Related Posts:
Professor J. Varon Interview: Treatment Protocols for Mildly Symptomatic Patients & More…
COVID-19 Epidemic Drawing to a Close in Marseille
Dr Fauci Announces Remdesivir to Become Standard of Care for COVID-19 while Chinese Study…
Posted on 06/27/2020 6:28:54 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The much anticipated research on 3,737 COVID-19 patients by Professor Raoult and his team was published this June 25th, as a pre-proof, in the journal Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease.
The article “Outcomes of 3,737 COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin and other regimens in Marseille, France: A retrospective analysis” can be found online at:
Interestingly, in his testimony yesterday, at the French National Assembly, Prof. Raoult indicated that the article was refused by The Lancet the very same week as the venerable publication accepted the fraudulent and now retracted article by Mehra et al.
Note that this research encompasses 3,737 COVID-19 patients, yet of those, only 3,119 were treated with the hydroxychloroquine / azithromycin therapy, often referred to as the Raoult Protocol.
Note that outside Marseille, the wait and see strategy for dealing with the disease was mostly adopted in France, like in many other countries. In that respect, it’s important to note the study assertion that “staying at home (lockdown) without testing while waiting for dyspnoea was not supported by our results.” This is a criticism applicable to most countries, especially those that refrained from implementing any form of early treatment, such as the UK, Canada and others.
Overall, according to the latest update, the case fatality rate among those 3,737 patients was 1.1%, which can be contrasted with hospital-level case fatality rates of about 25%, in the research by Oxford University in the context of its RECOVERY clinical trials.
Find the full study at this link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477893920302817
Here are a few highlights.
“We retrospectively report the clinical management of 3,737 screened patients, including 3,119 (83.5%) treated with HCQ-AZ (200 mg of oral HCQ, three times daily for ten days and 500 mg of oral AZ on day 1 followed by 250 mg daily for the next four days, respectively) for at least three days and 618 (16.5%) patients treated with other regimen (“others”). Outcomes were death, transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU), ≥10 days of hospitalization and viral shedding.”
“Treatment with HCQ-AZ was associated with a decreased risk of transfer to ICU or death (Hazard ratio (HR) 0.18 0.11–0.27), decreased risk of hospitalization ≥10 days (odds ratios 95% CI 0.38 0.27–0.54) and shorter duration of viral shedding (time to negative PCR: HR 1.29 1.17–1.42). QTc prolongation (>60 ms) was observed in 25 patients (0.67%) leading to the cessation of treatment in 12 cases including 3 cases with QTc> 500 ms. No cases of torsade de pointe or sudden death were observed.”
“Although this is a retrospective analysis, results suggest that early diagnosis, early isolation and early treatment of COVID-19 patients, with at least 3 days of HCQ-AZ lead to a significantly better clinical outcome and a faster viral load reduction than other treatments.”
“The decision of the government of France to recommend staying at home (lockdown) without testing while waiting for dyspnoea was not supported by our results.”
“As with other clinicians, we have seen patients with hypoxia, including some with very low blood oxygen levels, who described themselves as feeling well and comfortable (“happy hypoxemia”) [26]. Since these patients may develop severe symptoms based on our observations, the use of inexpensive pulse oximeters (around 20€) in primary-care health settings and/or by family doctors might be considered a triage tool on which to base hospitalization referral for further investigation.”
“Our approach of early diagnosis and care of as many patients as possible results in much lower mortality rates than other strategies. The test-and-treat strategy adopted in Marseille also seems capable of shortening the duration of the outbreak when compared to data from France overall by identifying infected people and reducing their viral shedding duration. In fact, more people were tested in Marseille than in most other areas, and the outbreak lasted only 9 weeks.”
“In addition, patients under HCQ-AZ treatment for at least 3 days had a better clinical outcome, based on mortality rates among patients >60 years, less transfer to ICU and shorter length of stay at the hospital, and these patients also had a shorter duration of viral shedding than patients who did not receive this drug combination. Finally, a global strategy for the management of the COVID-19 outbreak may help to limit both the number of cases and fatalities and guide countries where this pandemic has not yet peaked.”
