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and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX). 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 Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung–Knapp–Sidik–Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. Results A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients).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 (I2 = 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 The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis.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.
Adoptive cell therapy with T cells reprogrammed to express chimeric antigen receptors (CAR-T cells) has been highly successful in patients with hematological neoplasms. However, its therapeutic benefits have been limited in solid tumor cases. Even those patients who respond to this immunotherapy remain at risk of relapse due to the short-term persistence or non-expansion of CAR-T cells; moreover, the hostile tumor microenvironment (TME) leads to the dysfunction of these cells after reinfusion. Some research has shown that, in adoptive T-cell therapies, the presence of less differentiated T-cell subsets within the infusion product is associated with better clinical outcomes. Naive and memory T cells persist longer and exhibit greater antitumor activity than effector T cells. Therefore, new methods are being studied to overcome the limitations of this therapy to generate CAR-T cells with these ideal phenotypes. In this paper, we review the characteristics of T-cell subsets and their implications in the clinical outcomes of adoptive therapy with CAR-T cells. In addition, we describe some strategies developed to overcome the reduced persistence of CAR T-cells and alternatives to improve this therapy by increasing the expansion ability and longevity of modified T cells. These methods include cell culture optimization, incorporating homeostatic cytokines during the expansion phase of manufacturing, modulation of CAR-T cell metabolism, manipulating signaling pathways involved in T-cell differentiation, and strategies related to CAR construct designs.
Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC) have been used in over 800 clinical trials with encouraging results in the field of transplant medicine and chronic inflammatory diseases. Today, Umbilical Cord (UC)-derived MSC are the second leading source used for clinical purposes, mainly due to its easy access and superior immune modulatory effects. Although the underlying molecular mechanisms of immune suppressive activities have not been fully understood, research over the last decade strongly suggests that MSC-mediated benefits are closely related to activation of secretome networks. Nevertheless, recent findings also point to cytokine-independent mechanisms as key players of MSC-mediated immune modulation. Here, we set up a robust in vitro immune assay using phytohemagglutinin-or anti-CD3/CD28treated human peripheral blood mononuclear cells in cell-to-cell interaction or in cellcontact independent format with UC-MSC and conducted integrated transcriptome and secretome analyses to dissect molecular pathways driving UC-MSC-mediated immune modulation. Under inflammatory stimuli, multiparametric analyses of the secretome led us to identify cytokine/chemokine expression patterns associated with the induction of MSC-reprogrammed macrophages and T cell subsets ultimately leading to immune suppression. UC-MSC transcriptome analysis under inflammatory challenge allowed the identification of 47 differentially expressed genes, including chemokines, antiand pro-inflammatory cytokines and adhesion molecules found also in UC-MSCimmunosupressive secretomes, including the novel candidate soluble IL-2R. This study enabled us to track functionally activated UC-MSC during immune suppression and opened an opportunity to explore new pathways involved in immunity control by UC-MSC. We propose that identified immunomodulatory molecules and pathways could potentially be translated into clinical settings in order to improve UC-MSC-therapy quality and efficacy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.