Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19: a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Funder: laura and john arnold foundationBACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX ). METHODS: In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. RESULTS: A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care

The global retinoblastoma outcome study : a prospective, cluster-based analysis of 4064 patients from 149 countries

DATA SHARING : The study data will become available online once all analyses are complete.BACKGROUND : Retinoblastoma is the most common intraocular cancer worldwide. There is some evidence to suggest that major differences exist in treatment outcomes for children with retinoblastoma from different regions, but these differences have not been assessed on a global scale. We aimed to report 3-year outcomes for children with retinoblastoma globally and to investigate factors associated with survival. METHODS : We did a prospective cluster-based analysis of treatment-naive patients with retinoblastoma who were diagnosed between Jan 1, 2017, and Dec 31, 2017, then treated and followed up for 3 years. Patients were recruited from 260 specialised treatment centres worldwide. Data were obtained from participating centres on primary and additional treatments, duration of follow-up, metastasis, eye globe salvage, and survival outcome. We analysed time to death and time to enucleation with Cox regression models. FINDINGS : The cohort included 4064 children from 149 countries. The median age at diagnosis was 23·2 months (IQR 11·0–36·5). Extraocular tumour spread (cT4 of the cTNMH classification) at diagnosis was reported in five (0·8%) of 636 children from high-income countries, 55 (5·4%) of 1027 children from upper-middle-income countries, 342 (19·7%) of 1738 children from lower-middle-income countries, and 196 (42·9%) of 457 children from low-income countries. Enucleation surgery was available for all children and intravenous chemotherapy was available for 4014 (98·8%) of 4064 children. The 3-year survival rate was 99·5% (95% CI 98·8–100·0) for children from high-income countries, 91·2% (89·5–93·0) for children from upper-middle-income countries, 80·3% (78·3–82·3) for children from lower-middle-income countries, and 57·3% (52·1-63·0) for children from low-income countries. On analysis, independent factors for worse survival were residence in low-income countries compared to high-income countries (hazard ratio 16·67; 95% CI 4·76–50·00), cT4 advanced tumour compared to cT1 (8·98; 4·44–18·18), and older age at diagnosis in children up to 3 years (1·38 per year; 1·23–1·56). For children aged 3–7 years, the mortality risk decreased slightly (p=0·0104 for the change in slope). INTERPRETATION : This study, estimated to include approximately half of all new retinoblastoma cases worldwide in 2017, shows profound inequity in survival of children depending on the national income level of their country of residence. In high-income countries, death from retinoblastoma is rare, whereas in low-income countries estimated 3-year survival is just over 50%. Although essential treatments are available in nearly all countries, early diagnosis and treatment in low-income countries are key to improving survival outcomes.The Queen Elizabeth Diamond Jubilee Trust and the Wellcome Trust.https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/homeam2023Paediatrics and Child Healt

Additional file 2 of Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19: a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Additional file 2. Email invitation

Additional file 7 of Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19: a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Additional file 7. Sensitivity analyses: various meta-analytic approaches

Additional file 1 of Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19: a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Additional file 1. Search strategy

Additional file 5 of Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19: a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Additional file 5. Risk of bias

Benchmarking plant diversity of Palaearctic grasslands and other open habitats

Abstract Aims: Understanding fine-grain diversity patterns across large spatial extents is fundamental for macroecological research and biodiversity conservation. Using the GrassPlot database, we provide benchmarks of fine-grain richness values of Palaearctic open habitats for vascular plants, bryophytes, lichens and complete vegetation (i.e., the sum of the former three groups). Location: Palaearctic biogeographic realm. Methods: We used 126,524 plots of eight standard grain sizes from the GrassPlot database: 0.0001, 0.001, 0.01, 0.1, 1, 10, 100 and 1,000 m² and calculated the mean richness and standard deviations, as well as maximum, minimum, median, and first and third quartiles for each combination of grain size, taxonomic group, biome, region, vegetation type and phytosociological class. Results: Patterns of plant diversity in vegetation types and biomes differ across grain sizes and taxonomic groups. Overall, secondary (mostly semi-natural) grasslands and natural grasslands are the richest vegetation type. The open-access file ”GrassPlot Diversity Benchmarks” and the web tool “GrassPlot Diversity Explorer” are now available online (https://edgg.org/databases/GrasslandDiversityExplorer) and provide more insights into species richness patterns in the Palaearctic open habitats. Conclusions: The GrassPlot Diversity Benchmarks provide high-quality data on species richness in open habitat types across the Palaearctic. These benchmark data can be used in vegetation ecology, macroecology, biodiversity conservation and data quality checking. While the amount of data in the underlying GrassPlot database and their spatial coverage are smaller than in other extensive vegetation-plot databases, species recordings in GrassPlot are on average more complete, making it a valuable complementary data source in macroecology