证明 COVID-19 新陈代谢血浆功效的证据

3区 医学 Q2 Medicine
Stephen A Klassen, Jonathon W Senefeld
{"title":"证明 COVID-19 新陈代谢血浆功效的证据","authors":"Stephen A Klassen, Jonathon W Senefeld","doi":"10.1007/82_2024_280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>During the global health emergency caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), evidence relating to the efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy-evidence critically needed for both public policy and clinical practice-came from multiple levels of the epistemic hierarchy. The challenges of conducting clinical research during a pandemic, combined with the biological complexities of convalescent plasma treatment, required the use of observational data to fully assess the impact of convalescent plasma therapy on COVID symptomatology, hospitalization rates, and mortality rates. Observational studies showing the mortality benefits of convalescent plasma emerged early during the COVID-19 pandemic from multiple continents and were substantiated by real-time pragmatic meta-analyses. Although many randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were initiated at the onset of the pandemic and were designed to provide high-quality evidence, the relative inflexibility in the design of clinical trials meant that findings generally lagged behind other forms of emerging information and ultimately provided inconsistent results on the efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma. In the pandemic framework, it is necessary to emphasize more flexible analytic strategies in clinical trials, including secondary, subgroup, and exploratory analyses. We conclude that in totality, observational studies and clinical trials taken together provide strong evidence of a mortality benefit conferred by COVID-19 convalescent plasma, while acknowledging that some randomized clinical trials examined suboptimal uses of convalescent plasma.</p>","PeriodicalId":11102,"journal":{"name":"Current topics in microbiology and immunology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evidence for the Efficacy of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma.\",\"authors\":\"Stephen A Klassen, Jonathon W Senefeld\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/82_2024_280\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>During the global health emergency caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), evidence relating to the efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy-evidence critically needed for both public policy and clinical practice-came from multiple levels of the epistemic hierarchy. The challenges of conducting clinical research during a pandemic, combined with the biological complexities of convalescent plasma treatment, required the use of observational data to fully assess the impact of convalescent plasma therapy on COVID symptomatology, hospitalization rates, and mortality rates. Observational studies showing the mortality benefits of convalescent plasma emerged early during the COVID-19 pandemic from multiple continents and were substantiated by real-time pragmatic meta-analyses. Although many randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were initiated at the onset of the pandemic and were designed to provide high-quality evidence, the relative inflexibility in the design of clinical trials meant that findings generally lagged behind other forms of emerging information and ultimately provided inconsistent results on the efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma. In the pandemic framework, it is necessary to emphasize more flexible analytic strategies in clinical trials, including secondary, subgroup, and exploratory analyses. We conclude that in totality, observational studies and clinical trials taken together provide strong evidence of a mortality benefit conferred by COVID-19 convalescent plasma, while acknowledging that some randomized clinical trials examined suboptimal uses of convalescent plasma.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11102,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current topics in microbiology and immunology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current topics in microbiology and immunology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/82_2024_280\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current topics in microbiology and immunology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/82_2024_280","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在由 2019 年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)引发的全球卫生紧急事件期间,有关疗养血浆疗法疗效的证据--公共政策和临床实践所急需的证据--来自认识论层次结构的多个层面。在大流行期间开展临床研究所面临的挑战,加上疗养血浆治疗在生物学上的复杂性,要求使用观察数据来全面评估疗养血浆治疗对 COVID 症状、住院率和死亡率的影响。在 COVID-19 大流行期间,各大洲很早就出现了显示疗养血浆对死亡率有益的观察性研究,并通过实时实用荟萃分析得到证实。虽然许多随机临床试验(RCT)是在大流行开始时启动的,旨在提供高质量的证据,但临床试验设计相对缺乏灵活性,这意味着研究结果通常落后于其他形式的新兴信息,最终导致 COVID-19 疗养血浆疗效的结果不一致。在大流行框架下,有必要在临床试验中强调更灵活的分析策略,包括二次分析、亚组分析和探索性分析。我们的结论是,总体而言,观察性研究和临床试验共同提供了强有力的证据,证明 COVID-19 新陈代谢血浆可降低死亡率,同时也承认一些随机临床试验对新陈代谢血浆的次优用途进行了研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evidence for the Efficacy of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma.

During the global health emergency caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), evidence relating to the efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy-evidence critically needed for both public policy and clinical practice-came from multiple levels of the epistemic hierarchy. The challenges of conducting clinical research during a pandemic, combined with the biological complexities of convalescent plasma treatment, required the use of observational data to fully assess the impact of convalescent plasma therapy on COVID symptomatology, hospitalization rates, and mortality rates. Observational studies showing the mortality benefits of convalescent plasma emerged early during the COVID-19 pandemic from multiple continents and were substantiated by real-time pragmatic meta-analyses. Although many randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were initiated at the onset of the pandemic and were designed to provide high-quality evidence, the relative inflexibility in the design of clinical trials meant that findings generally lagged behind other forms of emerging information and ultimately provided inconsistent results on the efficacy of COVID-19 convalescent plasma. In the pandemic framework, it is necessary to emphasize more flexible analytic strategies in clinical trials, including secondary, subgroup, and exploratory analyses. We conclude that in totality, observational studies and clinical trials taken together provide strong evidence of a mortality benefit conferred by COVID-19 convalescent plasma, while acknowledging that some randomized clinical trials examined suboptimal uses of convalescent plasma.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The review series Current Topics in Microbiology and Immunology provides a synthesis of the latest research findings in the areas of molecular immunology, bacteriology and virology. Each timely volume contains a wealth of information on the featured subject. This review series is designed to provide access to up-to-date, often previously unpublished information.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信