Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, has spread globally, and no proven treatments are available. Convalescent plasma therapy has been used with varying degrees of success to treat severe microbial infections for >100 years. Patients (n = 25) with severe and/or life-threatening COVID-19 disease were enrolled at the Houston Methodist hospitals from March 28, 2020, to April 14, 2020. Patients were transfused with convalescent plasma, obtained from donors with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection who had recovered. The primary study outcome was safety, and the secondary outcome was clinical status at day 14 after transfusion. Clinical improvement was assessed on the basis of a modified World Health Organization six-point ordinal scale and laboratory parameters. Viral genome sequencing was performed on donor and recipient strains. At day 7 after transfusion with convalescent plasma, nine patients had at least a one-point improvement in clinical scale, and seven of those were discharged. By day 14 after transfusion, 19 (76%) patients had at least a one-point improvement in clinical status, and 11 were discharged. No adverse events as a result of plasma transfusion were observed. Whole genome sequencing data did not identify a strain genotype-disease severity correlation. The data indicate that administration of convalescent plasma is a safe treatment option for those with severe COVID-19 disease. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, has spread globally, and no proven treatments are available. Convalescent plasma therapy has been used with varying degrees of success to treat severe microbial infections for >100 years. Patients (n = 25) with severe and/or life-threatening COVID-19 disease were enrolled at the Houston Methodist hospitals from March 28, 2020, to April 14, 2020. Patients were transfused with convalescent plasma, obtained from donors with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection who had recovered. The primary study outcome was safety, and the secondary outcome was clinical status at day 14 after transfusion. Clinical improvement was assessed on the basis of a modified World Health Organization six-point ordinal scale and laboratory parameters. Viral genome sequencing was performed on donor and recipient strains. At day 7 after transfusion with convalescent plasma, nine patients had at least a one-point improvement in clinical scale, and seven of those were discharged. By day 14 after transfusion, 19 (76%) patients had at least a one-point improvement in clinical status, and 11 were discharged. No adverse events as a result of plasma transfusion were observed. Whole genome sequencing data did not identify a strain genotype-disease severity correlation. The data indicate that administration of convalescent plasma is a safe treatment option for those with severe COVID-19 disease. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has spread globally and caused massive loss of life and economic hardship. As of May 2, 2020, there were 3,494,671 confirmed cases and 246,475 deaths worldwide, and in the United States, there were 1,154,340 confirmed cases and 67,447 deaths (Johns Hopkins University, https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html, last accessed May 2, 2020). The disease is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a highly transmissible coronavirus first identified in Wuhan, China.1Huang C. Wang Y. Li X. Ren L. Zhao J. Hu Y. Zhang L. Fan G. Xu J. Gu X. Cheng Z. Yu T. Xia J. Wei Y. Wu W. Xie X. Yin W. Li H. Liu M. Xiao Y. Gao H. Guo L. Xie J. Wang G. Jiang R. Gao Z. Jin Q. Wang J. Cao B. Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China.Lancet. 2020; 395: 497-506Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (29360) Google Scholar, 2Li R. Pei S. Chen B. Song Y. Zhang T. Yang W. Shaman J. Substantial undocumented infection facilitates the rapid dissemination of novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2).Science. 2020; 368: 489-493Crossref PubMed Scopus (2078) Google Scholar, 3Wang C. Horby P.W. Hayden F.G. Gao G.F. A novel coronavirus outbreak of global health concern.Lancet. 2020; 395: 470-473Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (4464) Google Scholar SARS-CoV-2 continues to spread in many countries,4Caly L. Druce J. Roberts J. Bond K. Tran T. Kostecki R. Yoga Y. Naughton W. Taiaroa G. Seemann T. Schultz M.B. Howden B.P. Korman T.M. Lewin S.R. Williamson D.A. Catton M.G. Isolation and rapid sharing of the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) from the first patient diagnosed with COVID-19 in Australia.Med J Aust. 2020; 212: 459-462Crossref PubMed Scopus (220) Google Scholar, 5Ghosal S. Sengupta S. Majumder M. Sinha B. Linear regression analysis to predict the number of deaths in India due to SARS-CoV-2 at 6 weeks from day 0 (100 cases - March 14th 2020).Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2020; 14: 311-315Crossref PubMed Scopus (71) Google Scholar, 6Gudbjartsson D.F. Helgason A. Jonsson H. Magnusson O.T. Melsted P. Norddahl G.L. et al.Spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the Icelandic population.N Engl J Med. 2020; 382: 2302-2315Crossref PubMed Scopus (809) Google Scholar, 7Hodcroft E.B. Preliminary case report on the SARS-CoV-2 cluster in the UK, France, and Spain.Swiss Med Wkly. 2020; 150: w20212Google Scholar, 8Piva S. Filippini M. Turla F. Cattaneo S. Margola A. De Fulviis S. Nardiello I. Beretta A. Ferrari L. Trotta R. Erbici G. Foca E. Castelli F. Rasulo F. Lanspa M.J. Latronico N. Clinical presentation and initial management critically ill patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in Brescia, Italy.J Crit Care. 2020; 58: 29-33Crossref PubMed Scopus (96) Google Scholar and despite aggressive research, no proven therapies have been described. Treatment strategies for critically ill COVID-19 patients are lacking, with only limited evidence available for a battery of antiviral, antibiotic, and anti-inflammatory agents, and aggressive supportive therapy. Multiple clinical trials are ongoing, including the repurposing of remdesivir, an antiviral agent investigated to treat Ebola, and hydroxychloroquine, an antimalarial chloroquine derivative used to treat lupus and rheumatoid arthritis. There are early anti–COVID-19 efficacy data with remdesivir.9Grein J. Ohmagari N. Shin D. Diaz G. Asperges E. Castagna A. et al.Compassionate use of remdesivir for patients with severe Covid-19.N Engl J Med. 2020; 382: 2327-2336Crossref PubMed Scopus (1884) Google Scholar Preliminary data supporting the use of hydroxychloroquine, alone or in combination with azithromycin,10Gautret P. Lagier J.C. Parola P. Hoang V.T. Meddeb L. Mailhe M. Doudier B. Courjon J. Giordanengo V. Vieira V.E. Dupont H.T. Honore S. Colson P. Chabriere E. La Scola B. Rolain J.M. Brouqui P. Raoult D. Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial.Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2020; ([Epub ahead of print] doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.105949)Crossref PubMed Scopus (3497) Google Scholar have since been shown by larger controlled trials as misleading and potentially dangerous.11Magagnoli J. Narendran S. Pereira F. Cummings T. Hardin J.W. Sutton S.S. Ambati J. Outcomes of hydroxychloroquine usage in United States veterans hospitalized with Covid-19.medRxiv. 2020; ([Epub] doi: 10.1101/2020.04.16.20065920)PubMed Google Scholar New therapies are needed to improve outcomes for critically ill COVID-19 patients. In convalescent plasma therapy, blood plasma from a recovered patient is collected and transfused to a symptomatic patient. The transfer of convalescent plasma is an old concept, having been used since at least 1918 when it was employed to fight the Spanish flu pandemic.12Luke T.C. Kilbane E.M. Jackson J.L. Hoffman S.L. Meta-analysis: convalescent blood products for Spanish influenza pneumonia: a future H5N1 treatment?.Ann Intern Med. 2006; 145: 599-609Crossref PubMed Scopus (471) Google Scholar More recently, convalescent plasma was used with some reported success during the 2003 SARS pandemic,13Soo Y.O. Cheng Y. Wong R. Hui D.S. Lee C.K. Tsang K.K. Ng M.H. Chan P. Cheng G. Sung J.J. Retrospective comparison of convalescent plasma with continuing high-dose methylprednisolone treatment in SARS patients.Clin Microbiol Infect. 2004; 10: 676-678Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (304) Google Scholar,14Cheng Y. Wong R. Soo Y.O. Wong W.S. Lee C.K. Ng M.H. Chan P. Wong K.C. Leung C.B. Cheng G. Use of convalescent plasma therapy in SARS patients in Hong Kong.Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2005; 24: 44-46Crossref PubMed Scopus (703) Google Scholar the 2009 influenza H1N1 pandemic,15Hung I.F. To K.K. Lee C.K. Lee K.L. Chan K. Yan W.W. Liu R. Watt C.L. Chan W.M. Lai K.Y. Koo C.K. Buckley T. Chow F.L. Wong K.K. Chan H.S. Ching C.K. Tang B.S. Lau C.C. Li I.W. Liu S.H. Chan K.H. Lin C.K. Yuen K.Y. Convalescent plasma treatment reduced mortality in patients with severe pandemic influenza A (H1N1) 2009 virus infection.Clin Infect Dis. 2011; 52: 447-456Crossref PubMed Scopus (520) Google Scholar and the 2015 Ebola outbreak in Africa.16van Griensven J. Edwards T. de Lamballerie X. Semple M.G. Gallian P. Baize S. Horby P.W. Raoul H. Magassouba N. Antierens A. Lomas C. Faye O. Sall A.A. Fransen K. Buyze J. Ravinetto R. Tiberghien P. Claeys Y. De Crop M. Lynen L. Bah E.I. Smith P.G. Delamou A. De Weggheleire A. Haba N. Ebola-Tx Consortium: Evaluation of convalescent plasma for Ebola virus disease in Guinea.N Engl J Med. 2016; 374: 33-42Crossref PubMed Scopus (392) Google Scholar Several small observational studies published during the COVID-19 pandemic suggest convalescent plasma is part of an effective treatment strategy for patients with severe disease.17Duan K. Liu B. Li C. Zhang H. Yu T. Qu J. et al.Effectiveness of convalescent plasma therapy in severe COVID-19 patients.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020; 117: 9490-9496Crossref PubMed Scopus (1315) Google Scholar, 18Shen C. Wang Z. Zhao F. Yang Y. Li J. Yuan J. Wang F. Li D. Yang M. Xing L. Wei J. Xiao H. Yang Y. Qu J. Qing L. Chen L. Xu Z. Peng L. Li Y. Zheng H. Chen F. Huang K. Jiang Y. Liu D. Zhang Z. Liu Y. Liu L. Treatment of 5 critically ill patients with COVID-19 with convalescent plasma.JAMA. 2020; 323: 1582-1589Crossref PubMed Scopus (1623) Google Scholar, 19Ye M. Fu D. Ren Y. Wang F. Wang D. Zhang F. Xia X. Lv T. Treatment with convalescent plasma for COVID-19 patients in Wuhan, China.J Med Virol. 2020; ([Epub ahead of print] doi: 10.1002/jmv.25882)Crossref Scopus (276) Google Scholar, 20Zhang B. Liu S. Tan T. Huang W. Dong Y. Chen L. Chen Q. Zhang L. Zhong Q. Zhang X. Zou Y. Zhang S. Treatment with convalescent plasma for critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.Chest. 2020; 158: e9-e13Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (284) Google Scholar The first report describing administration of convalescent plasma to five patients early in the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan was recently published.18Shen C. Wang Z. Zhao F. Yang Y. Li J. Yuan J. Wang F. Li D. Yang M. Xing L. Wei J. Xiao H. Yang Y. Qu J. Qing L. Chen L. Xu Z. Peng L. Li Y. Zheng H. Chen F. Huang K. Jiang Y. Liu D. Zhang Z. Liu Y. Liu L. Treatment of 5 critically ill patients with COVID-19 with convalescent plasma.JAMA. 2020; 323: 1582-1589Crossref PubMed Scopus (1623) Google Scholar Five critically ill patients received two, same-day infusions from five recovered healthy donors. In four of the five patients, inflammatory biomarkers decreased and Alveolar–arterial (A/a) gradient improved, and all patients had improvement in pulmonary lesions on the basis of computed tomography scan.18Shen C. Wang Z. Zhao F. Yang Y. Li J. Yuan J. Wang F. Li D. Yang M. Xing L. Wei J. Xiao H. Yang Y. Qu J. Qing L. Chen L. Xu Z. Peng L. Li Y. Zheng H. Chen F. Huang K. Jiang Y. Liu D. Zhang Z. Liu Y. Liu L. Treatment of 5 critically ill patients with COVID-19 with convalescent plasma.JAMA. 2020; 323: 1582-1589Crossref PubMed Scopus (1623) Google Scholar A second study by Duan et al17Duan K. Liu B. Li C. Zhang H. Yu T. Qu J. et al.Effectiveness of convalescent plasma therapy in severe COVID-19 patients.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020; 117: 9490-9496Crossref PubMed Scopus (1315) Google Scholar reported improved clinical outcomes in 10 patients who received a single transfusion of convalescent plasma, with no adverse events reported. Two additional small case studies of five and six patients have since been published with similar findings.19Ye M. Fu D. Ren Y. Wang F. Wang D. Zhang F. Xia X. Lv T. Treatment with convalescent plasma for COVID-19 patients in Wuhan, China.J Med Virol. 