patients were hospitalized, were aged 18 years or older, and had-or were at risk of progression to-severe or life-threatening COVID-19; eligible patients were enrolled through the EAP central website. Blood collection facilities rapidly implemented programs to collect convalescent plasma for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Demographic and clinical characteristics of all enrolled patients in the EAP were summarized. Temporal patterns in access to COVID-19 convalescent plasma were investigated by comparing daily and weekly changes in EAP enrollment in response to changes in infection rate at the state level. Geographical analyses on access to convalescent plasma included assessing EAP enrollment in all national hospital referral regions, as well as assessing enrollment in metropolitan areas and less populated areas that did not have access to COVID-19 clinical trials. From April 3 to August 23, 2020, 105,717 hospitalized patients with severe or life-threatening COVID-19 were enrolled in the EAP. The majority of patients were 60 years of age or older (57.8%), were male (58.4%), and had overweight or obesity (83.8%). There was substantial inclusion of minorities and underserved populations: 46.4% of patients were of a race other than white, and 37.2% of patients were of Hispanic ethnicity. Chronologically and geographically, increases in the number of both enrollments and transfusions in the EAP closely followed confirmed infections across all 50 states. Nearly all national hospital referral regions enrolled and transfused patients in the EAP, including both in metropolitan and in less populated areas. The incidence of serious adverse events was objectively low (<1%), and the overall crude 30-day mortality rate was 25.2% (95% CI, 25.0% to 25.5%). This registry study was limited by the observational and pragmatic study design that did not include a control or comparator group; thus, the data should not be used to infer definitive treatment effects. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the EAP provided widespread access to COVID-19 convalescent plasma in all 50 states, including for underserved racial and ethnic minority populations. The study design of the EAP may serve as a model for future efforts when broad access to a treatment is needed in response to an emerging infectious disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT#: NCT04338360.

Mortality in individuals treated with COVID-19 convalescent plasma varies with the geographic provenance of donors.

Successful therapeutics and vaccines for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have harnessed the immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Evidence that SARS-CoV-2 exists as locally evolving variants suggests that immunological differences may impact the effectiveness of antibody-based treatments such as convalescent plasma and vaccines. Considering that near-sourced convalescent plasma likely reflects the antigenic composition of local viral strains, we hypothesize that convalescent plasma has a higher efficacy, as defined by death within 30 days of transfusion, when the convalescent plasma donor and treated patient were in close geographic proximity. Results of a series of modeling techniques applied to approximately 28,000 patients from the Expanded Access to Convalescent Plasma program (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT04338360) support this hypothesis. This work has implications for the interpretation of clinical studies, the ability to develop effective COVID-19 treatments, and, potentially, for the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines as additional locally-evolving variants continue to emerge.

Program and patient characteristics for the United States Expanded Access Program to COVID-19 convalescent plasma.

BACKGROUND: The United States (US) Expanded Access Program (EAP) to COVID-19 convalescent plasma was initiated in response to the rapid spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). While randomized clinical trials were in various stages of development and enrollment, there was an urgent need for widespread access to potential therapeutic agents particularly for vulnerable racial and ethnic minority populations who were disproportionately affected by the pandemic. The objective of this study is to report on the demographic, geographic, and chronological access to COVID-19 convalescent plasma in the US via the EAP. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Mayo Clinic served as the central IRB for all participating facilities and any US physician could participate as local physician-principal investigator. Registration occurred through the EAP central website. Blood banks rapidly developed logistics to provide convalescent plasma to hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Demographic and clinical characteristics of all enrolled patients in the EAP were summarized. Temporal trends in access to COVID-19 convalescent plasma were investigated by comparing daily and weekly changes in EAP enrollment in response to changes in infection rate on a state level. Geographical analyses on access to convalescent plasma included assessing EAP enrollment in all national hospital referral regions as well as assessing enrollment in metropolitan and less populated areas which did not have access to COVID-19 clinical trials.From April 3 to August 23, 2020, 105,717 hospitalized patients with severe or life-threatening COVID-19 were enrolled in the EAP. A majority of patients were older than 60 years of age (57.8%), male (58.4%), and overweight or obese (83.8%). There was substantial inclusion of minorities and underserved populations, including 46.4% of patients with a race other than White, and 37.2% of patients were of Hispanic ethnicity. Severe or life-threatening COVID-19 was present in 61.8% of patients and 18.9% of patients were mechanically ventilated at time of convalescent plasma infusion. Chronologically and geographically, increases in enrollment in the EAP closely followed confirmed infections across all 50 states. Nearly all national hospital referral regions enrolled patients in the EAP, including both in metropolitan and less populated areas. CONCLUSIONS: The EAP successfully provided widespread access to COVID-19 convalescent plasma in all 50 states, including for underserved racial and ethnic minority populations. The efficient study design of the EAP may serve as an example framework for future efforts when broad access to a treatment is needed in response to a dynamic disease affecting demographic groups and areas historically underrepresented in clinical studies.

