ArticleMicrobiology spectrum2021
SARS-CoV-2 Infection of Rhesus Macaques Treated Early with Human COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma.
Article in Microbiology spectrum, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pulmonary lymphoid tissue induced after SARS-CoV-2 infection in rhesus macaques.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Estimates of actual and potential lives saved in the United States from the use of COVID-19 convalescent plasma.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Vaccine-Boosted CCP Decreases Virus Replication and Hastens Resolution of Infection Despite Transiently Enhancing Disease in SARS-CoV-2-Infected Hamsters.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2024Article
- COVID-19 therapeutics.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2024Review
- Testing of tissue specimens obtained from SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal swab-positive donors.Cell and tissue banking · 2024Article
- Aerosol delivery of SARS-CoV-2 human monoclonal antibodies in macaques limits viral replication and lung pathology.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Mid-titer human convalescent plasma administration results in suboptimal prophylaxis against SARS-CoV-2 infection in rhesus macaques.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- A framework and resource for global collaboration in non-human primate neuroscience.Current research in neurobiology · 2023Review
- Developing and validating SARS-CoV-2 assays for nonhuman primate surveillance.Journal of medical primatology · 2022Article
- COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma and Clinical Trials: Understanding Conflicting Outcomes.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2022Review
- Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 variants: a brief review and practical implications.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2022Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Human clinical studies investigating use of convalescent plasma (CP) for treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have produced conflicting results. Outcomes in these studies may vary at least partly due to different timing of CP administration relative to symptom onset. The mechanisms of action of CP include neutralizing antibodies but may extend beyond virus neutralization to include normalization of blood clotting and dampening of inflammation. Unresolved questions include the minimum therapeutic titer in the CP units or CP recipient as well as the optimal timing of administration. Here, we show that treatment of macaques with CP within 24 h of infection does not reduce viral shedding in nasal or lung secretions compared to controls and does not detectably improve any clinical endpoint. We also demonstrate that CP administration does not impact viral sequence diversity
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.