ArticleThe journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global2022
Lessons learned from the use of COVID-19 convalescent plasma at Kaiser Permanente.
Article in The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global, 2022. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In April 2020, the Mayo Clinic helped establish the US Food and Drug Administration Expanded Access Protocol for COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) convalescent plasma (CCP). The effectiveness of CCP in the published literature is contradictory because some retrospective studies showed benefit in reducing mortality and severe illness, whereas prospective randomized controlled trials demonstrated no benefit of CCP. Objectives: To discuss (1) the implementation of CCP across Kaiser Permanente Southern California between April 2020 and April 2021, (2) retrospective multivariable analysis of 2,831 patients with COVID-19 who were transfused with CCP compared with 18,475 patients with COVID-19 who did not receive CCP, (3) how to reconcile contradictory published data regarding the efficacy of CCP, and (4) guidance regarding the future use of convalescent plasma in a large community hospital setting. Methods: Multivariable analysis was controlled for demographic characteristics, level of oxygen delivery, intensive care unit stay, selected laboratory findings, and other concurrent treatment-related variables. Tubing segments from 151 CCP units transfused between October 2020 and April 2021 were retrospectively tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) anti-spike protein receptor-binding domain IgG. Multivariable analysis showed that CCP transfusion did not affect mortality rates at 30 days and 5 months (odds ratio, 1.04, 95% CI, 0.87-1.25, and hazard ratio, 1.05, 95% CI, 0.93-1.19). Conclusions: If convalescent plasma is offered as a therapeutic in a future viral pandemic, we recommend (1) transfusing only those patients who are negative for neutralizing antibodies, (2) transfusing very early during the disease course, (3) only using convalescent plasma with known levels of neutralizing antibodies, or (4) alternatively providing fractionated hyperimmune globulin.
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.