Skip to main content

New story in Health from Time: Leaked Data From a Key Remdesivir Study Suggest the Potential Coronavirus Drug Is Not Effective



A summary of a study conducted in China on a potential COVID-19 treatment, remdesivir, was posted on the World Health Organization (WHO) website on Thursday and then removed.

The researchers responsible for the study had not approved its posting; Tarik Jasarevic, a WHO spokesperson told STAT that it was “inadvertently posted on the website and taken down as soon as the mistake was noticed. The manuscript is undergoing peer review and we are waiting for a final version before WHO comments.”

Remdesivir, an experimental drug originally developed to treat Ebola, is not yet approved for that or any other disease. But studies conducted by remdesivir’s maker, Gilead, have shown that the experimental drug could be effective against coronaviruses like those that cause SARS and MERS. So during the COVID-19 crisis, Chinese researchers contacted the company about using it to treat the sickest patients, and Gilead made the drug available under a compassionate use program, to treat those with no other treatment options.

After Gilead agreed, Chinese doctors launched two formal studies of remdesivir; one in severely ill patients, and another in people with milder disease. Both studies compared the drug to a placebo. But in mid-April, both were suspended when scientists could not enroll the more than 400 patients needed for each trial.

The summary posted temporarily to the WHO’s website involved the trial to treat severe patients. The Chinese researchers noted that remdesivir was “not associated with a difference in time to clinical improvement,” according to STAT, which took a screen shot of the study before it was removed. In addition, according to the documentation briefly published on the WHO site, after a month, there was almost no difference in the fatality rate of patients given remdesivir compared to those who received the placebo.

In a statement responding to the results, Dr. Merdad Parsey, chief medical officer of Gilead Sciences, said “we believe the post included inappropriate characterizations of the study. The study was terminated early due to low enrollment and, as a result, it was underpowered to enable statistically meaningful conclusions. As such, the study results are inconclusive, though trends in the data suggest a potential benefit for remdesivir, particularly among patients treated early in the disease.”

Parsey seemingly was referencing recent remdesivir studies involving COVID-19 patients in the U.S., Europe and Canada, which have hinted at more positive results. In one, which involved 53 patients who were treated with remdesivir on a compassionate use basis, 68% of those experiencing severe respiratory symptoms improved after 10 days. In another, involving 125 U.S. patients, most who took the drug improved enough to be discharged from the hospital. However, unlike the Chinese studies, those trials did not compare remdesivir to a placebo.

The studies from China would be the first to provide solid data from gold standard clinical trials that randomly assigned people to remdesivir or placebo. Their results would likely guide decisions about ongoing trials in the U.S. and around the world, including one sponsored by Gilead and another by the National Institutes of Health, seeking to uncover which COVID-19 patients might benefit most from the drug, and when in the course of the disease the drug is most effective. Those studies, however, will take months to complete, regardless of this data leak.

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

New story in Health from Time: Here’s How Quickly Coronavirus Is Spreading in Your State

The novel coronavirus pandemic is a global crisis, a national emergency and a local nightmare. But while a great deal of the focus in the U.S. has been on the federal government’s response, widely criticized as slow and halting , the picture on the ground remains very different in different parts of the country. A TIME analysis of the per capita spread of the epidemic in all 50 states and Washington, D.C. found considerable range in the rate of contagion, and, in some parts of the country, a significant disparity compared to the national figure. The U.S., unlike nations such as South Korea and now Italy , has yet to show signs of bringing the runaway spread of the virus under control. However, while no single state is yet showing strong signs of bending the curve , some are faring much worse than others. The following graphic plots the rise in the total confirmed cases of COVID-19 per 100,000 residents in each state, plotted by the day that each state reported its first case.
Read more

New story in Health from Time: We Need to Take Care of the Growing Number of Long-term COVID-19 Patients

On July 7, 2020, the Boston Red Sox pitcher Eduardo Rodriguez tested positive for the new coronavirus. He was scheduled to start Opening Day for the Sox, but the virus had other plans— damaging Rodriguez’s heart and causing a condition called myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle). Now the previously fit 27-year old ace left-hander must sit out the 2020 season to recover. Rodriguez is not alone in having heart damage from SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. In a new study done in Germany, researchers studied the hearts of 100 patients who had recently recovered from COVID-19. The findings were alarming: 78 patients had heart abnormalities, as shown by a special kind of imaging test that shows the heart’s structure (a cardiac MRI), and 60 had myocarditis. These patients were mostly young and previously healthy . Several had just returned from ski trips. While other studies have shown a lower rate of heart problems—for example, a study of 416 patients hosp
Read more

New story in Health from Time: What We Don’t Know About COVID-19 Can Hurt Us

Countries around the world have introduced stringent control measures to stop COVID-19 outbreaks growing, but now many find themselves facing the same situation again. From Melbourne to Miami, the relaxation of measures had led to increasing flare-ups, which in some places has already meant reclosing schools, businesses or travel routes. Within the U.S. and among different countries , places with wildly varying public-health policies have experienced wildly diverse outcomes. Most ominously, infections are rising rapidly in many places where they once were falling. So how do countries avoid an indefinite, unsustainable, cycle of opening and closing society? What is needed to prevent a future of strict social distancing and closed borders? To escape this limbo, we need to know more about each step in the chain of infection: why some people are more susceptible or have more symptoms, how our interactions and surroundings influence risk, and how we can curb the impact of the re
Read more