re: Chloroquine cures 100% of COVID patients in study

quote:

---

I would take it without a trial if I were sick.

---

I'm good with that. I would too, most likely.

I just answered the "why trial it" question. That is why they trial things that are "off label". To see if the interaction may actually be NEGATIVE. That is all I am saying

quote:

---

Guess what has it already in there? 

---

Super low dose though IIRC. You would probably have to drinks cases of it. Still, it is just water soooooo...
Why not?

get this news out there and let's move on with our lives folks.

quote:

---

Facebook?

---

i get it, but ultimately its the daily caller + stanford medical

quote:

---

frick your mother!

---

Meh. She ain't that great. OT 4.5 on her best day.

quote:

---

The Daily Caller.

---

come on dick head, they're the ones doing the interview.

no who's leading the study and articulating the results?

i legitimately believe yall want this shite to last for 10 more months.

quote:

---

Chloroquine

---

I saw an episode of M*A*S*H that revolved around this. It had adverse effects on people of African and Middle Eastern descent. It hit Klinger pretty hard.

This is a pretty good article that turned up as a footnote on a Wiki page on chloroquine. Very detailed description of the disease in the link.

Chinese desciption of the disease

quote:

---

4. Antiviral therapies: Interferon-alpha (adult: 5 million units or equivalent can be added to 2ml sterile injection water and delivered with a nebulizer twice daily), lopinavir/ritonavir (adult: 200mg/50mg/tablet, 2 tablets twice daily; the length of treatment should not exceed 10 days), ribavirin (recommended in combination with interferon or lopinavir/ritonavir, adult: 500mg twice or three times daily via IV, the length of treatment should not exceed 10 days), chloroquine phosphate (adult 18-65 years old weighing more than 50kg: 500mg twice daily for 7 days; bodyweight less than 50kg: 500mg twice daily for day 1 and 2, 500mg once daily for day 3 through 7); umifenovir (adult: 200mg three times daily; the length of treatment should not exceed 10 days).

---

quote:

---

Chloroquine cures 100% of COVID patients in study

---

It was actually 70% (14 out of 20 patients).

A number major issues that stand out with this study.

1. Small sample (36 completed) study, and the control/treatment groups were not only not-randomized, they were self-selected for treatment.

2. 2 of the 16 individuals (12.5%) of the control group were "cured" (e.g., tested negative on day 6) 3 of those not cured had negative results within the previous 2 days, including one who had negative results on days 1, 4, and 5.

3. of the 16 control group participants were not tested on day 6; however, they are considered "not cured." While the participant in the treatment group who wasn't tested on days 5 or 6 but he/she was considered "cured."


4. 6 of the 26 participants in the treatment group stopped their treatment, 4 of those participants stopped the treatment because their condition worsened, 3 were transferred to ICU and 1 died 2 days into it; 1 left because of nausea from the treatment but was positive for the first 3 days; and 1 left voluntarily but was negative. So best-case scenario, only 1 of those 6 participants responded positively to the treatment, as 3 worsened, 1 died, and one couldn't handle the side effects. So now we're talking about 15 of 26 participants being "cured" (57%).

5. According to their tables, a negative test has a CT value of 35 or greater; however, for the treatment group they list the CT values when the are positive for all 20 participants; however, they only list the CT values for the control group for 6 of their participants. It's strange to treat the measurement so different between the two groups.

6. Of the 6 original CT values listed for the control group, only 1 was 30 or above (16.7%), while 5 of the 20 for the treatment group was 30 or above (25%) including 2 who were a 34, only 1 point from testing negative.

7. Their analyses, in light of the limitations of their sample and data (missing data), are extremely flawed (chi-square and various time points). With repeated-measurements across time, they could have done a mixed-effects model and at the very least used done a logistic regression with the positive/negative data, and even better, used the actual scaled CT to establish a trend line for the treatment.

Obviously the sample and randomization issues are something they couldn't do anything about; however, between the loss of participants in the treatment group, the majority of which got worse or died, the differences in how they coded the data and treated missing data between the control and treatment groups, and not using better analyses that would control for the limitations of their data and maximize the benefits of it (e.g., repeated measurements), this is a really poor study, IMO.

Here is the paper:

Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial