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

51–60 of 99 posts

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#51

Post by tigershark »

cycrutchfield wrote: post #32
throwaway5466 wrote: post #25

For people that didn't read: it's "disappointing" because both the control and study groups largely tested negative (93% and 87% respectively). That 87% figure sounds worse than the control but it actually is better than in the French study. What happened in essence is that almost all cases were mild so the patients almost all got better after a while, with or without medication. This doesn't mean HCQ is ineffective,…

It's disappointing because it's no better than placebo.

It’s actually worse than placebo...

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#52

Post by tzjmetron »

hcknwscommenter wrote: post #12
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, doe…

Pertinent.

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#53

Post by rdtsc »

antonvs wrote: post #41
roenxi wrote: post #30

This is evidence; it isn't great but it also isn't conclusive. We'll need to wait longer for something a little more decisive. A twitter link is also unhelpful because we only get a blurry abstract to go off. The happy dream is maybe hydroxychloroquine has prophylactic tendencies since it is something people can take long term to be at a substantially lower risk vs catching COVID. The abstract doesn't really show muc…

> The happy dream is maybe hydroxychloroquine has prophylactic tendencies since it is something people can take long term to be at a substantially lower risk vs catching COVID. It's an immune system inhibitor, so this seems like a bad plan.

> It's an immune system inhibitor, so this seems like a bad plan.

Not unless the cytokine storm is what ends up killing the patient in the end.

https://www.vox.com/2020/3/12/21176783/coronavirus-covid-19-...

Then it may be a good idea. The immune system is a very complex _system_ so some parts may be active and some parts suppressed at the same time and that may be what’s need for the fastest recovery.

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#54

Post by halflings »

throwaway5466 wrote: post #25

For people that didn't read: it's "disappointing" because both the control and study groups largely tested negative (93% and 87% respectively). That 87% figure sounds worse than the control but it actually is better than in the French study. What happened in essence is that almost all cases were mild so the patients almost all got better after a while, with or without medication. This doesn't mean HCQ is ineffective,…

"That 87% figure sounds worse than the control but it actually is better than in the French study."

This is a moot point, because the French study was not a randomized control trial, on 6 people, at different stages of the disease from this study.

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#55

Post by JetBen »

This study comes from China, which lies about everything, so the results cannot be trusted. Chinese gov't likely strong-armed the results as part of their misinformation campaign. They have lied about literally every other stat - why would they tell the truth about this?

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#56

Post by jansan »

djvu9 wrote: post #21

It is a 30 patients test and almost everybody’s fever was gone right after enrollment. Even the swab test results turned negative in 2-4 days. Why is medicine ever needed for such group of patients?

The results are disappointing because they are useless. That's how I interpret the headline.

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#58

Post by brandmeyer »

dajohnson89 wrote: post #44
arcticbull wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case (as with many others) placebo is pretty effective, but also, these folks didn't get sick enough to need it, as with the overwhelming majority of young and healthy people. Another, broader study is required. I'm sure we'll find out more soon -- this reads like a mulligan though.

any data on what percentage of “young healthy” people die/get hospitalized? also, what’s the definition of young and healthy?

Data: https://covid19.colorado.gov/sites/covid19/files/COVID%20-%2...

This is a summary of all cases in Colorado. All of our state's (small handful of) fatalities have been among residents aged 60 and over. The hospitalization rate is ~5% or so for adults in the 30-50 year old range, and it rises to about 20% in the elderly age groups.

Caveats: with only 600 cases to draw inferences from, there's a little less than one digit of precision in those estimates. Testing availability is also still somewhat limited in the state with a little more than a 10% positive rate.

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#59

Post by blacksqr »

arcticbull wrote: post #46
dajohnson89 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

any data on what percentage of “young healthy” people die/get hospitalized? also, what’s the definition of young and healthy?

I mean, I’ve been saying this for a while and I don’t want to tire y’all out but, young being defined as under 40 and healthy being defined as without comorbid conditions. The median age of the dead in Italy is 80.5 and 99.2% of them were sick, averaging 3 comorbid conditions [3]. So basically the opposite of that. [1] https://twitter.com/AndyBiotech/status/1241741127205572609?s... [2] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volume…

I keep reading this statistic about deaths in Italy, but how much of it is shaped by doctors desperately deciding to withhold care from the sickest in order to save others?

i.e., would the age curve be different in an ideal situation where everyone was getting optimal care, and is the statistic thus misleadingly suggesting that younger people are less at risk?

Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing

#60

Post by xtracto »

cycrutchfield wrote: post #27
nikolay wrote: post #20

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.

Don't believe everything you watch on youtube.

And what about

Peer https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4182877/

Reviewed https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2973827/

Papers? https://www.academia.edu/download/41294025/Zn2_inhibits_coro...

Post reply on HN