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

Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

medrxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 379 posts

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#51

Post by winstonewert »

the_af wrote: post #46
war1025 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lots of conflicting research happening That's my main take-away at this point. I have seen enough reports saying it worked, and enough saying it didn't that I believe the answer is probably somewhere in the middle. My understanding is the best guess for how it works is by keeping the viral infection from becoming serious enough to require hospitalization. Similar to how proper treatment of wounds early on keeps the…

I'm out of the loop here: why would any political faction not want an alleged cure to work? What's the goal here?

Trump said positive things about it.

The left wants Trump to be wrong about everything, so wants this it to fail.

The right wants Trump to be right about everything, so wants it to work.

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#52

Post by munk-a »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #37
koheripbal wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the devil is really in the details about exactly when and how you administer it. Doctors are already saying that it's definitely no magic bullet, but they debate whether it is effective at a certain stage of illness. What I don't understand is why we're focusing so much on this specific drug when there are some great antivirals out thee that have a more effective theoretical mechanism of action. (eg Remdesivir)

Because this drug can be cheaply manufactured out of patent. Let's say Remdesivir is the only drug that works, it's basically an admission that Gilead is going to have us over a barrel.

Only if we chose to let them bend us over said barrel?

The US government could simply seize the patent if Gilead acted in a manner against the public good.

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#53

Post by Medicalidiot »

danans wrote: post #26
Medicalidiot wrote: post #18

It was observed that between 7% and 28% of hospitalized have acute myocardial injury [1-4]. When one looks at Epocrates (database for drugs which is why I'm not linking anything here) the severe adverse reactions of hydroxycholoroquine include QT prolongation, cardiomyopathy, and torsade de pointes. Just to define some things here, QT prolongation is the time from your Q wave to your T wave, or the start of an electr…

> between 7% and 28% of hospitalized have acute myocardial injury So, for a younger (< 60) otherwise healthy person whose chance of death with covid is less than 1%, it would seem ill advised to take this medication at the onset of symptoms, unless the the disease itself causes similar or higher rates of heart damage.

Potentially, yes. But again, we need more data before we can establish lucid guidelines on this therapy.

My hypothesis is that it's not going to be hydroxychloroquine that will be the miracle drug. There are better "hypothetical" alternatives that aren't getting as much mainstream attention but have a more realistic potential for working.

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#54

Post by programmarchy »

apendleton wrote: post #15

Personally I'm witholding judgment until the results of the PATCH trial ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04329923 ) arrive, as it'll finally give us some decent statistical power, and be a full, double-blind RCT. It also has multiple study arms (health-care worker prophylaxis, home-quarantined early stage, hospitalized later-stage), so if it turns out that HCQ is effective but that by the time patients are ho…

That link says the primary completion date won't be until April 1, 2021, a year from now. Seems like we should be able to collect valuable information much sooner than that because of the volume of patients, right?

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#55

Post by rootusrootus »

jackfoxy wrote: post #4

Totally out of my depth here. I've been following Dr. Chris Martenson's daily covid-19 updates since late January. He is adamant this treatment is only effective in combination with zinc supplements.

Is this the same Chris Martenson that did the Crash Course videos a number of years ago? That really puts this advice in context for me.

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#56

Post by downerending »

the_af wrote: post #46
war1025 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lots of conflicting research happening That's my main take-away at this point. I have seen enough reports saying it worked, and enough saying it didn't that I believe the answer is probably somewhere in the middle. My understanding is the best guess for how it works is by keeping the viral infection from becoming serious enough to require hospitalization. Similar to how proper treatment of wounds early on keeps the…

I'm out of the loop here: why would any political faction not want an alleged cure to work? What's the goal here?

Trump pushed it as a miracle cure, at least at one point, and he evokes bitter opposition in many.

(I think this is quite irrational, but that's your answer.)

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#57

Post by programmarchy »

kazinator wrote: post #38
w_t_payne wrote: post #23

Given that I need hydroxychloroquine to treat my rheumatoid arthritis, I'd like this hypothesis to be either proven or disproven as rapidly and as unambiguously as possible.

You want it disproven, otherwise you won't be able to get your hands on hydroxychloroquine.

Why couldn't we just manufacture more?

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#58

Post by rhino369 »

IAmEveryone wrote: post #10
julioo wrote: post #8

Point is that the study is done at the wrong stage, too late.

Point is far too much time and money has been wasted chasing this particular goose just because your cult leader saw it as the silver bullet that could save his re-election. I hope we don’t waste additional bandwidth in the medical community just to disprove additional no-true-Scotsmen rewritings of history. Just this comment section already features two of them: “too late”, and “only in combination with zinc”.

The Trump thing is a huge distraction. Doctors in China and Europe were already singing its praises before Trump got involved. These tests aren't happening because Trump got excited about it.

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#59

Post by grayed-down »

jackfoxy wrote: post #4

Totally out of my depth here. I've been following Dr. Chris Martenson's daily covid-19 updates since late January. He is adamant this treatment is only effective in combination with zinc supplements.

This is not a place for dissent

Re: Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients

#60

Post by prox »

orblivion wrote: post #33
_m5dp wrote: post #2

TLDR: French publication, non randomized 181 patients (hospitalized with pneumonia and O2 requirement) with control group (84 with HCQ, 97 without HCQ), no efficacy but adverse effects for some.

If this is accurate, perhaps the title could be edited to reflect the fact that it's a single study?

It is, but these studies are done in a european setting, so more results may be coming.
Post reply on HN