Page 26 of 43

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 11, 2020 6:22 pm
by Macdoc
Sure ....if you were dying from Covid you'd take the same wait and see?? Pardon my laughter.
.....there are very few "conclusive" things in medicine.
My son is in a clinical trial for his Level 2 brain cancer....should I tell him to "wait and see it's not conclusive". :nono:

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 11, 2020 6:38 pm
by NineBerry
If there's a clinical trial, is not known yet whether the treatment actually helps. That's why a trial is needed in the first place. Knowing whether a treatment helps, in which situations and whether there are side effects.

My point is that the information posted before is useless to us who are not involved with the studies. We can't know based on the information given whether the drug works or not. You need a controlled trial, actually several controlled trials, and then you can make a judgement.

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 11, 2020 6:54 pm
by Fallible
Yep, the trials are what happen while the rest of us wait and see.

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 11, 2020 6:54 pm
by chango369
NineBerry";p="2742622 wrote:If there's a clinical trial, is not known yet whether the treatment actually helps. That's why a trial is needed in the first place. Knowing whether a treatment helps, in which situations and whether there are side effects.

My point is that the information posted before is useless to us who are not involved with the studies me. We can't know based on the information given whether the drug works or not. You need a controlled trial, actually several controlled trials, and then you can make a judgement.


FIFY

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 11, 2020 9:39 pm
by Macdoc
Reading challenged I guess....68 people in serious trouble with Covid-19 were actually helped. Is that so hard to comprehend ??
Sit in your hut and wait it out. :roll:
•••••

A way forward maybe for one sizeable region

B.C. could be reaching the 'maintenance phase' of its COVID-19 pandemic. Here's what that means

Don't think about booking haircuts or going to concerts anytime soon, but some changes could come


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british- ... -1.5528959

snip
If you're going to go back to normal activities, it would be like 'OK, there's any sign of an outbreak, any person has been positive at work, immediately the [health] unit should be dispatched, the person should be tested, very meticulous contact tracing should be done,' " said Sadatsafavi.

"But that requires an order of magnitude of higher testing capacity than what we have now."


and it's a path already taken

Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore–all southeast Asian polities with strong language, economic and cultural links to China, and situated in close proximity to it, have managed to date to keep their deaths to single digits.

They did this primarily by vigorous testing and tracing of infected persons.


https://hongkongfp.com/2020/04/10/taiwa ... -covid-19/

snip
The Taiwan government merged citizens’ recent international travel records with their digital health-insurance files and allowed doctors and pharmacists access to the information. Stiff fines were applied to quarantine violators.

Singapore took a similarly serious approach, deploying police to track down the contacts of infected residents and using government-issued cellphones to keep tabs on those in quarantine. Three local doctors said recently that “relative normalcy of day-to-day life has been maintained.”

The general approach in all three jurisdictions was a range of aggressive measures based on the view that COVID-19 would spread quickly and widely. This meant testing for infection quickly. Today, testing capacity for COVID-19 in Taiwan has reached 3,400 samples a day.

Violators of home isolation regulations were fined up to (US)$5,000. The price of surgical masks was brought down to (US) $.20 and production greatly increased.

https://hongkongfp.com/2020/04/10/taiwa ... -covid-19/

Google and Apple may offer a way to trace contacts and rapid response teams need to be put in place.

OnOn Friday, Google and Apple joined together for an ambitious emergency project, laying out a new protocol for tracking the ongoing coronavirus outbreak. It’s an urgent, complex project, with huge implications for privacy and public health. Similar projects have been successful in Singapore and other countries, but it remains to be seen whether US public health agencies would be able to manage such a project — even with the biggest tech companies in the world lending a hand.

https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/11/2121 ... oth-secure

The headache with this is perhaps more freewheeling democracies won't submit to the rigor demanded and want the ankle bracelets off too soon. :scratch:

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 11, 2020 10:04 pm
by NineBerry
Macdoc";p="2742643 wrote:Reading challenged I guess....68 people in serious trouble with Covid-19 were actually helped.


That's wrong.

In this cohort of patients hospitalized for severe Covid-19 who were treated with
compassionate-use remdesivir, clinical improvement was observed in 36 of 53 pa-
tients (68%). Measurement of efficacy will require ongoing randomized, placebo-
controlled trials of remdesivir therapy.


68%, not 68 people. And the information, that clinical improvement occurred doesn't mean that it occurred because of this drug. The patients underwent other treatment at the same time. You can't say whether improvement occurred because of this drug, because of other treatments or would have occurred anyway. Even among patients with severe covid 19 without any experimental treatments, there is improvement. Based on the demographics of the patients, improvement can occur in a large part of the group.

That's why we need studies with comparable groups, one with and one without the drug, to know whether it works.

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 11, 2020 10:27 pm
by Macdoc
Fine score one for you ....you aren't going to bullshit your way out of this. These people were in a clinical trial but their own choice and improved
All received remdesivir for up to 10 days on a compassionate use basis, a program that allows people to use unapproved medicines when no other treatment options are available. Over 18 days, 68% of the patients improved


in the eyes of the trained professionals that undertook the trials....

