3 ms·

Edit: Be careful not to misinterpret the flawed study comment. The "this is a flawed study" comment is not with regards to the NIH trial. It is in regards to th

Edit: Be careful not to misinterpret the flawed study comment. The "this is a flawed study" comment is not with regards to the NIH trial. It is in regards to the lancet trial, the one that did not show benefit to remdesivir. It's not working in severe populations, but that study wasn't fully enrolled so we don't know if it was powered enough, which the study in the lancet states. And, it doesn't need to be a magic bullet to be a major step forward in the fight against the drug? The NIH sponsored placebo-controlled trial met its primary endpoint - how is stating that just an attempt to goose the share price? If they are lying about that, then their credibility will be killed. If they are not lying about that, then there is now statistically significant evidence that remdesivir does work in treating COVID-19 patients, likely in less severe patients.

HarryHirsch 7y ago
The Lancet study was a randomized trial with > 200 patients that showed no clinical benefits of remdesivir but did reveal some adverse effects. That's worrying. It's not the game changer that azidothymidine was for AIDS/HIV. The issue with remdesivir in mild cases is that it's expensive to produce (six steps, two at low temperature, outside the capability of many contract shops) and that multigram amounts are required for a course of treatment. It's not what you want to have for that group.