Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 99 posts

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#11

Post by aaavl2821 »

hartator wrote: post #10
aaavl2821 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may be that they just presented an abstract and the manuscript has not yet been submitted for publication or peer reviewed

Well let's peer review this wikipedia-style. Not sure why academia is stuck in last century.

scientists have increasingly been doing this during covid by publishing on biorxiv and then discussing on other channels (twitter etc)

for ex, this paper [0] by UCSF analyzing 26 of the 29 viral proteins expressed by the virus was posted on biorxiv and publicized further via twitter [1]. they identified 69 FDA approved drugs that target these proteins, giving the medical and scientific community a massive head start on studying drugs that could potentially be near-term treatments

there are some parts of academic science that are stuck in the last century but scientists themselves are certainly not

for those interested in learning more about how science works and how scientists operate, the covid situation is a great way to see how its done. modern science is amazing

[0] https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.22.002386v1

[1] https://twitter.com/kevansf/status/1241936588164063233

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#12

Post by hcknwscommenter »

akarve wrote: post #6

The reported dosage is less than half what the Chinese Government recommends (500mg x 2 (BID)). So it's possible that they didn't hit the effective dose. https://medium.com/@balajis/the-official-chinese-government-...

your link is to chloroquine phosphate, which has a phosphate group and is only like 75% chloroquine by weight. So no, not less than half. Moreover, you are trying to compare a hydroxychloroquine dose with a chloroquine phosphate dose (active ingredient is chloroquine, not hydroxychloroquine), which is any one's guess if they even have the same mechanism of action here. Just because they both work against malaria, doesn't mean much about this virus. All in all, it is nearly useless to compare the chloroquine phosphate dose and outcomes to the hydroxychloroquine dose and outcomes.

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#14

Post by HarryHirsch »

raphlinus wrote: post #9
aaavl2821 wrote: post #2

didnt find a link to the abstract, seems the results are just being published link to the trial on clinicaltrials.gov is here: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04261517 patients in both tx and control arm fared better than in the french study from earlier this week, suggesting patients were healthier / lower risk at baseline patients got slightly lower dose in this study (400 mg / day) vs the french study (600…

Someone on the Twitter thread linked to this, which seems to be not exactly the same document but contains very similar text in the abstract: http://subject.med.wanfangdata.com.cn/UpLoad/Files/202003/43... I think it helps if you can read Chinese, though Google Translate seems to do a pretty ok job on it.

No need to read Chinese, the abstract is on page 2. Conclusion: at current trial size no better than placebo. More study is needed to tease out an effect, if there is any.

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#15

Post by raphlinus »

aaavl2821 wrote: post #11
hartator wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well let's peer review this wikipedia-style. Not sure why academia is stuck in last century.

scientists have increasingly been doing this during covid by publishing on biorxiv and then discussing on other channels (twitter etc) for ex, this paper [0] by UCSF analyzing 26 of the 29 viral proteins expressed by the virus was posted on biorxiv and publicized further via twitter [1]. they identified 69 FDA approved drugs that target these proteins, giving the medical and scientific community a massive head start…

Yeah, I'm following a bunch of scientists on Twitter and have been watching from the sidelines with awe and admiration. The contrast to the seeming hordes of dumbfucks could hardly be more remarkable; sometimes it's hard to keep in mind the same platform is host to both sets of people.

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#17

Post by im3w1l »

hartator wrote: post #10
aaavl2821 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may be that they just presented an abstract and the manuscript has not yet been submitted for publication or peer reviewed

Well let's peer review this wikipedia-style. Not sure why academia is stuck in last century.

Wikipedia style is unreliable. I'm aware of quite a few errors. Why I don't fix them then? Because my edits would be reverted. Or because the page has been locked.

Academic literature in contrast, has multiple parallel journals. If one is suppressing you, you can go to the next. Of course if you go to a less reliable one, then people might not trust your research.

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#18

Post by godzulu »

raphlinus wrote: post #15
aaavl2821 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

scientists have increasingly been doing this during covid by publishing on biorxiv and then discussing on other channels (twitter etc) for ex, this paper [0] by UCSF analyzing 26 of the 29 viral proteins expressed by the virus was posted on biorxiv and publicized further via twitter [1]. they identified 69 FDA approved drugs that target these proteins, giving the medical and scientific community a massive head start…

Yeah, I'm following a bunch of scientists on Twitter and have been watching from the sidelines with awe and admiration. The contrast to the seeming hordes of dumbfucks could hardly be more remarkable; sometimes it's hard to keep in mind the same platform is host to both sets of people.

This Doctor in NY seems to have had great results so far https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/03/stunning-ny-doctor-...

This Doctor, Health Commissioner of NYC, Oxiris Barbot, seemed to take a lot of joy in proclaiming: Today our city is celebrating the #LunarNewYear parade in Chinatown, a beautiful cultural tradition with a rich history in our city. I want to remind everyone to enjoy the parade and not change any plans due to misinformation spreading about #coronavirus. https://on.nyc.gov/377LlcH

https://t.co/bwCnIb7j8H

Which Dr deserves awe and admiration and which brings with the seeming hordes of dumbfucks?

https://www.amny.com/editorial/city-leaders-seek-to-allay-fe...

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#19

Post by rurban »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #14
raphlinus wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone on the Twitter thread linked to this, which seems to be not exactly the same document but contains very similar text in the abstract: http://subject.med.wanfangdata.com.cn/UpLoad/Files/202003/43... I think it helps if you can read Chinese, though Google Translate seems to do a pretty ok job on it.

No need to read Chinese, the abstract is on page 2. Conclusion: at current trial size no better than placebo. More study is needed to tease out an effect, if there is any.

It does help if you read the translation.

By now everybody should know that the successful dosis is 2x500mg per day for 10 days. Not 1x 400mg per day, which is the old dosis for Malaria prevention. This dosis needs at least 2-3 weeks to be effective (saturate the cell membranes with zinc), and by then the infection is already over. And the Chinese treatment plan contained much more.

A study with zero value.

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#20

Post by nikolay »

I am sorry, but isn't the mechanism of action that hydroxychloroquine is simply a zinc ionophore, i.e. you need enough free zinc in the blood for this to work? I read doctors suggesting using hydroxychloroquine along with 50mg of ionic zinc.
Post reply on HN