Search

ABSTRACTAlthough severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and hospitalization associated with COVID-19 are generally preventable among healthy vaccine recipients, patients with immunosuppression have poor immunogenic responses to COVID-19 vaccines and remain at high risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and hospitalization. In addition, monoclonal antibody therapy is limited by the emergence of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants that have serially escaped neutralization. In this context, there is interest in understanding the clinical benefit associated with COVID-19 convalescent plasma collected from persons who have been both naturally infected with SARS-CoV-2 and vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 (“vax-plasma”). Thus, we report the clinical outcome of 386 immunocompromised outpatients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 and who received contemporary COVID-19-specific therapeutics (standard-of-care group) and a subgroup who also received concomitant treatment with very high titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma (vax-plasma group) with a specific focus on hospitalization rates. The overall hospitalization rate was 2.2% (5 of 225 patients) in the vax-plasma group and 6.2% (10 of 161 patients) in the standard-of-care group, which corresponded to a relative risk reduction of 65% (P = 0.046). Evidence of efficacy in nonvaccinated patients cannot be inferred from these data because 94% (361 of 386 patients) of patients were vaccinated. In vaccinated patients with immunosuppression and COVID-19, the addition of vax-plasma or very high titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma to COVID-19-specific therapies reduced the risk of disease progression leading to hospitalization.IMPORTANCEAs SARS-CoV-2 evolves, new variants of concern (VOCs) have emerged that evade available anti-spike monoclonal antibodies, particularly among immunosuppressed patients. However, high-titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma continues to be effective against VOCs because of its broad-spectrum immunomodulatory properties. Thus, we report clinical outcomes of 386 immunocompromised outpatients who were treated with COVID-19-specific therapeutics and a subgroup also treated with vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma. We found that the administration of vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma was associated with a significantly decreased incidence of hospitalization among immunocompromised COVID-19 outpatients. Our data add to the contemporary data providing evidence to support the clinical utility of high-titer convalescent plasma as antibody replacement therapy in immunocompromised patients.

Objective: To examine the association of COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion with mortality and the differences between subgroups in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Patients and Methods: On October 26, 2022, a systematic search was performed for clinical studies of COVID-19 convalescent plasma in the literature from January 1, 2020, to October 26, 2022. Randomized clinical trials and matched cohort studies investigating COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion compared with standard of care treatment or placebo among hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 were included. The electronic search yielded 3841 unique records, of which 744 were considered for full-text screening. The selection process was performed independently by a panel of 5 reviewers. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data were extracted by 5 independent reviewers in duplicate and pooled using an inverse-variance random effects model. The prespecified end point was all-cause mortality during hospitalization. Results: Thirty-nine randomized clinical trials enrolling 21,529 participants and 70 matched cohort studies enrolling 50,160 participants were included in the systematic review. Separate meta-analyses reported that transfusion of COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the control cohort for both randomized clinical trials (odds ratio [OR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-1.00) and matched cohort studies (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.88). The meta-analysis of subgroups revealed 2 important findings. First, treatment with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with convalescent plasma containing low antibody levels (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.99). Second, earlier treatment with COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the later treatment cohort (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.82). Conclusion: During COVID-19 convalescent plasma use was associated with a 13% reduced risk of mortality, implying a mortality benefit for hospitalized patients with COVID-19, particularly those treated with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels treated earlier in the disease course.

Abstract Respiratory epithelium in the conducting airways of the human body is one of the primary targets of SARS-CoV-2 infection, however, there is a paucity of studies describing the association between COVID-19 and physical characteristics of the conducting airways. To better understand the pathophysiology of COVID-19 on the size of larger conducting airways, we determined the luminal area of the central airways in patients with a history of COVID-19 compared to a height-matched cohort of controls using a case–control study design. Using three-dimensional reconstruction from low-dose high-resolution computed tomography, we retrospectively assessed airway luminal cross-sectional area in 114 patients with COVID-19 (66 females, 48 males) and 114 healthy, sex- and height-matched controls (66 females, 48 males). People with a history of smoking, cardiopulmonary disease, or a body mass index greater than 40 kg·m−2 were excluded. Luminal areas of seven conducting airways were analyzed, including trachea, left and right main bronchus, intermediate bronchus, left and right upper lobe, and left lower lobe. For the central conducting airways, luminal area was ~ 15% greater patients with COVID-19 compared to matched controls (p

ObjectiveThere is widespread agreement about the key role of hemoglobin for oxygen transport. Both observational and interventional studies have examined the relationship between hemoglobin levels and maximal oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]) in humans. However, there exists considerable variability in the scientific literature regarding the potential relationship between hemoglobin and [Formula: see text]. Thus, we aimed to provide a comprehensive analysis of the diverse literature and examine the relationship between hemoglobin levels (hemoglobin concentration and mass) and [Formula: see text] (absolute and relative [Formula: see text]) among both observational and interventional studies.MethodsA systematic search was performed on December 6th, 2021. The study procedures and reporting of findings followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Article selection and data abstraction were performed in duplicate by two independent reviewers. Primary outcomes were hemoglobin levels and [Formula: see text] values (absolute and relative). For observational studies, meta-regression models were performed to examine the relationship between hemoglobin levels and [Formula: see text] values. For interventional studies, meta-analysis models were performed to determine the change in [Formula: see text] values (standard paired difference) associated with interventions designed to modify hemoglobin levels or [Formula: see text]. Meta-regression models were then performed to determine the relationship between a change in hemoglobin levels and the change in [Formula: see text] values.ResultsData from 384 studies (226 observational studies and 158 interventional studies) were examined. For observational data, there was a positive association between absolute [Formula: see text] and hemoglobin levels (hemoglobin concentration, hemoglobin mass, and hematocrit (PConclusionThese findings suggest that [Formula: see text] values are closely associated with hemoglobin levels among both observational and interventional studies. Although our findings suggest a lack of sex differences in these relationships, there were limited studies incorporating females or stratifying results by biological sex.