Convalescent Plasma Antibody Levels and the Risk of Death from Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) under the presumption that such plasma contains potentially therapeutic antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that can be passively transferred to the plasma recipient. Whether convalescent plasma with high antibody levels rather than low antibody levels is associated with a lower risk of death is unknown. METHODS: In a retrospective study based on a U.S. national registry, we determined the anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels in convalescent plasma used to treat hospitalized adults with Covid-19. The primary outcome was death within 30 days after plasma transfusion. Patients who were enrolled through July 4, 2020, and for whom data on anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels in plasma transfusions and on 30-day mortality were available were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Of the 3082 patients included in this analysis, death within 30 days after plasma transfusion occurred in 115 of 515 patients (22.3%) in the high-titer group, 549 of 2006 patients (27.4%) in the medium-titer group, and 166 of 561 patients (29.6%) in the low-titer group. The association of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels with the risk of death from Covid-19 was moderated by mechanical ventilation status. A lower risk of death within 30 days in the high-titer group than in the low-titer group was observed among patients who had not received mechanical ventilation before transfusion (relative risk, 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48 to 0.91), and no effect on the risk of death was observed among patients who had received mechanical ventilation (relative risk, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized with Covid-19 who were not receiving mechanical ventilation, transfusion of plasma with higher anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels was associated with a lower risk of death than transfusion of plasma with lower antibody levels. (Funded by the Department of Health and Human Services and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04338360.).

Safety Update: COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma in 20,000 Hospitalized Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update on key safety metrics after transfusion of convalescent plasma in hospitalized coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) patients, having previously demonstrated safety in 5000 hospitalized patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From April 3 to June 2, 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration Expanded Access Program for COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfused a convenience sample of 20,000 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 convalescent plasma. RESULTS: The incidence of all serious adverse events was low; these included transfusion reactions (n=78; <1%), thromboembolic or thrombotic events (n=113; <1%), and cardiac events (n=677, ~3%). Notably, the vast majority of the thromboembolic or thrombotic events (n=75) and cardiac events (n=597) were judged to be unrelated to the plasma transfusion per se. The 7-day mortality rate was 13.0% (12.5%, 13.4%), and was higher among more critically ill patients relative to less ill counterparts, including patients admitted to the intensive care unit versus those not admitted (15.6 vs 9.3%), mechanically ventilated versus not ventilated (18.3% vs 9.9%), and with septic shock or multiple organ dysfunction/failure versus those without dysfunction/failure (21.7% vs 11.5%). CONCLUSION: These updated data provide robust evidence that transfusion of convalescent plasma is safe in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and support the notion that earlier administration of plasma within the clinical course of COVID-19 is more likely to reduce mortality.

Early safety indicators of COVID-19 convalescent plasma in 5000 patients.

BACKGROUNDConvalescent plasma is the only antibody-based therapy currently available for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It has robust historical precedence and sound biological plausibility. Although promising, convalescent plasma has not yet been shown to be safe as a treatment for COVID-19.METHODSThus, we analyzed key safety metrics after transfusion of ABO-compatible human COVID-19 convalescent plasma in 5000 hospitalized adults with severe or life-threatening COVID-19, with 66% in the intensive care unit, as part of the US FDA expanded access program for COVID-19 convalescent plasma.RESULTSThe incidence of all serious adverse events (SAEs), including mortality rate (0.3%), in the first 4 hours after transfusion was <1%. Of the 36 reported SAEs, there were 25 reported incidences of related SAEs, including mortality (n = 4), transfusion-associated circulatory overload (n = 7), transfusion-related acute lung injury (n = 11), and severe allergic transfusion reactions (n = 3). However, only 2 of 36 SAEs were judged as definitely related to the convalescent plasma transfusion by the treating physician. The 7-day mortality rate was 14.9%.CONCLUSIONGiven the deadly nature of COVID-19 and the large population of critically ill patients included in these analyses, the mortality rate does not appear excessive. These early indicators suggest that transfusion of convalescent plasma is safe in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov NCT04338360.FUNDINGMayo Clinic, Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (75A50120C00096), National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1TR002377), National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (5R35HL139854 and R01 HL059842), National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (5T32DK07352), Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (PDF-532926-2019), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (R21 AI145356, R21 AI152318, and AI152078), Schwab Charitable Fund, United Health Group, National Basketball Association, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, and Octapharma USA Inc.

