Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Preliminary Report

New England Journal of Medicine ^ | May 22, 2020 | Multi member team

[null and void]

Background

Although several therapeutic agents have been evaluated for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), none have yet been shown to be efficacious.

Methods

We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of intravenous remdesivir in adults hospitalized with Covid-19 with evidence of lower respiratory tract involvement. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either remdesivir (200 mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for up to 9 additional days) or placebo for up to 10 days. The primary outcome was the time to recovery, defined by either discharge from the hospital or hospitalization for infection-control purposes only.

Results

A total of 1063 patients underwent randomization. The data and safety monitoring board recommended early unblinding of the results on the basis of findings from an analysis that showed shortened time to recovery in the remdesivir group. Preliminary results from the 1059 patients (538 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo) with data available after randomization indicated that those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 11 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 12), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 19) in those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.55; P<0.001). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality by 14 days were 7.1% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.04). Serious adverse events were reported for 114 of the 541 patients in the remdesivir group who underwent randomization (21.1%) and 141 of the 522 patients in the placebo group who underwent randomization (27.0%).

Conclusions

Remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery in adults hospitalized with Covid-19 and evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ACCT-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04280705. opens in new tab.)

[null and void]

Originally posting deleted by the Mod Squad because LRoggy used the title from a different source:

The Remdesivir Study Is Finally Out: Drug Only Helped Those On Oxygen, Finds Mortality Too High For Standalone Treatment

Don't do that Roggy! Begging the Mod Squad to fix the title doesn't cut it, you must be punished...

[null and void]

DAMMIT!!!

We're going to have to go back the the cheap, readily available, effective treatment the Orange Man Bad advocated over a month ago!

too bad about the 150,000 that died since then...

Bring Out Your Dead

Post to me or FReep mail to be on/off the Bring Out Your Dead ping list.

The purpose of the “Bring Out Your Dead” ping list (formerly the “Ebola” ping list) is very early warning of emerging pandemics, as such it has a high false positive rate.

The false positive rate was 100%.

At some point we may well have a high mortality pandemic, and likely as not the “Bring Out Your Dead” threads will miss the beginning entirely.

*sigh* Such is life, and death...

If a quarantine saves just one child's or one old fart’s life, it's worth it.

[Grimmy]

https://quartermaster.news/gin-and-tonic-with-a-twist-quinine-is-miraculous-scientists-testing-hcq-on-cancer/

Have you read that one yet? Lots of info. HCQ does a *lot*, not just kill off the covid.

Oh, and there’s this linked in the above as well:

CDC Special Pathogens Report.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1545C_dJWMIAgqeLEsfo2U8Kq5WprDuARXrJl6N1aDjY/preview

[Sacajaweau]

Remember...This is given intravenously so you must be hospitalized. From reading the results.....it didn’t do much....if anything.

[LRoggy]

Which one of you is Null and which one is Void? I want to be punished by the more liberal one . . .

[Blood of Tyrants]

11 days vs 15 days for recovery? That’s hardly the miracle drug they have been touting and far less effective that what doctors have been reporting for the HCQ/Z-pack/Zinc combo.

[Vlad The Inhaler]

We're going to have to go back the the cheap, readily available, effective treatment the Orange Man Bad advocated over a month ago!

Q - Why are many influential people and people in positions of authority opposed to the low cost COVID19 treatments readily available today?

A- Because they are low cost and low profit.

They want a new, high cost medication so politicians can pump massive amounts of taxpayer money to Big-Pharma.

In return, as Big-Pharma rakes in windfall profits, they will feed some of it back to politicians in the form of political contributions, jobs for family members, stock tips, and other ways.

That's how worthless incompetent buffoons like Schmucky Schumer and Joe Biden became multi-millionaires on a fixed government salary?

.

[Vlad The Inhaler]

If a quarantine saves just one child's or one old fart’s life, it's worth it.

[silverleaf]

Gee, only 20% chance of liver damage for the survivors

Sign up today!

[Howie66]

Hey, Vlad....should that be “The Thing” in your tag? Just curious.....

[willk]

Looks like decent results for those hospitalized and on oxygen. Hopefully HCQ will be found to be helpful in preventing people from getting to this stage.

[cradle of freedom]

I have been noticing how they keep attacking hydroxychloroquine. It has really become noticeable if you are paying attention. Why don’t they just say ask your doctor. That would take care of that.

I hope some of these media people get sued by loved ones who were not given hydroxychloroquine and died.

[WASCWatch]

Most of those treated with the HCQ combo walk out of the hospital in five days.

[null and void]

Sorry, I don’t punish, that’s what the Mod Squad does...

[null and void]

I have been noticing how they keep attacking hydroxychloroquine.

Worse, they attack chloroquine, and attach its known bad side effects to hydroxychloroquine, which was developed to eliminate those bad side effects.

This is deliberate. The more dead bodies, the better they think their chances are to remove Orange Man Bad.

No cost is too high for that for anyone who wants to avoid a traitor's noose.

[semimojo]

Regardless of what happened in the placebo group, a 21% rate of serious adverse reactions is terrible.

It would be terrible if that's what they said happened, but it isn't.

Some patients had adverse events, which in general were just a worsening in condition as the disease ran it's course.

Only 4 of the 255 adverse events were attributed to Remdesivir or the placebo (2 each):

"Serious adverse events occurred in 114 patients (21.1%) in the remdesivir group and 141 patients (27.0%) in the placebo group (Table S3); 4 events (2 in each group) were judged by site investigators to be related to remdesivir or placebo. There were 28 serious respiratory failure adverse events in the remdesivir group (5.2% of patients) and 42 in the placebo group (8.0% of patients). Acute respiratory failure, hypotension, viral pneumonia, and acute kidney injury were slightly more common among patients in the placebo group. No deaths were considered to be related to treatment assignment, as judged by the site investigators."

Those taking Remdesivir had significantly fewer adverse medical events than those taking the placebo.

And almost none of them were "side effects".

[the OlLine Rebel]

Just where do you hear that?

Sounds like you’re falling for this “SKY IS FALLING” narrative. Lots of people don’t even go to the hospital with this, and lots of them are fine in a few days, like any other RI.

So there is little reason to think HCQ or Rem or anything is really doing much. Some are badly affected by the disease but for many, it’s not much. You can’t prove a negative, and that’s what I’m seeing with much of these claims.

[Steve_Seattle]

I misspoke when I described the adverse effects as "side effects," but the difference between the two groups (21.1% versus 27%) does not seem "significantly fewer" to me; it seems attributable to chance or - at best - some slight benefit that might also be obtained from many other treatment options.

The other puzzling thing is that a placebo is supposed to be basically an inert factor, yet they attribute two cases of "side effects" to the placebo.

If I go to a doctor and he says, "This treatment option gives you a 5.9% better chance of survival than no treatment at all, or than some other treatment, I'm not going to jump up and down with joy. Just the other day I heard a doctor who specializes in these things say that he was unimpressed by early testing of remdesivir, a drug that has been in the works for years but has never been approved for anything.

[catnipman]

doc from local hospital told me they don’t use remdisivir because the $4,000 cost per treatment course isn’t “worth the money”; in other words, it doesn’t work ... and my own doc told me it doesn’t work ...

[catnipman]

doc from local hospital told me they don’t use remdisivir because the $4,000 cost per treatment course isn’t “worth the money”; in other words, it doesn’t work ... and my own doc told me it doesn’t work ...