Since we are going to get back into the HCQ argument. Let's bring that one up to date.
This is all from the Journal of Annals of Internal Medicine in the last 2 days.
First this review of all HCQ studies so far showing alot of biases by studies from both the positive and negative point of view.
Basically there isn't a non controlled study on HCQ that isn't biased. For example, the one released by Detroit Henry Ford - where the lead doctor says it doesn't actually contradict any previous studies. In that study the entire difference between the 2 groups can be potentially explained by a higher usage of steroids rather than HCQ.
Second, a new, random clinically controlled study on the use of HCQ and whether it is helpful in early (pre-hospitalization) stages of COVID19 by Skipper, et al.
It found no positive effect compared to the placebo and had more side effects (mostly minor).
Finally, a letter from the same Journal today talking about the whole saga of HCQ study, both the good and the bad.
Basically it takes to task the medical community for some of its work during this whole time, but also points out that there is not a single randomized control study of HCQ that currently shows it to have any positive effect whether provided early on or in later stages. Below are a couple of key excerpts.
"Taken together with the other published RCTs, the current study by Skipper and colleagues (
9) provides strong evidence that hydroxychloroquine offers no benefit in patients with mild illness. If the peer-reviewed findings confirm the preliminary reports of no benefit in sicker patients in the National Institutes of Health and RECOVERY trials, the saga of hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19 will likely reach its sad end.
The apparent ineffectiveness of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment of COVID-19 should not come as a surprise. Of all novel drugs that enter clinical phases of testing, about 90% fail to demonstrate effectiveness and safety. More simply put, many good ideas in medicine do not work. There is no shame in acknowledging that. But there are deeper lessons to be learned from the hydroxychloroquine experience in the current pandemic."
"Prestigious journals have worked feverishly to rapidly review studies that could have immediate impact but have occasionally fallen victim to deceit, damaging public confidence in their status as arbiters and presenters of objective facts. The scientific community needs to do a good bit of stock-taking and soul-searching about its performance in meeting the challenges of the pandemic and how it will meet these challenges in future pandemics that are certain to emerge.
Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic is far from over, but the emergence of data from well-done RCTs is a welcome development. Results of carefully done research, such as Skipper and colleagues' RCT, set an example for how we should search for effective therapies. It is time to move on from hydroxychloroquine.
