It seems like the study was conducted on the complete wrong set of patients.
First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing
61–70 of 99 posts
Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing
#62Thank goodness that we are actually getting some RCT results. There has been a huge confirmation bias towards any positive results for chloroquine, no matter how specious or flawed the underlying science was. Everybody wants this to work because the drug is well-tested on humans, cheap, and broadly available. It would be a panacea, a miracle drug. My concern is that the desire for this drug to be effective has cloude…
>It would be a panacea, a miracle drug.
Not really, a panacea is a drug that cures everything. If chloroquine was found to be an effective antiviral, it would only be a drug that cured two things. That's common enough to not warrant excessive skepticism taken alone.
Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing
#63I 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.
I've read about benefits not related to zinc, in addition to the zinc-related mechanism. It helps zinc get into the cell which prevents the replication of the virus, but there are additional benefits of this chemo medication. I'd have to take some time to find the particulars, if you read the original French study I think it details all the theoretical benefits.
With any chemo drug I suspect it won't have a huge effect on patients who are mild, in fact it could have a negative effect, but I'm no expert.
Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing
#64Has anyone found the study they're talking about?
This tweet is only a screenshot of the abstract.
And the trials registry entry says "No results published": https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04261517
Update: I asked the person on twitter and here it is: http://subject.med.wanfangdata.com.cn/UpLoad/Files/202003/43... Apparently it's in chinese.
Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's disappointing because it's no better than placebo.
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.
> In this case (as with many others) placebo is pretty effective
Where do you get that idea from? In the study it looks like everyone got better, but that may just be regression to the mean (i.e. the normal progression of covid-19 in those patients).
If you'd want to know if placebo is effective on covid-19 you'd have to do a completely different study, comparing placebo to doing nothing. Though the likelyhood that placebo therapy is "pretty effective" here is very low. Placebos usually work best in things that have a strong subjective factor, e.g. pain treatment.
Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing
#66Aneesh Karve
@akarve
·
9h
Replying to
@gcbioinv
The reported dosage is less than half what the Chinese Government recommends (500mg x 2 (BID Chloroquine)). So it's possible that they didn't hit the effective dose.
Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing
#67Earlier 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?
The Imperial College paper that was being passed around said about 1% of 20somethings, 3% of 30somethings, and 5% of 40somethings wind up hospitalized.
I think if your population trends younger this can mean pretty high absolute numbers even if low percentages. A number of news sites in various places said the under 50 crowd is using significant portions of hospital resources.
Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing
#68Earlier 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?
Across the United States, 38 percent of those hospitalized were between the ages of 20 and 54.
Nationally, 12 percent of the intensive care patients were between the ages of 20 and 44.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/23/nyregion/nyc-coronavirus-...
Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing
#69Why are we amplifying someone posting a compressed jpeg to 3,000 followers who lists no name, has a photo of George Costanza, and claims to be a virologist?
Re: First hydroxychloroquine randomized controlled trial: results disappointing
#70For 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.
I think what you are trying to say is that we cannot measure the difference.