| 1. |
- Axfors, Cathrine, et al.
(författare)
-
Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19 : a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
- 2021
-
Ingår i: BMC Infectious Diseases. - : BioMed Central (BMC). - 1471-2334. ; 21:1
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, ). Methods: In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. Results: A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I-2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. Conclusions: Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care.
|
|
| 2. |
- Berglund, Erik, et al.
(författare)
-
Clinical Significance of Alloantibodies in Hand Transplantation : A Multicenter Study
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Transplantation. - : LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS. - 0041-1337 .- 1534-6080. ; 103:10, s. 2173-2182
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background. Donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) have a strong negative correlation with long-term survival in solid organ transplantation. Although the clinical significance of DSA and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) in upper extremity transplantation (UET) remains to be established, a growing number of single-center reports indicate their presence and potential clinical impact. Methods. We present a multicenter study assessing the occurrence and significance of alloantibodies in UET in reference to immunological parameters and functional outcome. Results. Our study revealed a high prevalence and early development of de novo DSA and non-DSA (43%, the majority detected within the first 3 postoperative y). HLA class II mismatch correlated with antibody development, which in turn significantly correlated with the incidence of acute cellular rejection. Cellular rejections preceded antibody development in almost all cases. A strong correlation between DSA and graft survival or function cannot be statistically established at this early stage but a correlation with a lesser outcome seems to emerge. Conclusions. While the phenotype and true clinical effect of AMR remain to be better defined, the high prevalence of DSA and the correlation with acute rejection highlight the need for optimizing immunosuppression, close monitoring, and the relevance of an HLA class II match in UET recipients.
|
|
