File photo of a doctor holding a bag of blood plasma donated by a COVID-19 survivor. (AP Photo / Juan Karita)
Delhi and Maharashtra have established plasma banks in the state and, alongside these states, the therapy has also been used in moderately ill patients in Haryana.
- News18.com
- Last update: September 10, 2020 9:58 PM IST
- FOLLOW US:
Nearly five months after trials began studying convalescent plasma (CP) therapy, a study funded by the Indian Council for Medical Research (ICMR) has shown that the treatment was not beneficial in reducing mortality in Covid patients. -19 or to prevent progression to serious disease. .
The results of the multicenter study, the preprint of which was published in Medrxiv, have fueled criticism against the push for CP therapy by private hospitals and some state governments.
Delhi and Maharashtra have established plasma banks in the state and, alongside these states, the therapy has also been used in moderately ill patients in Haryana. Doctors initially prescribed the therapy and approved it out of compassion.
However, since June, the therapy has been more prevalent and, due to its unauthorized use, has even led to black marketing.
As part of CP, a person who has recovered from Covid-19 donates their blood plasma, the light yellow liquid part of blood with no cellular components.
It is transfused into a moderately ill patient as the plasma contains antibodies. The ICMR study was carried out in 464 moderately ill patients. The volunteers were divided into two groups of 235 and 229 patients each. The intervention arm received PC while the control arm received the best standard of care. At the end of the randomized trial, the researchers didn’t find much difference in mortality between the two groups.
According to the study, 34 people (13.6%) died in the intervention arm and 31 people (14.6%) died in the control arm. Furthermore, there was no difference in outcome between patients who were receiving PC with detectable neutralizing antibodies and patients who were only receiving the best standard of care.
Experts said the study has provided clear evidence on the results of using plasma therapy and that the findings should be used to debunk some of the debate and discussion surrounding it.
“Since this trial has shown that plasma does not work, there is no point in spending our money, effort, infrastructure and technology on an intervention that has no value. We should move on to something that is more meaningful and is more beneficial to patients. This insistence and push for plasma banks and plasma as a panacea has created an aura and hype around the treatment, ”said Dr. SP Kalantri, Director of the Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Wardha.
Dr. Kalantri said he was satisfied with ICMR’s decision to present a study that criticized the therapy.
“This study has not only shown that the therapy did not meet clinical endpoints, but we also have little knowledge of the amount of neutralizing antibodies present at the start of therapy. Along with drugs and therapies, I think we also need to pay attention to having a dedicated team of doctors and nurses closely monitoring patients and their conditions, “she said.
Dr Anant Bhan, a Bhopal-based researcher on global health and bioethics, said the ICMR should study the data closely and express its position on the issue.
“Ideally, we should wait for the study to be peer-reviewed. But in the context of this paper, it would be prudent for the ICMR to examine the data closely and state its position on this therapy. The indiscriminate use and black marketing in and of themselves are unethical and have led people to believe that it is some kind of magic formula, “said Dr. Bhan.
“We have also seen in the case of the RECOVERY trials that enrollment in the HCQ trials stopped after they saw no benefits,” he added.
.
