Enfermedades infecciosas y microbiologia clinica (English ed.) · 2026
Safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma for COVID-19 in the pre-vaccine era, and implementation in a large healthcare system: A phase I/II randomized, multicentre clinical trial (PC-COVID).
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеМногоцентровое исследованиеКлиническое исследование II фазыКлиническое исследование I фазыНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Caponcello Maria Giulia, Macías-Sánchez Maria Del Mar, Macías Juan, Aguilar-Guisado Manuela, Romero Palacios Alberto, Retamar-Gentil Pilar, Márquez-Gómez Ignacio, Martínez-Marcos Francisco Javier, López Cárdenas Salvador, Marrugal-Lorenzo Jose Antonio, Quijano Ruiz Blanca, Mata Rosario, Carmona-Sánchez Gloria, Oyonarte Salvador, Rodríguez-Baño Jesús, PC-COVID group
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: A phase 2 trial was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma (CP) for patients admitted with COVID-19 in the pre-vaccine era.
METHODS: CP was compared to standard of care (SoC) in a randomized clinical trial in patients admitted with COVID-19 pneumonia and with either hypoxia and/or some underlying condition from April to December 2020 in 15 hospitals in Andalusia, Spain. The primary endpoints were adverse events and failure (all-cause death and need for mechanical ventilation during the first 21 days).
RESULT: The procedure for CP was developed and worked properly. Overall, 72 patients of 88 evaluated were recruited (37 and 35) assigned to CP and SoC. Median duration of COVID-19 related symptoms was 7 and 6 days, and median oxygen saturation at randomization was 93% and 92.5% in experimental and control arms, respectively. Overall, 8 (21.6%) patients in the experimental CP group (non related to CP) and 8 (22.9%) in the control group developed grade 3 adverse events (relative risk [RR] 0.94; 95% CI: 0.39-2.24); failure occurred in 3 (8.1%) and 4 (11.4%) patients, respectively ([RR] 0.94, CI: 0.14-6.35 for both events). No differences in secondary endpoints (change in inflammatory parameters, negativization of SARS-CoV-2 PCR or duration of hospital stay) were found.
CONCLUSIONS: The results suggested that CP is safe for use in COVID-19 patients, although no significant efficacy signal could be observed. A successful regional system for CP administration was developed.
METHODS: CP was compared to standard of care (SoC) in a randomized clinical trial in patients admitted with COVID-19 pneumonia and with either hypoxia and/or some underlying condition from April to December 2020 in 15 hospitals in Andalusia, Spain. The primary endpoints were adverse events and failure (all-cause death and need for mechanical ventilation during the first 21 days).
RESULT: The procedure for CP was developed and worked properly. Overall, 72 patients of 88 evaluated were recruited (37 and 35) assigned to CP and SoC. Median duration of COVID-19 related symptoms was 7 and 6 days, and median oxygen saturation at randomization was 93% and 92.5% in experimental and control arms, respectively. Overall, 8 (21.6%) patients in the experimental CP group (non related to CP) and 8 (22.9%) in the control group developed grade 3 adverse events (relative risk [RR] 0.94; 95% CI: 0.39-2.24); failure occurred in 3 (8.1%) and 4 (11.4%) patients, respectively ([RR] 0.94, CI: 0.14-6.35 for both events). No differences in secondary endpoints (change in inflammatory parameters, negativization of SARS-CoV-2 PCR or duration of hospital stay) were found.
CONCLUSIONS: The results suggested that CP is safe for use in COVID-19 patients, although no significant efficacy signal could be observed. A successful regional system for CP administration was developed.