Skip to main content

New story in Health from Time: A Low-Cost Steroid Shows Promise for Treating COVID-19. But Take the News with a Grain of Salt



Encouraging results from researchers looking into potential COVID-19 treatments are being hailed as a “groundbreaking development”—but recent history shows it’s worth taking these promising findings with a grain of salt.

Investigators working on the U.K.-based RECOVERY trial announced today that dexamethasone, a low-cost and widely available steroid that lowers inflammation, improved patients’ chances of surviving severe COVID-19. During the study, about 2,100 COVID-19 patients were treated with dexamethasone for 10 days. Patients on mechanical ventilation who were given dexamethasone were 35% less likely to die compared to patients on ventilators who did not get the treatment. In patients on less invasive forms of breathing support, dexamethasone decreased the risk of death by 20%, while patients who did not require any respiratory help saw no improvements after taking the steroid.

Those are promising findings, and it makes sense that an anti-inflammatory drug would be effective against a disease that’s most harmful when it spurs excess inflammation in the body. But there’s a big caveat: the researchers released only a summary of the data, rather than a complete, peer-reviewed paper. (The researchers said in a statement they’ll publish their full findings soon.)

It’s understandable that these researchers would want to get the news out as soon as possible, given the possibility that dexamethasone could, based on the results, save lives immediately. But some health experts are warning the public to interpret the results with caution—especially in light of a recent scandal in which two prominent medical journals, the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, had to retract high-profile studies on potential COVID-19 treatments due to suspect data.

“It will be great news if dexamethasone, a cheap steroid, really does cut deaths by 1/3 in ventilated patients with COVID-19, but after all the retractions and walk backs, it is unacceptable to tout study results by press release without releasing the paper,” influential surgeon and author Dr. Atul Gawande wrote on Twitter this morning.

The anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine serves as a cautionary tale. A small French study from March sparked a flurry of excitement (and glowing praise from President Donald Trump) over hydroxychloroquine’s potential to treat COVID-19. But as more robust studies came out, findings began to suggest the drug is at best ineffective, and at worst potentially harmful. Eventually, the growing body of research led the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to revoke the drug’s emergency use authorization.

The hope, of course, is that no such thing happens with dexamethasone. If the drug truly works as well as the early results suggest, it could revolutionize the way severe COVID-19 is treated. But the rapidly evolving COVID-19 pandemic, which has spurred scientists to produce a staggering amount of work in record time, has also exposed the drawbacks of accelerating past the traditionally slow-and-steady scientific review process. Mistakes happen, and conclusions change—especially when the whole world is impatient for answers.

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

New story in Health from Time: COVID-19 Has Been ‘Apocalyptic’ for Public Transit. Will Congress Offer More Help?

While trying to get to work over the past few months, Brittany Williams, a Seattle home care worker, has often been passed by two or three buses before one stops to let her board. Buses in her area that once carried anywhere from about 50 to 100 passengers have been limited to between 12 and 18 to prevent overcrowding in response to coronavirus, and Williams’ commute, typically a half-hour ride, now takes more than double that time. Other Seattle transit riders have described budgeting as much as an extra hour per trip to account for the reduced capacity, eating into their time at work, school or with family. Even with the ridership limits in place, Williams, 34, doesn’t feel safe on public transit. Some passengers don’t wear face coverings, and bus drivers sometimes ignore capacity limits, she says. On one ride with her seven-year-old son, she decided to get off at a stop far from her home after a driver allowed a crowd of people to board. “It’s very trying. I’ll put...
Read more

New story in Health from Time: A Montana Care Home Refused Free COVID-19 Tests. Now, Nearly Every Resident Has Coronavirus

(BILLINGS, Mont.) — It was meant to be a last line of defense to protect the most vulnerable as the coronavirus spread across the United States : Montana officials offered free testing in May for staff and residents at assisted living and long-term care facilities. But not all of them followed through, according to state data, including a facility in Billings, Montana’s largest city, that cares for people with dementia and other memory problems. The virus has infected almost every resident and killed eight, accounting for almost a quarter of Montana’s 34 confirmed deaths. Thirty-six employees also have tested positive at the facility where 59 people lived before the deaths began. Read more: ‘It’s Getting Worse.’ Nursing Home Workers Confront Risks in Facilities Devastated by Coronavirus While Montana’s rates of confirmed infections and deaths are much lower than other parts of the country, the outbreak at Canyon Creek Memory Care illustrates that even the most simple an...
Read more

New story in Health from Time: An At-Home Coronavirus Test May Be On the Way in the U.S.

As cases of COVID-19 continue to climb in the U.S. , there’s a new urgency to make sure there are as many tests as possible to diagnose people who have symptoms that might indicate an infection. Knowing if people are positive is important for guiding their next steps: self-isolation, avoiding contact with others, and, if their symptoms get worse, seeking medical care. To date, access to tests has been spotty at best across the country, and while more kits are now available than even a week ago , most are gene-based assays that take several days for commercial labs to process and produce results. That may change in about two months if the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gives Emergency Use Authorization to the first blood-based COVID-19 test in the U.S. Scanwell Health, an at-home test company based in California, licensed the rights to a test developed by Chinese company Innovita, which was used extensively at the height of country’s epidemic earlier this year. “The ...
Read more