2020; ([Epub ahead of print] doi: 10.1002/jmv.25882)Crossref Scopus (276) Google Scholar,20Zhang B. Liu S. Tan T. Huang W. Dong Y. Chen L. Chen Q. Zhang L. Zhong Q. Zhang X. Zou Y. Zhang S. Treatment with convalescent plasma for critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.Chest. 2020; 158: e9-e13Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (284) Google Scholar A more recent study by Zeng et al21Zeng Q.L. Yu Z.J. Gou J.J. Li G.M. Ma S.H. Zhang G.F. Xu J.H. Lin W.B. Cui G.L. Zhang M.M. Li C. Wang Z.S. Zhang Z.H. Liu Z.S. Effect of convalescent plasma therapy on viral shedding and survival in COVID-19 patients.J Infect Dis. 2020; 222: 38-43Crossref Scopus (220) Google Scholar suggested that administration of convalescent plasma late in the disease course was ineffective for mortality reduction. We performed the present study to provide additional data on these initial clinical observations of patients' clinical course and subsequent improvement after receiving convalescent plasma therapy for COVID-19. We transfused 25 COVID-19 patients with severe and/or life-threatening disease at the Houston Methodist hospitals, a large, quaternary-care hospital system that serves metropolitan Houston, TX (approximately 7 million people; United States Census Bureau, https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-kits/2020/pop-estimates-county-metro.html, last accessed May 3, 2020). Patients were transfused once with 300 mL of convalescent plasma. The therapy was well tolerated, and no transfusion-related adverse events were observed. At day 7 after transfusion, 9 of 25 patients (36%) had improvement in the assessed clinical end points. By 14 days after transfusion, 19 patients (76%) had improved or been discharged. Although this study has limitations, the data indicate that transfusion of convalescent plasma is a safe treatment option for those with severe COVID-19 disease. This study was conducted at the Houston Methodist hospitals from March 28, 2020, through April 28, 2020, with the approval of the Houston Methodist Research Institute ethics review board and with informed patient or legally authorized representative consent. Patients were treated under either emergency investigational new drug or investigational new drug applications, approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/emergency-situations-medical-devices/emergency-use-authorizations, last accessed May 3, 2020). Approval to treat the first patient by emergency investigational new drug was granted on March 28, 2020. The investigational new drug application was approved on April 3, 2020. COVID-19 patients in the Houston Methodist hospitals were considered for enrollment in this trial. SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed by reverse transcriptase real-time PCR. Patients were eligible if they had severe and/or life-threatening COVID-19 disease (US Food and Drug Administration, https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/investigational-new-drug-ind-or-device-exemption-ide-process-cber/recommendations-investigational-covid-19-convalescent-plasma#Patient%20Eligibility2020, last accessed May 3, 2020). Severe disease was defined as one or more of the following: shortness of breath (dyspnea), respiratory rate ≥ 30/min, blood oxygen saturation ≤ 93%, partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen ratio < 300, and/or pulmonary infiltrates > 50% within 24 to 48 hours. Life-threatening disease was defined as one or more of the following: respiratory failure, septic shock, and/or multiple organ dysfunction or failure. Clinical data for patients were obtained from the hospital electronic medical record. Clinical severity for the purposes of outcome assessment was scored on the basis of a modified six-point clinical scale used by the World Health Organization Research and Development Blueprint group (https://www.who.int/blueprint/priority-diseases/key-action/COVID-19_Treatment_Trial_Design_Master_Protocol_synopsis_Final_18022020.pdf, last accessed May 6, 2020). Patients were assigned a clinical status at baseline (day 0, date of transfusion) and evaluated at days 0, 7, and 14. The six-point scale is as follows: 1, discharged (alive); 2, hospitalized, not requiring supplemental oxygen but requiring ongoing medical care (for COVID-19 or otherwise); 3, hospitalized, requiring low-flow supplemental oxygen; 4, hospitalized, on noninvasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen devices; 5, hospitalized and on invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO); and 6, death. Convalescent plasma was obtained by apheresis using the Trima Accel automated blood collection system (Terumo BCT, Lakewood, CO). Plasma (600 mL) was collected from each donor and divided into two 300-mL units. Each donor had a documented history of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection on the basis of a positive RT-PCR test result. All plasma was donated by recovered and healthy COVID-19 patients who had been asymptomatic for ≥14 days. Donors were between 23 and 67 years old. All donors provided written informed consent and tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. If eligible according to standard blood donor criteria, donors were enrolled in a frequent plasmapheresis program. Donors were negative for anti–human leukocyte antigen antibodies, hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, HIV, human T-lymphotropic virus I/II, Chagas disease, West Nile virus, Zika virus, and syphilis, per standard blood banking practices. Symptomatic patients with a high degree of clinical suspicion for COVID-19 disease were tested in the Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory at Houston Methodist Hospital using a validated assay applied for under Emergency Use Authorization from the US Food and Drug Administration. The assay follows the protocol published by the World Health Organization22Corman V.M. Landt O. Kaiser M. Molenkamp R. Meijer A. Chu D.K.W. Bleicker T. Brünink S. Schneider J. Schmidt M.L. Mulders D. Haagmans B.L. van der Veer B. van den Brink S. Wijsman L. Goderski G. Romette J.L. Ellis J. Zambon M. Peiris M. Goossens H. Reusken C. Koopmans M.P.G. Drosten C. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR.Euro Surveill. 2020; 25: 2000045Crossref PubMed Scopus (4491) Google Scholar and uses a 7500 Fast Dx instrument (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA) and 7500 SDS software version 1.4.1 (Applied Biosystems). Testing was performed on nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs immersed in universal transport media, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, or sputum treated with dithiothreitol. The expression and purification of the receptor binding domain (RBD) and ectodomain (ECD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein have been described previously.23Wrapp D. Wang N. Corbett K.S. Goldsmith J.A. Hsieh C.L. Abiona O. Graham B.S. McLellan J.S. Cryo-EM structure of the 2019-nCoV spike in the prefusion conformation.Science. 2020; 367: 1260-1263Crossref PubMed Scopus (82) Google Scholar Briefly, the RBD (residues 319 to 591) and ECD (residues 1 to 1208) domains were cloned into the mammalian expression vector pαH (pNCOV-1), which contains an HRV3C cleavage site upstream of TwinStrep and 8xHis purification tags. The ColE1 vector was transformed and maintained in Escherichia coli DH10B at 37°C using ampicillin selection at 100 μg/mL. Plasmids from single colonies were recovered using a mini-prep kit (Qiagen, Germantown, MD) after growing cells overnight in Superior broth (AthenaES, Baltimore, MD) supplemented with 100 μg/mL ampicillin. Expi293F cells (Thermo Fisher, Waltham, MA) were passaged twice and seeded to a density of 7.5 × 107 cells in 25.5 mL Expi293 Expression Medium (2.9 × 106 cells/mL in a 125-mL flask). For each 30-mL transfection, plasmid DNA (30 μg; a gift from Dr. Jason S. McLellan, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX) was added to Opti-MEM I Reduced Serum Medium (Gibco, Gaithersburg, MD) to a total volume of 1.5 mL and gently mixed. ExpiFectamine 293 Reagent (81 μL) was diluted in Opti-MEM I medium to a total volume of 1.5 mL. After gently mixing, it was incubated for 5 minutes at room temperature. After incubation, the diluted DNA was added to the diluted ExpiFectamine 293 Reagent to obtain a total volume of 3 mL and gently mixed. The mixture was incubated for 20 minutes at room temperature to allow the DNA–ExpiFectamine 293 Reagent complexes to form and then added to the Expi293F cells. After incubating cells for 20 hours, 150 μL of ExpiFectamine 293 Transfection Enhancer 1 and 1.5 mL of ExpiFectamine 293 Transfection Enhancer 2 