Compassionate Use of Remdesivir for Patients with Severe Covid-19
List of authors.
Jonathan Grein, M.D., Norio Ohmagari, M.D., Ph.D., Daniel Shin, M.D., George Diaz, M.D., Erika Asperges, M.D., Antonella Castagna, M.D., Torsten Feldt, M.D., Gary Green, M.D., Margaret L. Green, M.D., M.P.H., François-Xavier Lescure, M.D., Ph.D., Emanuele Nicastri, M.D., Rentaro Oda, M.D.,


https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/N ... 6?query=RP

FFS what does it take ... :nono:

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 11, 2020 10:43 pm
by NineBerry
Macdoc";p="2742646 wrote:Fine score one for you ....you aren't going to bullshit your way out of this. These people were in a clinical trial but their own choice and improved
All received remdesivir for up to 10 days on a compassionate use basis, a program that allows people to use unapproved medicines when no other treatment options are available. Over 18 days, 68% of the patients improved


in the eyes of the trained professionals that undertook the trials....

Compassionate Use of Remdesivir for Patients with Severe Covid-19
List of authors.
Jonathan Grein, M.D., Norio Ohmagari, M.D., Ph.D., Daniel Shin, M.D., George Diaz, M.D., Erika Asperges, M.D., Antonella Castagna, M.D., Torsten Feldt, M.D., Gary Green, M.D., Margaret L. Green, M.D., M.P.H., François-Xavier Lescure, M.D., Ph.D., Emanuele Nicastri, M.D., Rentaro Oda, M.D.,


https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/N ... 6?query=RP

FFS what does it take ... :nono:


Yes, those patients improved. The question is if they improved because of the drug. That's also in the conclusion of the paper:

Interpretation of the results of this study is limited by the small size of the cohort, the relatively short duration of follow-up, potential missing data owing to the nature of the program, the lack of information on 8 of the patients initially treated, and the lack of a randomized control group. Although the latter precludes definitive conclusions, comparisons with contemporaneous cohorts from the literature, in whom general care is expected to be consistent with that of our cohort, suggest that remdesivir may have clinical benefit in patients with severe Covid-19. Nevertheless, other factors may have contributed to differences in outcomes, including the type of supportive care (e.g., concomitant medications or variations in ventilatory practices) and differences in institutional treatment protocols and thresholds for hospitalization. Moreover, the use of invasive ventilation as a proxy for disease severity may be influenced by the availability of ventilators in a given location. The findings from these uncontrolled data will be informed by the ongoing randomized, placebo-controlled trials of remdesivir therapy for Covid-19.


Not conclusive, only hopeful. I definitely hope that it works.

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 11, 2020 10:48 pm
by Hermit
Macdoc";p="2742646 wrote:Fine score one for you ....you aren't going to bullshit your way out of this. These people were in a clinical trial but their own choice and improved
All received remdesivir for up to 10 days on a compassionate use basis, a program that allows people to use unapproved medicines when no other treatment options are available. Over 18 days, 68% of the patients improved

That's good news. Unfortunately we have no way of knowing what percentage of patients would have improved had remdesivir been administered to nobody in that group. In the absence of a control group we can say nothing regarding its beneficial effects.

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 12, 2020 7:46 am
by Rachel Bronwyn
68% of patients improving tells us nothing about remdesivir. It just tells us 68% of patients improved and we can't demonstrate how or why. 68% may well have improved without remdesivir. They didn't use any controls so we can't know.

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 12, 2020 11:41 am
by Macdoc
You can only know they improved in the eyes of the professionals conducting the study and that the same professionals suggested more trials are warranted as a result.
If you really think 68% improved on their own ..... pity the planet. :roll:

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 12, 2020 12:30 pm
by OlivierK
What percentage do you think of COVID-19 patients improve over 18 days? Overall, the percentage would be higher than that by far. For hospitalised patients it seems in the right ballpark, so it will come down to how the patients were selected, and whether a double blind trial would affect assessment of "improvement".

While it's worth testing (pretty much anything is if it has any conceivable mechanism) it simply remains to be seen whether its effective. If 32% of patients who take it show no improvement or get worse, then it's probably not wise to hang too much hope on it.

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 12, 2020 1:11 pm
by Rachel Bronwyn
WHO's mortality rate estinate for COVID-19 last month was 3.4%. The disease runs its course pretty fast. Considering most people do just get over it, I would entirely expect to see 68% of people who test positive feeling improved three weeks after the onset of symptoms. Most people are over the disease by then and most of them don't need treatment to overcome it.

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 12, 2020 1:53 pm
by Hermit
Macdoc";p="2742688 wrote:You can only know they improved in the eyes of the professionals conducting the study and that the same professionals suggested more trials are warranted as a result.
If you really think 68% improved on their own ..... pity the planet. :roll:

Empirical data have established that the death rate of hospitalised patients infected with the 2019-nCoV virus is 15%. One ought to be able to conclude that the condition of the other 85% improved. If you can find statistics that put the death rate of hospitalised patients above the 32% mark feel free to provide links to them.

