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and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX).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 Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung–Knapp–Sidik–Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. Results A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients).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 The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis.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.

BCL-2 inhibition has been shown to be effective in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in combination with hypomethylating agents or low-dose cytarabine. However, resistance and relapse represent major clinical challenges. Thus, there is an unmet need to overcome resistance to current venetoclax-based strategies. We performed high-throughput drug screening to identify effective combination partners for venetoclax in AML. Overall, 64 anti-leukemic drugs were screened in 31 primary high-risk AML samples with or without venetoclax. Gilteritinib exhibited highest synergy with venetoclax in FLT3 wildtype AML. The combination of gilteritinib and venetoclax increased apoptosis, reduced viability, and was active in venetoclax-azacitidine resistant cell lines and primary patient samples. Proteomics revealed increased FLT3 wildtype signaling in specimens with low in-vitro response to the currently used venetoclax-azacitidine combination. Mechanistically, venetoclax with gilteritinib decreased phosphorylation of ERK and GSK3B via combined AXL and FLT3 inhibition with subsequent suppression of the antiapoptotic protein MCL-1. MCL-1 downregulation was associated with increased MCL-1 phosphorylation of serine 159, decreased phosphorylation of threonine 161 and proteasomal degradation. Gilteritinib and venetoclax were active in a FLT3 wildtype AML PDX model with TP53 mutation and reduced leukemic burden in four FLT3 wildtype AML patients receiving venetoclax-gilteritinib off-label after developing refractory disease under venetoclax-azacitidine. In summary, our results suggest that combined inhibition of FLT3/AXL potentiates venetoclax response in FLT3-wildtype AML by inducing MCL-1 degradation. Thus, the venetoclax-gilteritinib combination merits testing as potentially active regimen in high-risk AML patients with FLT3 wildtype.