BACKGROUND. Convalescent plasma is the only antibody-based therapy currently available for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It has robust historical precedence and sound biological plausibility. Although promising, convalescent plasma has not yet been shown to be safe as a treatment for COVID-19. METHODS. Thus, we analyzed key safety metrics after transfusion of ABO-compatible human COVID-19 convalescent plasma in 5000 hospitalized adults with severe or life-threatening COVID-19, with 66% in the intensive care unit, as part of the US FDA expanded access program for COVID-19 convalescent plasma. RESULTS. The incidence of all serious adverse events (SAEs), including mortality rate (0.3%), in the first 4 hours after transfusion was <1%. Of the 36 reported SAEs, there were 25 reported incidences of related SAEs, including mortality (n = 4), transfusion-associated circulatory overload (n = 7), transfusion-related acute lung injury (n = 11), and severe allergic transfusion reactions (n = 3). However, only 2 of 36 SAEs were judged as definitely related to the convalescent plasma transfusion by the treating physician. The 7-day mortality rate was 14.9%. CONCLUSION. Given the deadly nature of COVID-19 and the large population of critically ill patients included in these analyses, the mortality rate does not appear excessive. These early indicators suggest that transfusion of convalescent plasma is safe in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04338360. FUNDING. Mayo Clinic, Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (75A50120C00096), National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1TR002377), National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (5R35HL139854 and R01 HL059842), National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (5T32DK07352), Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (PDF-532926-2019), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (R21 AI145356, R21 AI152318, and AI152078), Schwab Charitable Fund, United Health Group, National Basketball Association, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, and Octapharma USA Inc.

Objectives: Sarcopenia is associated with a poor prognosis in the ICU. The purpose of this study was to describe a simple sarcopenia index using routinely available renal biomarkers and evaluate its association with muscle mass and patient outcomes. Design: A retrospective cohort study. Setting: A tertiary-care medical center. Patients: High-risk adult ICU patients from October 2008 to December 2010. Interventions: The gold standard for muscle mass was quantified with the paraspinal muscle surface area at the L4 vertebrae in the subset of individuals with an abdominal CT scan. Using Pearson’s correlation coefficient, serum creatinine-to-serum cystatin C ratio was found to be the best performer in the estimation of muscle mass. The relationship between sarcopenia index and hospital and 90-day mortality, and the length of mechanical ventilation was evaluated. Measurements and Main Results: Out of 226 enrolled patients, 123 (54%) were female, and 198 (87%) were white. Median (interquartile range) age, body mass index, and body surface area were 68 (57–77) years, 28 (24–34) kg/m², and 1.9 (1.7–2.2) m², respectively. The mean (± sd) Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III was 70 (± 22). ICU, hospital, and 90-day mortality rates were 5%, 12%, and 20%, respectively. The correlation (r) between sarcopenia index and muscle mass was 0.62 and coefficient of determination (r ²) was 0.27 (p < 0.0001). After adjustment for Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III, body surface area, and age, sarcopenia index was independently predictive of both hospital (p = 0.001) and 90-day mortality (p < 0.0001). Among the 131 patients on mechanical ventilator, the duration of mechanical ventilation was significantly lower on those with higher sarcopenia index (–1 d for each 10 unit of sarcopenia index [95% CI, –1.4 to –0.2; p = 0.006]). Conclusions: The sarcopenia index is a fair measure for muscle mass estimation among ICU patients and can modestly predict hospital and 90-day mortality among patients who do not have acute kidney injury at the time of measurement.

Importance: Passive antibody transfer is a longstanding treatment strategy for infectious diseases that involve the respiratory system. In this context, human convalescent plasma has been used to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but the efficacy remains uncertain. Objective: To explore potential signals of efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma. Design: Open-label, Expanded Access Program (EAP) for the treatment of COVID-19 patients with human convalescent plasma. Setting: Multicenter, including 2,807 acute care facilities in the US and territories. Participants: Adult participants enrolled and transfused under the purview of the US Convalescent Plasma EAP program between April 4 and July 4, 2020 who were hospitalized with (or at risk of) severe or life threatening acute COVID-19 respiratory syndrome. Intervention: Transfusion of at least one unit of human COVID-19 convalescent plasma using standard transfusion guidelines at any time during hospitalization. Convalescent plasma was donated by recently-recovered COVID-19 survivors, and the antibody levels in the units collected were unknown at the time of transfusion. Main Outcomes and Measures: Seven and thirty-day mortality. Results: The 35,322 transfused patients had heterogeneous demographic and clinical characteristics. This cohort included a high proportion of critically-ill patients, with 52.3% in the intensive care unit (ICU) and 27.5% receiving mechanical ventilation at the time of plasma transfusion. The seven-day mortality rate was 8.7% [95% CI 8.3%-9.2%] in patients transfused within 3 days of COVID-19 diagnosis but 11.9% [11.4%-12.2%] in patients transfused 4 or more days after diagnosis (p<0.001). Similar findings were observed in 30-day mortality (21.6% vs. 26.7%, p18.45 S/Co), seven-day mortality was 8.9% (6.8%, 11.7%); for recipients of medium IgG plasma (4.62 to 18.45 S/Co) mortality was 11.6% (10.3%, 13.1%); and for recipients of low IgG plasma (<4.62 S/Co) mortality was 13.7% (11.1%, 16.8%) (p=0.048). This unadjusted dose-response relationship with IgG was also observed in thirty-day mortality (p=0.021). The pooled relative risk of mortality among patients transfused with high antibody level plasma units was 0.65 [0.47-0.92] for 7 days and 0.77 [0.63-0.94] for 30 days compared to low antibody level plasma units. Conclusions and Relevance: The relationships between reduced mortality and both earlier time to transfusion and higher antibody levels provide signatures of efficacy for convalescent plasma in the treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. This information may be informative for the treatment of COVID-19 and design of randomized clinical trials involving convalescent plasma. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04338360 Key Points: Question: Does transfusion of human convalescent plasma reduce mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients? Findings: Transfusion of convalescent plasma with higher antibody levels to hospitalized COVID-19 patients significantly reduced mortality compared to transfusions with low antibody levels. Transfusions within three days of COVID-19 diagnosis yielded greater reductions in mortality. Meaning: Embedded in an Expanded Access Program providing access to COVID-19 convalescent plasma and designed to assess its safety, several signals consistent with efficacy of convalescent plasma in the treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients emerged.