ArticleHealth science reports2024
Experiences in the use of multiple doses of convalescent plasma in critically ill patients with COVID-19: An early phase 1 descriptive study.
Article in Health science reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Experiences in the use of multiple doses of convalescent plasma in critically ill patients with COVID-19: An early phase 1 descriptive study.Health science reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: At the beginning of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, transfusion of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescent plasma (CCP) emerged as a potential therapeutic strategy to help patients severely afflicted by COVID-19. The efficacy of CCP has been controversial as it depends on many variables pertaining to the plasma donor and the patient with COVID-19, for example, time of convalescence or symptoms onset. This feasibility and descriptive study aimed to assess the safety of multiple doses of CCP in mechanically ventilated, intubated patients with respiratory failure due to COVID-19. Methods: A cohort of 30 patients all experiencing severe respiratory failure and undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation in an intensive care unit, received up to five doses of 300-600 mL of CCP on alternate days (0, 2, 4, 6, and 8) until extubation, futility, or death. Results: Nineteen patients received five doses, seven received four, and four received two or three doses. At 28-day follow-up mark, 57% of patients recovered and were sent home, and the long-term mortality rate was 27%. Ten severe adverse events reported in the study were unrelated to CCP transfusion. Independent of the number of transfused doses, most patients had detectable levels of total and neutralizing antibodies in plasma. Conclusion: This study suggests that transfusion of multiple doses of CCP is safe. This strategy may represent a viable option for future studies, given the potential benefit of CCP transfusions during the early stages of infection in unvaccinated populations and in settings where monoclonal antibodies or antivirals are contraindicated or unavailable.
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.