Logo image
Back
Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

Peter W. Horby, Martin J. Landray, RECOVERY Collaborative Grp and Lindsay A Steele
The Lancet (British edition), v 397(10289), pp 2049-2059
29 May 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00897-7
PMID: 34000257
Featured in Collection :   UN Sustainable Development Goals @ Drexel
url
http://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140673621008977/pdfView
Published, Version of Record (VoR) Open
url
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00897-7View
Published, Version of Record (VoR) Open

Abstract

General & Internal Medicine Life Sciences & Biomedicine Medicine, General & Internal Science & Technology ESI Highly Cited Paper (Incites)
Background Many patients with COVID-19 have been treated with plasma containing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Methods This randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]) is assessing several possible treatments in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 177 NHS hospitals from across the UK. Eligible and consenting patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either usual care alone (usual care group) or usual care plus high-titre convalescent plasma (convalescent plasma group). The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936. Findings Between May 28, 2020, and Jan 15, 2021, 11558 (71%) of 16287 patients enrolled in RECOVERY were eligible to receive convalescent plasma and were assigned to either the convalescent plasma group or the usual care group. There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality between the two groups: 1399 (24%) of 5795 patients in the convalescent plasma group and 1408 (24%) of 5763 patients in the usual care group died within 28 days (rate ratio 1.00, 95% CI 0.93-1.07; p=0.95). The 28-day mortality rate ratio was similar in all prespecified subgroups of patients, including in those patients without detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at randomisation. Allocation to convalescent plasma had no significant effect on the proportion of patients discharged from hospital within 28 days (3832 [66%] patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 3822 [66%] patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0.99, 95% CI 0.94-1.03; p=0.57). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at randomisation, there was no significant difference in the proportion of patients meeting the composite endpoint of progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death (1568 [29%] of 5493 patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 1568 [29%] of 5448 patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0.99, 95% CI 0.93-1.05; p=0.79). Interpretation In patients hospitalised with COVID-19, high-titre convalescent plasma did not improve survival or other prespecified clinical outcomes. Copyright (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Metrics

9 Record Views
442 citations in Web of Science
395 citations in Scopus

Details

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This publication has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

#3 Good Health and Well-Being

InCites Highlights

Data related to this publication, from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool:

Highly Cited Paper 
Web of Science research areas
Medicine, General & Internal
Logo image