Trial reportBMC infectious diseases2022
Safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma for severe COVID-19: a randomized, single blinded, parallel, controlled clinical study.
Trial report in BMC infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04332835 (Convalescent Plasma for Patients With COVID-19), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 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.
Convalescent Plasma for Patients With COVID-19: A Randomized, Single Blinded, Parallel, Controlled Clinical Study
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association between COVID-19 convalescent plasma antibody levels and COVID-19 outcomes stratified by clinical status at presentation.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Pooled it
- Effect of convalescent plasma transfusion on outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019: a meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.Journal of anesthesia · 2023Pooled it
- Convalescent Plasma Therapy for COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Randomized Controlled Trials.Viruses · 2023Pooled it
- Prolonged COVID-19 infection in a patient with B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia maintained on convalescent plasma until recovery with monoclonal antibodies.Laboratory medicine · 2025Article
- Convalescent plasma therapy for COVID-19 in patients with nasal catheter oxygen therapy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Exploring Study Design Foibles in Randomized Controlled Trials on Convalescent Plasma in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Review
- Effects of remdesivir on SARS-CoV-2 viral dynamics and mortality in viraemic patients hospitalized for COVID-19.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2023Article
- Rates Among Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 Treated With Convalescent Plasma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2023Article
- Convalescent plasma (hyperimmune immunoglobulin) for COVID-19 management: An update.Process biochemistry (Barking, London, England) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
45 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundConvalescent plasma (CP) has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under study. However, the variability in the current clinical trials has averted its wide use in the current pandemic. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of CP in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the early stages of the disease.
methodsA randomized controlled clinical study was conducted on 101 patients admitted to the hospital with confirmed severe COVID-19. Most participants had less than 14 days from symptoms onset and less than seven days from hospitalization. Fifty patients were assigned to receive CP plus standard therapy (ST), and 51 were assigned to receive ST alone. Participants in the CP arm received two doses of 250 mL each, transfused 24 h apart. All transfused plasma was obtained from "super donors" that fulfilled the following criteria: titers of anti-SARS-CoV-2 S1 IgG ≥ 1:3200 and IgA ≥ 1:800 antibodies. The effect of transfused anti-IFN antibodies and the SARS-CoV-2 variants at the entry of the study on the overall CP efficacy was evaluated. The primary outcomes were the reduction in viral load and the increase in IgG and IgA antibodies at 28 days of follow-up. The per-protocol analysis included 91 patients.
resultsAn early but transient increase in IgG anti-S1-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels at day 4 post-transfusion was observed (Estimated difference [ED], - 1.36; 95% CI, - 2.33 to - 0.39; P = 0.04). However, CP was not associated with viral load reduction in any of the points evaluated. Analysis of secondary outcomes revealed that those patients in the CP arm disclosed a shorter time to discharge (ED adjusted for mortality, 3.1 days; 95% CI, 0.20 to 5.94; P = 0.0361) or a reduction of 2 points on the WHO scale when compared with the ST group (HR adjusted for mortality, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.03 to 2.5; P = 0.0376). There were no benefits from CP on the rates of intensive care unit admission (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.35 to 1.9; P = 0.6399), mechanical ventilation (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.25 to 1.7; P = 0.4039), or mortality (HR, 3.2; 95% CI, 0.64 to 16; P = 0.1584). Anti-IFN antibodies and SARS-CoV-2 variants did not influence these results.
conclusionCP was not associated with viral load reduction, despite the early increase in IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. However, CP is safe and could be a therapeutic option to reduce the hospital length of stay. Trial registration NCT04332835.
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.