Background Convalescent plasma is frequently administered to patients with Covid-19 and has been reported, largely on the basis of observational data, to improve clinical outcomes. Minimal data are available from adequately powered randomized, controlled trials. Methods We randomly assigned hospitalized adult patients with severe Covid-19 pneumonia in a 2:1 ratio to receive convalescent plasma or placebo. The primary outcome was the patient’s clinical status 30 days after the intervention, as measured on a six-point ordinal scale ranging from total recovery to death. Results A total of 228 patients were assigned to receive convalescent plasma and 105 to receive placebo. The median time from the onset of symptoms to enrollment in the trial was 8 days (interquartile range, 5 to 10), and hypoxemia was the most frequent severity criterion for enrollment. The infused convalescent plasma had a median titer of 1:3200 of total SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (interquartile range, 1:800 to 1:3200]. No patients were lost to follow-up. At day 30 day, no significant difference was noted between the convalescent plasma group and the placebo group in the distribution of clinical outcomes according to the ordinal scale (odds ratio, 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 1.35; P=0.46). Overall mortality was 10.96% in the convalescent plasma group and 11.43% in the placebo group, for a risk difference of −0.46 percentage points (95% CI, −7.8 to 6.8). Total SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers tended to be higher in the convalescent plasma group at day 2 after the intervention. Adverse events and serious adverse events were similar in the two groups. Conclusions No significant differences were observed in clinical status or overall mortality between patients treated with convalescent plasma and those who received placebo. (PlasmAr ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04383535 .)
The results from two methodologically identical double-blind studies indicate that telavancin is noninferior to vancomycin based on clinical response in the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia due to Gram-positive pathogens.
SummaryBackgroundSince the 1918 influenza pandemic, non-randomised studies and small clinical trials have suggested that convalescent plasma or anti-influenza hyperimmune intravenous immunoglobulin (hIVIG) might have clinical benefit for patients with influenza infection, but definitive data do not exist. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of hIVIG in a randomised controlled trial.MethodsThis randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was planned for 45 hospitals in Argentina, Australia, Denmark, Greece, Mexico, Spain, Thailand, UK, and the USA over five influenza seasons from 2013–14 to 2017–18. Adults (≥18 years of age) were admitted for hospital treatment with laboratory-confirmed influenza A or B infection and were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive standard care plus either a single 500-mL infusion of high-titre hIVIG (0·25 g/kg bodyweight, 24·75 g maximum; hIVIG group) or saline placebo (placebo group). Eligible patients had a National Early Warning score of 2 points or greater at the time of screening and their symptoms began no more than 7 days before randomisation. Pregnant and breastfeeding women were excluded, as well as any patients for whom the treatment would present a health risk. Separate randomisation schedules were generated for each participating clinical site using permuted block randomisation. Treatment assignments were obtained using a web-based application by the site pharmacist who then masked the solution for infusion. Patients and investigators were masked to study treatment. The primary endpoint was a six-category ordinal outcome of clinical status at day 7, ranging in severity from death to resumption of normal activities after discharge. The choice of day 7 was based on haemagglutination inhibition titres from a pilot study. It was analysed with a proportional odds model, using all six categories to estimate a common odds ratio (OR). An OR greater than 1 indicated that, for a given category, patients in the hIVIG group were more likely to be in a better category than those in the placebo group. Prespecified primary analyses for safety and efficacy were based on patients who received an infusion and for whom eligibility could be confirmed. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02287467.Findings313 patients were enrolled in 34 sites between Dec 11, 2014, and May 28, 2018. We also used data from 16 patients enrolled at seven of the 34 sites during the pilot study between Jan 15, 2014, and April 10, 2014. 168 patients were randomly assigned to the hIVIG group and 161 to the placebo group. 21 patients were excluded (12 from the hIVIG group and 9 from the placebo group) because they did not receive an infusion or their eligibility could not be confirmed. Thus, 308 were included in the primary analysis. hIVIG treatment produced a robust rise in haemagglutination inhibition titres against influenza A and smaller rises in influenza B titres. Based on the proportional odds model, the OR on day 7 was 1·25 (95% CI 0·79–1·97; p=0·33). In subgroup analyses for the pr...
Methicillin (meticillin)-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) strains producing large amounts of type A -lactamase (Bla) have been associated with cefazolin failures, but the frequency and impact of these strains have not been well studied. Here we examined 98 MSSA clinical isolates and found that 26% produced type A Bla, 15% type B, 46% type C, and none type D and that 13% lacked blaZ. The cefazolin MIC 90 was 2 g/ml for a standard inoculum and 32 g/ml for a high inoculum, with 19% of isolates displaying a pronounced inoculum effect (MICs of >16 g/ml with 10 7 CFU/ml) (9 type A and 10 type C Bla producers). At the high inoculum, type A producers displayed higher cefazolin MICs than type B or C producers, while type B and C producers displayed higher cefamandole MICs. Among isolates from hemodialysis patients with MSSA bacteremia, three from the six patients who experienced cefazolin failure showed a cefazolin inoculum effect, while none from the six patients successfully treated with cefazolin showed an inoculum effect, suggesting an association between these strains and cefazolin failure (P ؍ 0.09 by Fisher's exact test). In summary, 19% of MSSA clinical isolates showed a pronounced inoculum effect with cefazolin, a phenomenon that could explain the cases of cefazolin failure previously reported for hemodialysis patients with MSSA bacteremia. These results suggest that for serious MSSA infections, the presence of a significant inoculum effect with cefazolin could be associated with clinical failure in patients treated with this cephalosporin, particularly when it is used at low doses.Even though the rate of methicillin (meticillin) resistance in Staphylococcus aureus is rising worldwide, a recent international prospective study found that 85.2% of S. aureus strains producing native valve endocarditis were susceptible to methicillin (methicillin-susceptible S. aureus [MSSA]) (13). Cephalosporins (e.g., cefazolin) are recommended for patients with MSSA endocarditis who have non-immediate-type hypersensitivity to penicillin (1, 29), and in addition, patients are often switched to cefazolin because of a more favorable dosing schedule.
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.