Xunliang Tong

Importance: Convalescent plasma is a potential therapeutic option for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but further data from randomized clinical trials are needed. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of convalescent plasma therapy for patients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Open-label, multicenter, randomized clinical trial performed in 7 medical centers in Wuhan, China, from February 14, 2020, to April 1, 2020, with final follow-up April 28, 2020. The trial included 103 participants with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 that was severe (respiratory distress and/or hypoxemia) or life-threatening (shock, organ failure, or requiring mechanical ventilation). The trial was terminated early after 103 of a planned 200 patients were enrolled. Intervention: Convalescent plasma in addition to standard treatment (n = 52) vs standard treatment alone (control) (n = 51), stratified by disease severity. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was time to clinical improvement within 28 days, defined as patient discharged alive or reduction of 2 points on a 6-point disease severity scale (ranging from 1 [discharge] to 6 [death]). Secondary outcomes included 28-day mortality, time to discharge, and the rate of viral polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results turned from positive at baseline to negative at up to 72 hours. Results: Of 103 patients who were randomized (median age, 70 years; 60 [58.3%] male), 101 (98.1%) completed the trial. Clinical improvement occurred within 28 days in 51.9% (27/52) of the convalescent plasma group vs 43.1% (22/51) in the control group (difference, 8.8% [95% CI, -10.4% to 28.0%]; hazard ratio [HR], 1.40 [95% CI, 0.79-2.49]; P = .26). Among those with severe disease, the primary outcome occurred in 91.3% (21/23) of the convalescent plasma group vs 68.2% (15/22) of the control group (HR, 2.15 [95% CI, 1.07-4.32]; P = .03); among those with life-threatening disease the primary outcome occurred in 20.7% (6/29) of the convalescent plasma group vs 24.1% (7/29) of the control group (HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.30-2.63]; P = .83) (P for interaction = .17). There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality (15.7% vs 24.0%; OR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.22-1.59]; P = .30) or time from randomization to discharge (51.0% vs 36.0% discharged by day 28; HR, 1.61 [95% CI, 0.88-2.95]; P = .12). Convalescent plasma treatment was associated with a negative conversion rate of viral PCR at 72 hours in 87.2% of the convalescent plasma group vs 37.5% of the control group (OR, 11.39 [95% CI, 3.91-33.18]; P < .001). Two patients in the convalescent plasma group experienced adverse events within hours after transfusion that improved with supportive care. Conclusion and Relevance: Among patients with severe or life-threatening COVID-19, convalescent plasma therapy added to standard treatment, compared with standard treatment alone, did not result in a statistically significant improvement in time to clinical improvement within 28 days. Interpretation is limited by early termination of the trial, which may have been underpowered to detect a clinically important difference. Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2000029757.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has become a worldwide pandemic since it emerged in December 2019. Previous studies have reported rapid antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in the first 2 to 3 weeks after symptom onset. Here, we retrospectively described the dynamic changes of serum immunoglobulin M (IgM) and IgG specifically against SARS-CoV-2 in later weeks (mainly 4-10 weeks) in 97 hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We observed that serum IgM and IgG, especially in patients with moderate-to-high levels, declined significantly between week 4 to 10 after illness onset. Notably, IgG levels in high percentage of patients (77.5%, 31 of 40) rapidly declined by half, from 212.5 (range, 163.7-420.3) to 96.3 (range, 75.0-133.4) AU/mL, within 1 to 2 weeks in the second month and then sustained at around 100 AU/mL until discharge from hospital. Significant reduction of IgM was also observed as SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid turned negative (P = .002). In the recovery stage, serum IgG declined significantly (early vs late recovery stage, n = 16, P = .003) with a median reduction of 50.0% (range, 3.7%-77.0%). Our results suggested that the decline of IgM may be an indicator of virus clearance and recovered patients may have a robust immunity against reinfection within at least 3 months after illness onset. Yet, the rapid reduction of IgG by half rises serious concerns on the robustness and sustainability of the humoral immune response in the period after discharge, which is crucial for immunity strategy and developing a vaccine.

Invasive fungal infections acquired in the hospital have progressively emerged as an important cause of life-threatening infection. In particular, airborne fungi in hospitals are considered critical pathogens of hospital-associated infections. To identify the causative airborne microorganisms, high-volume air samplers were utilized for collection, and species identification was performed using a culture-based method and DNA sequencing analysis with the Illumina MiSeq and HiSeq 2000 sequencing systems. Few bacteria were grown after cultivation in blood agar. However, using microbiome sequencing, the relative abundance of fungi, Archaea species, bacteria and viruses was determined. The distribution characteristics of fungi were investigated using heat map analysis of four departments, including the Respiratory Intensive Care Unit, Intensive Care Unit, Emergency Room and Outpatient Department. The prevalence of Aspergillus among fungi was the highest at the species level, approximately 17% to 61%, and the prevalence of Aspergillus fumigatus among Aspergillus species was from 34% to 50% in the four departments. Draft genomes of microorganisms isolated from the hospital environment were obtained by sequence analysis, indicating that investigation into the diversity of airborne fungi may provide reliable results for hospital infection control and surveillance.

BACKGROUND: The lack of effective treatments against the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has led to the exploratory use of convalescent plasma for treating COVID-19. Case reports and case series have shown encouraging results. This study investigated SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and epidemiological characteristics in convalescent plasma donors, to identify criteria for donor selection. METHODS: Recovered COVID-19 patients, aged 18-55 years, who had experienced no symptoms for more than 2 weeks, were recruited. Donor characteristics such as disease presentations were collected and SARS-CoV-2 N-specific IgM, IgG, and S-RBD-specific IgG levels were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). RESULTS: Whereas levels of N-specific IgM antibody declined after recovery, S-RBD-specific and N-specific IgG antibodies increased after 4 weeks from the onset of symptoms, with no significant correlation to age, sex, or ABO blood type. Donors with the disease presentation of fever exceeding 38.5°C or lasting longer than 3 days exhibited higher levels of S-RBD-specific IgG antibodies at the time of donation. Of the 49 convalescent plasma donors, 90% had an S-RBD-specific IgG titer of ≥1:160 and 78% had a titer of ≥1:640 at the time of plasma donation. Of the 30 convalescent plasma donors, who had donated plasma later than 28 days after the onset of symptoms and had a disease presentation of fever lasting longer than 3 days or a body temperature exceeding 38.5°C, 100% had an S-RBD-specific IgG titer of ≥1:160 and 93% had a titer of ≥1:640. CONCLUSION: This study indicates that the S-RBD-specific IgG antibody reaches higher levels after 4 weeks from the onset of COVID-19 symptoms. We recommend the following selection criteria for optimal donation of COVID-19 convalescent plasma: 28 days after the onset of symptoms and with a disease presentation of fever lasting longer than 3 days or a body temperature exceeding 38.5°C. Selection based on these criteria can ensure a high likelihood of achieving sufficiently high S-RBD-specific IgG titers.