The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Effect of Convalescent Plasma Therapy on Time to Clinical Improvement in Patients With Severe and Life-threatening COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Open accessAbstract
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.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Wiersinga, W. J., Rhodes, A., Cheng, A. C., Peacock, S. J., & Prescott, H. C. (2020) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2020.12839 · Cited by 4,609
Mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2 entry into cells
Jackson, C. B., Farzan, M., Chen, B., & Choe, H. (2022) · Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology · doi:10.1038/s41580-021-00418-x · Cited by 3,022
REGN-COV2, a Neutralizing Antibody Cocktail, in Outpatients with Covid-19
Weinreich, D. M., Sivapalasingam, S., Norton, T., Ali, S., Gao, H., Bhore, R., Musser, B. J., Soo, Y., Rofail, D., Im, J., et al. (2021) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2035002 · Cited by 1,642
SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibody LY-CoV555 in Outpatients with Covid-19
Chen, P., Nirula, A., Heller, B., Gottlieb, R. L., Boscia, J., Morris, J., Huhn, G., Cardona, J., Mocherla, B., Stosor, V., et al. (2021) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2029849 · Cited by 1,282
Aging in COVID-19: Vulnerability, immunity and intervention
Chen, Y., Klein, S. L., Garibaldi, B. T., Li, H., Wu, C., Osevala, N. M., Li, T., Margolick, J. B., Pawelec, G., & Leng, S. X. (2021) · Ageing Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.arr.2020.101205 · Cited by 1,007
Metadata
- Authors
- Li, L., Zhang, W., Hu, Y., Tong, X., Zheng, S., Yang, J., Kong, Y., Ren, L., Wei, Q., Mei, H., Hu, C., Tao, C., Yang, R., Wang, J., Yu, Y., Guo, Y., Wu, X., Xu, Z., Zeng, L., Xiong, N., Chen, L., Wang, J., Man, N., Liu, Y., Xu, H., Deng, E., Zhang, X., Li, C., Wang, C., Su, S., Zhang, L., Wang, J., Wu, Y., & Liu, Z.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2020-08-04
- Volume
- 324
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 460
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W3032394272
- Cited by
- 1,206
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 34.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effect of Convalescent Plasma Therapy on Time to Clinical Improvement in Patients With Severe and Life-threatening COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2020.10044
- The paper
- Li, L., Zhang, W., Hu, Y., Tong, X., Zheng, S., Yang, J., Kong, Y., Ren, L., Wei, Q., Mei, H., Hu, C., Tao, C., Yang, R., Wang, J., Yu, Y., Guo, Y., Wu, X., Xu, Z., Zeng, L., . . . Liu, Z. (2020). Effect of Convalescent Plasma Therapy on Time to Clinical Improvement in Patients With Severe and Life-threatening COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.10044
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.