Trial reportPLoS medicine2021
Early versus deferred anti-SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma in patients admitted for COVID-19: A randomized phase II clinical trial.
Trial report in PLoS medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04375098 (Efficacy and Safety of Early Anti-SARS-COV-2 Convalescent Plasma in Patients Admitted for COVID-19 Infection), which is not on this map. Cited by 63 papers, 17 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Efficacy and Safety of Early Anti-SARS-COV-2 Convalescent Plasma in Patients Admitted for COVID-19 Infection: a Randomized Phase II Trial
Who cites it
63 citing papers in PubMed, 17 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 93 citations in OpenAlex.
- Timing, Titre, and Host Determinants of Convalescent Plasma Efficacy in COVID-19: A Systematic Review With Design-Stratified Narrative Synthesis.Reviews in medical virology · 2026Pooled it
- Convalescent plasma for people with COVID-19: a living systematic review.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Convalescent plasma for people with COVID-19: a living systematic review.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Role of red blood cell distribution width, as a prognostic indicator in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Reviews in medical virology · 2022Pooled it
- Convalescent Plasma for Patients Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Transfusion medicine reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Development of Evidence-Based COVID-19 Management Guidelines for Local Context: The Methodological Challenges.Global health, epidemiology and genomics · 2022Pooled it
- The efficiency of convalescent plasma in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials testing the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Evidence-base for practise and implications for research.Transfusion medicine (Oxford, England) · 2021Pooled it
- Coronavirus Disease 2019 as Cause of Viral Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Critical care medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Convalescent plasma for COVID-19: a meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis, and meta-regression.British journal of anaesthesia · 2021Pooled it
- CONVALESCENT plasma for COVID-19: A meta-analysis of clinical trials and real-world evidence.European journal of clinical investigation · 2021Pooled it
- Clinical trials in COVID-19 management & prevention: A meta-epidemiological study examining methodological quality.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Antibody and cellular therapies for treatment of covid-19: a living systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Pooled it
- Convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin for people with COVID-19: a living systematic review.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a systematic review ofTheranostics · 2021Pooled it
- One-year follow-up of the CAPSID randomized trial for high-dose convalescent plasma in severe COVID-19 patients.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2022Trial
- Convalescent or standard plasma versus standard of care in the treatment of COVID-19 patients with respiratory impairment: short and long-term effects. A three-arm randomized controlled clinical trial.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Trial
- Trial
3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
32 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConvalescent plasma (CP), despite limited evidence on its efficacy, is being widely used as a compassionate therapy for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of early CP therapy in COVID-19 progression. METHODS AND
findingsThe study was an open-label, single-center randomized clinical trial performed in an academic medical center in Santiago, Chile, from May 10, 2020, to July 18, 2020, with final follow-up until August 17, 2020. The trial included patients hospitalized within the first 7 days of COVID-19 symptom onset, presenting risk factors for illness progression and not on mechanical ventilation. The intervention consisted of immediate CP (early plasma group) versus no CP unless developing prespecified criteria of deterioration (deferred plasma group). Additional standard treatment was allowed in both arms. The primary outcome was a composite of mechanical ventilation, hospitalization for >14 days, or death. The key secondary outcomes included time to respiratory failure, days of mechanical ventilation, hospital length of stay, mortality at 30 days, and SARS-CoV-2 real-time PCR clearance rate. Of 58 randomized patients (mean age, 65.8 years; 50% male), 57 (98.3%) completed the trial. A total of 13 (43.3%) participants from the deferred group received plasma based on clinical aggravation. We failed to find benefit in the primary outcome (32.1% versus 33.3%, odds ratio [OR] 0.95, 95% CI 0.32-2.84, p > 0.999) in the early versus deferred CP group. The in-hospital mortality rate was 17.9% versus 6.7% (OR 3.04, 95% CI 0.54-17.17 p = 0.246), mechanical ventilation 17.9% versus 6.7% (OR 3.04, 95% CI 0.54-17.17, p = 0.246), and prolonged hospitalization 21.4% versus 30.0% (OR 0.64, 95% CI, 0.19-2.10, p = 0.554) in the early versus deferred CP group, respectively. The viral clearance rate on day 3 (26% versus 8%, p = 0.204) and day 7 (38% versus 19%, p = 0.374) did not differ between groups. Two patients experienced serious adverse events within 6 hours after plasma transfusion. The main limitation of this study is the lack of statistical power to detect a smaller but clinically relevant therapeutic effect of CP, as well as not having confirmed neutralizing antibodies in donor before plasma infusion.
conclusionsIn the present study, we failed to find evidence of benefit in mortality, length of hospitalization, or mechanical ventilation requirement by immediate addition of CP therapy in the early stages of COVID-19 compared to its use only in case of patient deterioration.
trial registrationNCT04375098.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.