Pathogen reduction of blood components during outbreaks of infectious diseases in the European Union: an expert opinion from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control consultation meeting.

Pathogen reduction (PR) of selected blood components is a technology that has been adopted in practice in various ways. Although they offer great advantages in improving the safety of the blood supply, these technologies have limitations which hinder their broader use, e.g. increased costs. In this context, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), in co-operation with the Italian National Blood Centre, organised an expert consultation meeting to discuss the potential role of pathogen reduction technologies (PRT) as a blood safety intervention during outbreaks of infectious diseases for which (in most cases) laboratory screening of blood donations is not available. The meeting brought together 26 experts and representatives of national competent authorities for blood from thirteen European Union and European Economic Area (EU/EEA) Member States (MS), Switzerland, the World Health Organization, the European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines and Health Care of the Council of Europe, the US Food and Drug Administration, and the ECDC. During the meeting, the current use of PRTs in the EU/EEA MS and Switzerland was verified, with particular reference to emerging infectious diseases (see Appendix). In this article, we also present expert discussions and a common view on the potential use of PRT as a part of both preparedness and response to threats posed to blood safety by outbreaks of infectious disease.

Dose Finding in Late-Phase Drug Development.

A drug may fail or raise concerns that must be addressed in later-phase trials because of an unacceptable toxicity profile, even if the drug meets expectations for efficacy. The problem could be due to the late onset of unacceptable toxicities that were not observed in early-phase trials. We explore methodologies to find appropriate doses in situations where a drug meets the primary efficacy objective but concerns about toxicity remain. In this manuscript, we propose a general framework to design a good phase IV trial that is designed to optimize the treatment regimen. In the first step, we learn from the existing data about the dose-response and dose-toxicity relationships and further to explore and establish the relationship using a statistical model. Noting the limitations of the exploratory analyses, these analyses are not sufficient to allow us to make definitive conclusions. However, the prediction obtained from the model, either estimated efficacy metrics or safety parameters for some doses, can be incorporated in the design of the phase IV trial. In the second step, we further propose and compare design options, including options that could effectively incorporate information from these exploratory analyses, for clinical trials to find optimal doses, including trials to fulfill postmarketing commitments or requirements.

FDA Approval: Ibrutinib for Patients with Previously Treated Mantle Cell Lymphoma and Previously Treated Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

On November 13, 2013, the FDA granted accelerated approval to ibrutinib (IMBRUVICA capsules; Pharmacyclics, Inc.) for the treatment of patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) who have received at least one prior therapy. On February 12, 2014, the FDA granted accelerated approval for the treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who have received at least one prior therapy. Ibrutinib is a first-in-class Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor that received all four expedited programs of the FDA: Fast-Track designation, Breakthrough Therapy designation, Priority Review, and Accelerated Approval. Both approvals were based on overall response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR) in single-arm clinical trials in patients with prior treatment. In MCL (N = 111), the complete and partial response rates were 17.1% and 48.6%, respectively, for an ORR of 65.8% [95% confidence interval (CI), 56.2%-74.5%]. The median DOR was 17.5 months (95% CI, 15.8-not reached). In CLL (N = 48), the ORR was 58.3% (95% CI, 43.2%-72.4%), and the DOR ranged from 5.6 to 24.2 months. The most common adverse reactions (≥ 30% in either trial) were thrombocytopenia, diarrhea, neutropenia, bruising, upper respiratory tract infection, anemia, fatigue, musculoskeletal pain, peripheral edema, and nausea.

Isolated midbrain ischemic infarct in association with hyperlipoproteinemia (a): a report of 2 adolescent patients.

Arterial ischemic strokes (AIS) localized solely to the midbrain are extremely uncommon in the pediatric population. Elevated lipoprotein (a), which promotes atherosclerosis and a prothrombotic state, has been associated with increased risk of AIS in children and adults. Here we describe a 17-year-old boy and a 15-year-old girl who presented with internuclear ophthalmoplegia secondary to an isolated midbrain AIS. Evaluation for risk factors for AIS in these otherwise healthy adolescents identified hyperlipoproteinemia (a) in combination with other potential prothrombotic conditions suggesting that hypercoagulable states such as hyperlipoproteinemia (a) may have contributed to development of small-vessel arteriopathy and localized AIS.