Premium
Guidance for the procurement of COVID‐19 convalescent plasma: differences between high‐ and low‐middle‐income countries
Author(s) -
Bloch Evan M.,
Goel Ruchika,
Wendel Silvano,
Burnouf Thierry,
AlRiyami Arwa Z.,
Ang Ai Leen,
DeAngelis Vincenzo,
Dumont Larry J.,
Land Kevin,
Lee Cheukkwong,
Oreh Adaeze,
Patidar Gopal,
Spitalnik Steven L.,
Vermeulen Marion,
Hindawi Salwa,
Van den Berg Karin,
Tiberghien Pierre,
Vrielink Hans,
Young Pampee,
Devine Dana,
So – Osman Cynthia
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
vox sanguinis
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.68
H-Index - 83
eISSN - 1423-0410
pISSN - 0042-9007
DOI - 10.1111/vox.12970
Subject(s) - covid-19 , convalescent plasma , virology , procurement , low and middle income countries , medicine , coronavirus infections , business , developing country , economic growth , economics , outbreak , infectious disease (medical specialty) , disease , marketing
Background and objectives COVID‐19 convalescent plasma (CCP) has been used, predominantly in high‐income countries (HICs) to treat COVID‐19; available data suggest the safety and efficacy of use. We sought to develop guidance for procurement and use of CCP, particularly in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs) for which data are lacking. Materials and methods A multidisciplinary, geographically representative group of individuals with expertise spanning transfusion medicine, infectious diseases and haematology was tasked with the development of a guidance document for CCP, drawing on expert opinion, survey of group members and review of available evidence. Three subgroups (i.e. donor, product and patient) were established based on self‐identified expertise and interest. Here, the donor and product‐related challenges are summarized and contrasted between HICs and LMICs with a view to guide related practices. Results The challenges to advance CCP therapy are different between HICs and LMICs. Early challenges in HICs related to recruitment and qualification of sufficient donors to meet the growing demand. Antibody testing also posed a specific obstacle given lack of standardization, variable performance of the assays in use and uncertain interpretation of results. In LMICs, an extant transfusion deficit, suboptimal models of donor recruitment (e.g. reliance on replacement and paid donors), limited laboratory capacity for pre‐donation qualification and operational considerations could impede wide adoption. Conclusion There has been wide‐scale adoption of CCP in many HICs, which could increase if clinical trials show efficacy of use. By contrast, LMICs, having received little attention, require locally applicable strategies for adoption of CCP.