MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118278606 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2031893

Convalescent Plasma Antibody Levels and the Risk of Death from Covid-19

2021· article· en· W3118278606 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Michael J. Joyner, Rickey E. Carter, Jonathon W. Senefeld, Stephen A. Klassen, John R. Mills, Patrick W. Johnson, Elitza S. Theel, Chad C. Wiggins, Katelyn A. Bruno, Allan M. Klompas, Elizabeth R. Lesser, Katie L. Kunze, Matthew A. Sexton, Juan C. Diaz Soto, Sarah E. Baker, John R.A. Shepherd, Noud van Helmond, Nicole Verdun, Peter Marks, Camille M. van Buskirk, Jeffrey L. Winters, James R. Stubbs, Robert F. Rea, David O. Hodge, Vitaly Herasevich, Emily R. Whelan, Andrew J. Clayburn, Kathryn F. Larson, Juan G. Ripoll, Kylie J. Andersen, Matthew Buras, Matthew N.P. Vogt, Joshua J. Dennis, Riley J. Regimbal, Philippe R. Bauer, Janis E. Blair, Nigel Paneth, DeLisa Fairweather, R. Scott Wright, Arturo Casadevall

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesMayo ClinicNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBiomedical Advanced Research and Development AuthorityNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteTakeda OncologyNational Institute on AgingUnitedHealth Group
KeywordsConvalescent plasmaCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)VirologyAntibody2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)MedicineImmunologyInternal medicineOutbreakDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) under the presumption that such plasma contains potentially therapeutic antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that can be passively transferred to the plasma recipient. Whether convalescent plasma with high antibody levels rather than low antibody levels is associated with a lower risk of death is unknown. METHODS: In a retrospective study based on a U.S. national registry, we determined the anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels in convalescent plasma used to treat hospitalized adults with Covid-19. The primary outcome was death within 30 days after plasma transfusion. Patients who were enrolled through July 4, 2020, and for whom data on anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels in plasma transfusions and on 30-day mortality were available were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Of the 3082 patients included in this analysis, death within 30 days after plasma transfusion occurred in 115 of 515 patients (22.3%) in the high-titer group, 549 of 2006 patients (27.4%) in the medium-titer group, and 166 of 561 patients (29.6%) in the low-titer group. The association of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels with the risk of death from Covid-19 was moderated by mechanical ventilation status. A lower risk of death within 30 days in the high-titer group than in the low-titer group was observed among patients who had not received mechanical ventilation before transfusion (relative risk, 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48 to 0.91), and no effect on the risk of death was observed among patients who had received mechanical ventilation (relative risk, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized with Covid-19 who were not receiving mechanical ventilation, transfusion of plasma with higher anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels was associated with a lower risk of death than transfusion of plasma with lower antibody levels. (Funded by the Department of Health and Human Services and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04338360.).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations553
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207