were added to each flask. Cells were harvested at 7 days. Immobilized metal affinity chromatography purification columns were used with 1 mL bed volume for each Ni-NTA column. Each prepared column was used to purify proteins from 200 to 250 mL of filtered tissue culture media. Following filtration, filtered tissue culture medium was applied to a previously prepared and equilibrated Ni-NTA column. Each column was washed with 20 mL equilibration buffer (50 mmol/L phosphate buffer, pH 7.5, 300 mmol/L NaCl, and 20 mmol/L imidazole). The target protein was eluted with 5 mL elution buffer (50 mmol/L phosphate buffer, pH 7.5, 300 mmol/L NaCl, and 250 mmol/L imidazole). The eluate was applied to a spin concentrator with 100 kDa molecular weight cutoff to concentrate target protein before fast protein liquid chromatography purification and for buffer exchange into cold 1× phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). Spin concentrators were centrifuged at 3000 × g, at 4°C for 15 minutes. Following buffer exchange, the eluate was concentrated to approximately 600 μL. The concentrated eluate was further purified using size-exclusion chromatography with a 24-mL Superose 6 10/300 GL column (GE Healthcare, Chicago, IL). The 0.5-mL sample loop was injected with 1 mL each of the following: 0.1 mol/L NaOH, RNase-free water, and 1× PBS. The buffer-exchanged eluate was applied to the fast protein liquid chromatography sample loop and run with a flow rate 0.25 mL/minute. Fractions were collected after 0.2 CV, and fractionation volumes were collected at 0.33 mL. Costar 96-well assay plates (Corning, Corning, NY) were coated with either SARS-CoV-2 spike (S protein) ECD or SARS-CoV-2 spike RBD (50 μL at 2 μg/mL in PBS) overnight at 4°C. Plates were blocked with 2% milk in PBS at room temperature for 2 hours and washed 3× with PBS with 0.1% Tween 20. Plasma or monoclonal antibody was serially diluted in 50 μL/well across the entire 96-well plate. Negative plasma control was included on each antigen plate. Monoclonal antibody CR3022 (a gift from Dr. Jason S. McLellan) was used as a positive control. CR3022 is a neutralizing antibody originally cloned from a convalescent SARS patient that targets the RBD of SARS-CoV24ter Meulen J. van den Brink E.N. Poon L.L. Marissen W.E. Leung C.S. Cox F. Cheung C.Y. Bakker A.Q. Bogaards J.A. van Deventer E. Preiser W. Doerr H.W. Chow V.T. de Kruif J. Peiris J.S. Goudsmit J. Human monoclonal antibody combination against SARS coronavirus: synergy and coverage of escape mutants.PLoS Med. 2006; 3: e237Crossref PubMed Scopus (411) Google Scholar and binds to the RBD of SARS-CoV-2 with a binding affinity of 6.3 nmol/L.25Tian X. Li C. Huang A. Xia S. Lu S. Shi Z. Lu L. Jiang S. Yang Z. Wu Y. Ying T. Potent binding of 2019 novel coronavirus spike protein by a SARS coronavirus-specific human monoclonal antibody.Emerg Microbes Infect. 2020; 9: 382-385Crossref PubMed Scopus (867) Google Scholar Binding was performed at room temperature for 1 hour. Plates were washed, and anti-human IgG Fab HRP (Sigma A0293; 1:5000; Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) was added to the plate (50 μL) and incubated at room temperature for 30 minutes. Plates were washed 3× with PBS with 0.1% Tween 20, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) substrate (1-step Ultra TMB; Thermo Fisher) was added, plates were developed for 1 minute for RBD and 5 minutes for spike ECD, and the reaction was stopped with 50 μL of H2SO4. Plates were read at 450 nm absorbance. Threefold serial dilutions from 50 to 4050 were analyzed. Titer was defined as the last dilution showing an OD greater than a multiplate negative control average plus six SDs. Libraries for whole viral genome sequencing were prepared according to version 1 ARTIC nCoV-2019 sequencing protocol (https://artic.network/ncov-2019, last accessed May 6, 2020). Long reads were generated with the LSK-109 sequencing kit, 24 native barcodes (NBD104 and NBD114 kits), and a GridION instrument (Oxford Nanopore, Oxford, UK). Short reads were generated with the NexteraXT kit and a MiSeq or NextSeq 550 instrument (Illumina, San Diego, CA). Whole genome alignments of consensus viral genome sequence generated from the ARTIC nCoV-2019 bioinformatics pipeline were trimmed to the start of orf1ab and the end of orf10 and used to generate a phylogenetic tree using RAxML version 8.2 (https://cme.h-its.org/exelixis/web/software/raxml/index.html, last accessed May 3, 2020)26Stamatakis A. RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England). 2014; 30: 1312-1313Crossref PubMed Scopus (20050) Google Scholar to determine viral clade. Trees were visualized and annotated with CLC Genomics Workbench version 20 (Qiagen). Twenty-five patients with severe and/or life-threatening COVID-19 disease were enrolled in the study from March 28, 2020, to April 14, 2020. Patients ranged in age from 19 to 77 years [median, 51 years; interquartile range (IQR), 42.5 to 60 years], and 14 were female (Table 1). The median body mass index was 30.4 kg/m2 (IQR, 26.5 to 37 kg/m2), and most (22/25, 88%) had no smoking history. Many patients (16/25, 64%) had one or more underlying chronic conditions, including diabetes mellitus (10 patients), hypertension (9 patients), hyperlipidemia (5 patients), and gastrointestinal reflux disease (4 patients). Most patients (19/25, 76%) enrolled in the study had O-positive blood type. Bacterial or viral co-infections were identified in five patients (Table 1).Table 1Demographics and Clinical Characteristics of Patients with COVID-19 Disease Who Received Convalescent PlasmaPatientSexAge, yearsWeight, kgBMI, kg/m2Smoking historyBlood typeCo-infectionsCo-existing chronic diseases1F399034NeverO posNoneDM22F6310438NeverO posNoneDM2, HTN, HLP, GERD3F486323NeverO posNoneNone4M579629NeverO posNoneNone5F389935NeverO posInfluenza BDM2, HTN, GERD6M4613332FormerO posMSSA PNADM27M519432FormerA posNoneDM28M748427NeverA posVAP: MSSA and GASDM2, HTN, CKD9F557326NeverO posNoneNone10F1911349NeverO posEnterococcus BSINone11F229140NeverO posNoneAsthma12F4665.824.9NeverO posNoneNone13M618830UnknownO posNoneNone14F4910131.9NeverO posNoneGERD, HTN15M2912644NeverO posNoneNone16F3094.738.2NeverO posNonePost-partum, hypothyroidism17F547930NeverO posNoneHTN18M5610240NeverO posNoneHTN, HLP19M6081.632NeverO posNoneDM2, HLD20F779536NeverO posNoneHTN, DM221F606523NeverO negNoneNone22F7786.529.8NeverA posGASAtrial fibrillation, DM2, HLD23M608530.4NeverO posNoneDM2, HLD, HTN24M547225NeverB posNoneHLD25M505822.6NeverB posNoneNoneF, female; M, male; BMI, body mass index; BSI, bloodstream infection; CKD, chronic kidney disease; COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019; DM2, diabetes mellitus type 2; GAS, group A Streptococcus; GERD, gastrointestinal reflux disease; HLD, hyperlipidemia; HLP, hyperlipidemia; HTN, hypertension; MSSA, methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus; neg, negative; None, no infection identified; PNA, pneumonia; pos, positive; VAP, ventilator-associated pneumonia. Open table in a new tab F, female; M, male; BMI, body mass index; BSI, bloodstream infection; CKD, chronic kidney disease; COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019; DM2, diabetes mellitus type 2; GAS, group A Streptococcus; GERD, gastrointestinal reflux disease; HLD, hyperlipidemia; HLP, hyperlipidemia; HTN, hypertension; MSSA, methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus; neg, negative; None, no infection identified; PNA, pneumonia; pos, positive; VAP, ventilator-associated pneumonia. The characteristics of the donors of convalescent plasma are shown in Table 2. A total of nine donors provided plasma that was used to transfuse COVID-19 patients; two donors gave plasma on multiple occasions. The donors ranged in age from 23 to 67 years, and 56% (5/9) were males. On average, the donors gave plasma 26 days (range, 19 to 33 days) after their symptom start date and 21 days (range, 13 to 27 days) after their initial positive RT-PCR specimen collection date. Although all donors had been symptomatic, only one was ill enough to require hospitalization. To assess antibody titers, two ELISAs were used, one based on recombinant purified ECD of the spike protein and the second using recombinant RBD of the spike protein. The titers of the convalescent plasma used for transfusion ranged from 0 to 1350 for the RBD and ECD domains (Figure 1 and Supplemental Table S1).Table 2Characteristics of Convalescent Plasma DonorsDonorAge, yearsSexBlood typeSymptom start datePositive test dateHospitalizedSymptoms resolvedPlasma collected date(