4.2 Article

Comparing Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) strains in convalescent COVID-19 patients

Journal

IMMUNOTHERAPY
Volume 15, Issue 1, Pages 9-15

Publisher

FUTURE MEDICINE LTD
DOI: 10.2217/imt-2022-0048

Keywords

BCG; COVID-19; randomized clinical trial; SARS-CoV-2; strains; vaccine

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The BATTLE trial revealed that recently infected SARS-CoV-2 patients can benefit from receiving BCG, with minimal adverse effects. Two strains of the vaccine were used in the study, and their clinical outcomes were compared. The results showed that there was no significant difference between the Russian and Brazilian strains in terms of symptom progression, lesion-size or type in COVID-19 convalescent patients.
Aim: We previously published results of the BATTLE trial, showing that patients recently infected with SARS-CoV-2 can benefit from receiving Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) with minimal adverse effects. The study incorporated two strains of this vaccine. In this study, patient outcomes were compared based on the strain of BCG because different strains have been shown to have different immunogenicity. Methods: BATTLE was a double-blind controlled trial of COVID-19 convalescent patients; symptom progression, injection-site lesion characteristics and adverse effects were compared between recipients of placebo, Russian BCG strain or Brazilian BCG strains. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the two BCG strains in terms of symptom progression, lesion-size or type. Conclusion: The two strains have similar clinical outcomes in COVID-19 convalescent patients. Plain language summaryWe previously published results of the BATTLE trial, showing that patients recently infected with SARS-CoV-2 virus can benefit from receiving BCG with minimal adverse effects. This article shows that the two BCG strains, Russian and Brazilian, have similar clinical outcomes in COVID-19 convalescent patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available