Abstract
Objectives
The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of human anti-SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma in hospitalized adults with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Trial Design
...This is a prospective, single-center, phase 2, randomized, controlled trial that is blinded to participants and clinical outcome assessor.
Participants
Eligible participants include adults (≥ 18 years) with evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by PCR test of nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab within 14 days of randomization, evidence of infiltrates on chest radiography, peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO2) ≤ 94% on room air, and/or need for supplemental oxygen, non-invasive mechanical ventilation, or invasive mechanical ventilation, who are willing and able to provide written informed consent prior to performing study procedures or who have a legally authorized representative available to do so. Exclusion criteria include participation in another clinical trial of anti-viral agent(s)* for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), receipt of any anti-viral agent(s)* with possible activity against SARS-CoV-2 <24 hours prior to plasma infusion, mechanical ventilation (including extracorporeal membrane oxygenation ECMO) for ≥ 5 days, severe multi-organ failure, history of allergic reactions to transfused blood products per NHSN/CDC criteria, known IgA deficiency, and pregnancy. Included participants will be hospitalized at the time of randomization and plasma infusion.
*Use of remdesivir as treatment for COVID-19 is permitted.
The study will be undertaken at Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York, USA.
Intervention and comparator
The investigational treatment is anti-SARS-CoV-2 human convalescent plasma. To procure the investigational treatment, volunteers who recovered from COVID-19 will undergo testing to confirm the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody to the spike trimer at a 1:400 dilution. Donors will also be screened for transfusion-transmitted infections (e.g. HIV, HBV, HCV, WNV, HTLV-I/II, T.
cruzi,
ZIKV). If donors have experienced COVID-19 symptoms within 28 days, they will be screened with a nasopharyngeal swab to confirm they are SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative. Plasma will be collected using standard apheresis technology by the New York Blood Center. Study participants will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive one unit (200 – 250 mL) of anti-SARS-CoV-2 plasma versus one unit (200 – 250 mL) of the earliest available control plasma. The control plasma cannot be tested for presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody prior to the transfusion, but will be tested for anti- SARS-CoV-2 antibody after the transfusion to allow for a retrospective per-protocol analysis.
Main outcomes
The primary endpoint is time to clinical improvement. This is defined as time from randomization to either discharge from the hospital or improvement by one point on the following seven-point ordinal scale, whichever occurs first.
1. Not hospitalized with resumption of normal activities
2. Not hospitalized, but unable to resume normal activities
3. Hospitalized, not requiring supplemental oxygen
4. Hospitalized, requiring supplemental oxygen
5. Hospitalized, requiring high-flow oxygen therapy or non-invasive mechanical ventilation
6. Hospitalized, requiring ECMO, invasive mechanical ventilation, or both
7. Death
This scale, designed to assess clinical status over time, was based on that recommended by the World Health Organization for use in determining efficacy end-points in clinical trials in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. A recent clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of lopinavir- ritonavir for patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 used a similar ordinal scale, as have recent clinical trials of novel therapeutics for severe influenza, including a post-hoc analysis of a trial evaluating immune plasma.
The primary safety endpoints are cumulative incidence of grade 3 and 4 adverse events and cumulative incidence of serious adverse events during the study period.
Randomization
Study participants will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive anti-SARS-CoV-2 plasma versus control plasma using a web-based randomization platform. Treatment assignments will be generated using randomly permuted blocks of different sizes to minimize imbalance while also minimizing predictability.
Blinding (masking)
The study participants and the clinicians who will evaluate post-treatment outcomes will be blinded to group assignment. The blood bank and the clinical research team will not be blinded to group assignment.
Numbers to be randomized (sample size)
We plan to enroll 129 participants, with 86 in the anti-SARS-CoV-2 arm, and 43 in the control arm. Among the participants, we expect ~70% or n = 72 will achieve clinical improvement. This will yield an 80% power for a one-sided Wald test at 0.15 level of significance under the proportional hazards model with a hazard ratio of 1.5.
Trial Status
Protocol AAAS9924, Version 17APR2020, 4/17/2020
Start of recruitment: April 20, 2020
Recruitment is ongoing.
Trial registration
ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04359810
Date of trial registration: April 24, 2020
Retrospectively registered
Full protocol
The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.
Although convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), data from randomized controlled trials that support its efficacy are limited.
We conducted a ...randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial among adults hospitalized with severe and critical COVID-19 at five sites in New York City (USA) and Rio de Janeiro (Brazil). Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive a single transfusion of either convalescent plasma or placebo (normal control plasma). The primary outcome was clinical status at 28 days following randomization, measured using an ordinal scale and analyzed using a proportional odds model in the intention-to-treat population.
Of 223 participants enrolled, 150 were randomized to receive convalescent plasma and 73 to normal control plasma. At 28 days, no significant improvement in clinical status was observed in participants randomized to convalescent plasma (OR 1.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83-2.68, p=0.180). However, 28-day mortality was significantly lower in participants randomized to convalescent plasma versus control plasma (19/150 12.6% versus 18/73 24.6%, OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22-0.91, p=0.034). The median titer of anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody in infused convalescent plasma units was 1:160 (IQR 1:80-1:320). In a subset of nasopharyngeal swab samples from Brazil that underwent genomic sequencing, no evidence of neutralization-escape mutants was detected.
In adults hospitalized with severe COVID-19, use of convalescent plasma was not associated with significant improvement in clinical status at day 28. However, a significant improvement in mortality was observed, which warrants further evaluation.
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04359810FUNDING. Amazon Foundation. Skoll Foundation.
We sought to determine if an association exists between age and capecitabine efficacy among patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Pooled analysis of five phase II or III registration trials ...of capecitabine 2,500-2,510 mg/m²/day for 2 weeks and 1 week off, or combination therapy was performed. Four trials enrolled patients previously exposed to other chemotherapy, generally a taxane. Of 570 patients, 193 (34%) were 18-49 years old, 246 (43%) were 50-64, and 131 (23%) were ≥65. Median average daily dose was 2,067 mg/m² in the 18- to 49-year-old group and 2,105 mg/m² in the 50-64 and ≥65 year groups. Overall survival (OS) in all groups was similar by log-rank test for the individual trials (P = 0.71-0.95) and Cox regression of the pooled trials. Univariate analysis demonstrated no difference in clinical benefit or objective response between groups. Treatment failure analysis showed 283 (50%) patients experienced progressive disease, while 114 (20%) withdrew for safety. Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 71 (36.8%), 85 (34.6%), and 59 (45.0%) patients in the 18-49, 50-64, and ≥65 years groups, respectively. There was no statistically significant association between age and OS, clinical benefit, or objective response in patients with MBC treated with capecitabine. Frequency of AEs and serious AEs was not related to age at treatment, although women ≥65 years were more likely to withdraw from treatment because of an AE than younger women.
PDF