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 12, 2020 2:22 pm
by NineBerry
The patients in this paper were in severe conditions, many already on ventilators. So, the 67% getting better is a reason for hope, but again, not conclusive. There was no defined study protocol and no control group. Not conclusive

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 12, 2020 3:50 pm
by Macdoc
Where ever did anyone say it was conclusive ??? ...the conclusion by the those conducting the study
68% improved and warranting further trials .. :roll:

Like this one which will take the information further

Study will enroll patients with severe and moderate COVID-19
Outside of clinical trials, remdesivir only has been available to patients with COVID-19 under compassionate use - the use of unapproved drugs when no other treatment is available.

"This trial will help give us more robust data about effectiveness and side effects of this drug," Shankaran said.

To qualify in the phase III randomized, trial, patients must be hospitalized with moderate to severe COVID-19 with lung abnormalities. Patients at Rush now are being given the option of enrolling in the study, which launched at Rush on April 3.

The study will include two groups of randomized patients with COVID-19; those with moderate or severe disease.

In the study, patients will receive either remdesivir or a nonactive substitute. This medication will be given intravenously for five to ten days. All patients also will receive supportive care (treatment of symptoms and side effects).

"We will be looking at how long the patients are sick, if they had to be intubated and whether this treatment helps patients recover faster," Shankaran said.

"Patients who agree to participate in this study will be followed closely during their hospitalization and up to a month after starting on the drug to evaluate how they are doing and how they are recovering. We will also evaluate for any side effects to the drug," she added.

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20200 ... ID-19.aspx


This is a good consolidation site for clinical trial news
https://www.news-medical.net/category/D ... -News.aspx

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 14, 2020 3:46 am
by Macdoc
As China fights to prevent a second wave of COVID-19, two experimental vaccines will be trialed on humans, state media Xinhua reported on Tuesday.

The experimental vaccines are being developed by a Beijing-based unit of Nasdaq-listed Sinovac Biotech, and by the Wuhan Institute of Biological Products, an affiliate of state-owned China National Pharmaceutical Group.

In March, China gave the green-light for another clinical trial for a coronavirus vaccine candidate developed by military-backed China’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences and HK-listed biotech firm CanSino Bio, shortly after U.S. drug developer Moderna said it had begun human tests for their vaccine with the U.S. National Institutes of Health.


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/a ... als-while/

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 14, 2020 4:07 pm
by kiore
Tested myself today with one of the new IgM/IgG antibody rapid test, will be ramping up testing soon and wanted to see how to plan the practical delivery of this. Test was relatively simple to use, single blood drop type and you can write unique identifier on the strip itself to avoid mis-identification/mis-labelling. These kinds of tests not that accurate as disease testing but should be pretty accurate for establishing immunity. They are easy to read the possible results generated are as below:
IgM -ve / IgG +ve Prior infection.
IgM -ve / IgG -ve No prior infection / too early in illness / non converter.
IgM +ve / IgG -ve Early stage infection.
IgM +ve / IgG +ve Increasing immunity from current infection

I was kind of hoping for the first one, but got the second one as I am asymptomatic this probably means both negative.

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 14, 2020 4:59 pm
by minininja
kiore wrote:Tested myself today with one of the new IgM/IgG antibody rapid test, will be ramping up testing soon and wanted to see how to plan the practical delivery of this. Test was relatively simple to use, single blood drop type and you can write unique identifier on the strip itself to avoid mis-identification/mis-labelling. These kinds of tests not that accurate as disease testing but should be pretty accurate for establishing immunity. They are easy to read the possible results generated are as below:
IgM -ve / IgG +ve Prior infection.
IgM -ve / IgG -ve No prior infection / too early in illness / non converter.
IgM +ve / IgG -ve Early stage infection.
IgM +ve / IgG +ve Increasing immunity from current infection

I was kind of hoping for the first one, but got the second one as I am asymptomatic this probably means both negative.


That's interesting, a little while ago the UK deputy chief medical officer insisted that antibody tests could not be used to indicate current infection despite other countries reportedly using them that way. There's a clip on twitter here.

The last thing I heard about them was that the UK had cancelled orders of millions of seven different types of antibody test after deciding they weren't accurate enough. Whereas Thailand was trialling their use due to the speed, knowing that they weren't always reliable but if they came back positive they could be followed up with the slower, more accurate test, and if they were negative then after three days isolation they could be tested a second time with the quick antibody test to reduce chance of false negatives.

Re: 2019-nCoV or COVID-19

Posted: Apr 14, 2020 6:26 pm
by kiore
Yes the dual test like this not very accurate for acute disease testing and not so useful for this usage which is why we are just planning this for post peak testing we are still PCR testing acute cases. This testing is useful for establishing the extent of the outbreak and identifying those with presumed immunity which I don't think should be considered a get out of jail free card but it will better allow projections of community immunity. In my location we have no idea how many infected in the mild category as testing still only prioritized to critically ill. I been waiting for a rapid test to be available in order to more realistically calculate the extent of this outbreak, is all very well to calculate the peaks by critical hospital admissions or deaths but sampling a population made up of asymptomatic, presumed and positive people has yet to be done on any scale.