ArticleTransfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie2021
COVID-19 Repeated Convalescent Plasma Collection: Analysis of 149 Donations from 88 French Military Health Workers.
Article in Transfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPassive therapy with convalescent plasma (CP) could be an effective and safe treatment option in COVID-19 patients. Neutralizing antibodies present in CP generated in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and directed against the receptor-binding domain of the spike protein are considered to play a major role in the viral clearance. CP infusion may also contribute to the modulation of the immune response through its immunomodulatory effect. We describe for the first time the effectiveness of a CP collection protocol from repeated donations in young patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe enrolled health service workers who experienced mild to moderate COVID-19 and from whom several donations have been collected. No minimal severity threshold and no biological cure criteria were required. Donors could return to a second plasma donation 14 days after the first donation. A minimal neutralizing antibody titer of 1:40 was considered for clinical use.
resultsEighty-eight donors were included (median age 35 [28-48] years, 41 women), and 149 plasma products were collected. COVID-19 were mainly WHO stage 2 infections (96%). Among the 88 first donations, 76% had neutralizing antibody titers higher than or equal to 1:40. Eighty-eight percent of donors who came for a second donation had a neutralizing antibody titer of 1:40. Median durations were 15 (15-19) and 38 (33-46) days from the first to the second donation and from recovery to the second donation, respectively. Sixty-nine percent of donors who came for a third donation had a neutralizing antibody titer of 1:40. Median durations were 16 (13-37) and 54 (49-61) days from the second to the third donation and from recovery to the third donation, respectively. No significant difference was observed between the IgG ratio and the age of the donors or the time between recovery and donation. The average IgG ratio did not significantly vary between donations. When focused on repeated blood donors, no significant differences were observed either.
conclusionThe recruitment of young patients with a mild to moderate CO-VID-19 course is an efficient possibility to collect CP with a satisfactory level of neutralizing antibodies. Repeated donations are a well-tolerated and effective way of CP collection.
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.