“Since this analysis was completed, and as of the 11h June, 2020, 6 more patients died including 1 patient treated with HCQ-AZ for at least 3 days and 5 in the other group, resulting in an overall 1.1% case fatality rate for the 3,737 patients included in our study.”
Again, please refer to the full study at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477893920302817
Professor J. Varon Interview: Treatment Protocols for Mildly Symptomatic Patients & More…COVID-19 Epidemic Drawing to a Close in MarseilleDr Fauci Announces Remdesivir to Become Standard of Care for COVID-19 while Chinese Study…Dr. Fauci is Kevorkian. What blood these people have on their hands. Orange Man Bad.
Conclusion
Although this is a retrospective analysis, results suggest that early diagnosis, early isolation and early treatment of COVID-19 patients, with at least 3 days of HCQ-AZ lead to a significantly better clinical outcome and a faster viral load reduction than other treatments.
~~~~~
No $20.00 solution for you, Americans! ~ Dr Anthony FAUX-chi
Rule of thumb: it is rare for a researcher's findings to conflict with his funding.
S&F -— if you think of it,please ping me to this kind of story. I’m collecting articles.
Dr. Raoult's definitive large study, showing the expected benefits of HCQ-AZ.
Dr. Raoult seems to have climbed onto the zinc bandwagon, or at least he acknowledges that low zinc levels are associated with poor clinical outcomes. I was glad to see Dr. Raoult respond to the (ORANGE DRUG BAD!) anti-HCQ propaganda:
Taking into account the association between low blood zinc levels and poor clinical outcomes, zinc supplementation should be also considered, as recently reported [31]. However, the choice of the best treatment should be made according to its safety profile, which is much better for HCQ-AZ than for remdesivir (adverse events leading to cessation of treatment in 0.3% in our study vs. 12% for remdesivir [12]). Nevertheless, we were surprised by the large discrepancy on efficacy and toxicity of HCQ in recent studies compared to ours [32]. As a matter of fact, all patients reported here have been followed by the physicians authors named in our study. Altogether, we found only 0.67% of QTc prolongations and no death related to treatment. In our opinion, this excellent safety profile of HCQ-AZ in our real-life medical experience much better reflects the reality than registry studies such as those recently retracted from high profile medical journals [9].
Good stuff.
That beautiful green line generated a lot of interest.
Bookmarking.
It would involve numbers without politics and would be easy to track. If the Lupus patients didn't contract Covid at half the rate the non HCQ did, that would prove it's effectiveness. Plus the Lupis patients would have compromised immune systems. Since they already had been on HCQ, they would have caught it early if the theory works. What if the HCQ patients were at a single digit rate?
We already know who is taking the drug so the results would be instantaneous.
Sadly...this report only had one treatment arm in it. The different treatment comparator were not explicitly analyzed .Would really want to see what happens with patients who are c19 positive and are treated with roault protocol and those C19 positive not treated with raoult protocol. A comparison of the two group outcomes would answer many questions. That would really cement hcg/azit as an early treatment modality...with remdesivir and dexamethasone added if hcq. and azit. cannot do the complete job.
Finally a comparison of remdesivir vs. Hcq/azit would be even better.
3737 patients is a helluva lot of “anecdotes”
A ,”small number” is how Fauci refers to these studies
No mention of zinc in this protocol
It’s not just research funding. Hospitals got lots of Washington money for patients who were put into ICU and lots more if they were put on ventilators.
We have a very large control arm since this was a new illness. How many in high risk groups were sent home with no medication? That group (retrospectively) established the death rates to compare against.
Compared to the experimental medications what has been the death rate for those vulnerable patients who used Zelenko’s plan? Very low. Therefore no need of study.
How can you have a control group of high risk patients who have just been infected and then not give them a medication that you know works just to prove some point? Again, we already have the control group.
And at this late stage the virus seems to be weakening so comparing it to a death rate when the virus was deadlier is bogus as well.
Ping me later today, I’ve got a small pile of stuff for you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.