Study finds hydroxychloroquine helped

imasoftov

Sat, Jul 04 2020, 8:44 pm

amother [ Blonde ] wrote:

Since one can be asymptomatic while transmitting the virus, I can't see how all senators, congressmen, governors and mayors managed to stay virus free. Like I posted, they most likely took it prophylactically secretly.

It's not true that all senators, congressmen, and mayors managed to stay virus free. I don't know of any governors, however. A Forbes article from the spring listed one senator, four representatives, and one mayor.

amother

Aqua

Sat, Jul 04 2020, 9:59 pm

The huge difference between this study and previous studies is the administration of the medication early on to only a select subset of patients who are more at-risk for corona complications. This was Dr. Zelenko's protocol as well.

amother

Cobalt

Sat, Jul 04 2020, 11:10 pm

I am sure all the naysayers and mockers on the media and elsewhere will immediately apologize for jumping to wrong conclusions.

amother

Wine

Sat, Jul 04 2020, 11:16 pm

amother [ Cobalt ] wrote:

I am sure all the naysayers and mockers on the media and elsewhere will immediately apologize for jumping to wrong conclusions.

I would love if it an effective treatment was found, but proving that hydroxychloroquine works from this one study is ridiculous.

You realize that this study was only done with 2,000 subjects over several months in the same hospital (when the treatments and mortality rate in general would have evolved over time as they learned more how to treat the virus)? And is an observational study rather than a clinical trial? And that those with cardiac risk factors weren't given this medication, but they were at higher risk to die from covid anyway? And that those given hydroxychloroquine were also given more steriods than the other patients?

Everyone jumping on the bandwagon here is proving that we all just believe what we want to believe.

amother

Cobalt

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 12:08 am

No actually I believe my dr who had his dr treat him with this and who treated his patients with it all to good effect B”H
I do like hearing encouraging news- would think we all would

amother

Seafoam

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 2:10 am

I believe it works because it worked miracles for me. After having steady fever for 1.5 weeks without any relief from Tylenol or Motrin I took this medication and 4-5 hours later I was fever free! The fever disappeared and my oxygen level that was going down started going back up.

amother

Brunette

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 2:55 am

amother [ Seafoam ] wrote:

Also worked for my dh.

amother

Pewter

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 3:07 am

amother [ Brunette ] wrote:

Also worked for my dh.

And for me

Laiya

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 7:18 pm

amother [ Wine ] wrote:

Although the study included over 2,000 subjects, it propensity-matched 190 pairs of subjects (iow, a control group) to account for differences in age, co-morbidities, etc. These 380 subjects are the ones relevant to the results of the study, and it is this group that demonstrated hydroxychloriquine use reduced mortality by around 50%.

Propensity-matching means that for every patient who was given steroids and who also received hydroxychloriquine, there was a corresponding patient, of similar age, etc. who was also given steroids but not given hydroxychloriquine. This would eliminate the possibility of benefits incurred by the steroids and not by the hydroxychloriquine.

It means that, for every patient with cardiovascular disease (yes there were some) who received hydroxychloriquine, there was a corresponding patient with cardiovascular disease who did not receive hydroxychloriquine. And so on.

It's true that this was a retrospective analysis and not a double blind placebo trial. The study itself lists that fact as its greatest weakness. Nevertheless, the results are very encouraging.

avrahamama

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 7:23 pm

Laiya wrote:

Almost every single doctor that I know personally. Has used HCQ for themselves, their families, and their patients with success. All of these doctors feel that public health has become politicized. In any case. The advice they give is to go to your private physician and not use an urgent care or hospital as they use protocol that is strongly influenced by govt subsidies. And so the quality of care is influenced by govt as opposed to science.

amother

Wine

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 7:52 pm

Laiya wrote:

It means that, for every patient with cardiovascular disease (yes there were some) who received hydroxychloriquine, there was a corresponding patient with cardiovascular disease who did not receive hydroxychloriquine. And so on.

Source?

Laiya

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 8:15 pm

amother [ Wine ] wrote:

Source?

The study.

amother

Lilac

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 8:23 pm

amother [ Cobalt ] wrote:

who is "they"?

to the point it is quite noteworthy that there is no accountability! Just the dems are on to the next thing...keep throwing mud til something sticks...ugh

and for sure the media supports it

That’s why they’re fake news.

Cheiny

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 8:25 pm

amother [ Seafoam ] wrote:

BH so glad to hear.

Laiya

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 8:27 pm

ora_43 wrote:

I love how sometimes, CNN is a rabidly left-wing site that should be ignored, and other times, it's the source of proof that Democrats are deliberately hiding the truth from the people.

The proof as to what the study found is is not CNN reporting on the study, it's the study. I'm not the OP, but if I were, I would also find an article on CNN that discusses the study rather than, say, Fox, as I would assume that the CNN article would be more palatable to some.

amother

Wine

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 8:42 pm

Laiya wrote:

The study.

The data was analysed retroactively and it says that only 190 patients had propensity matching exactly.

A total of 190 hydroxychloroquine patients exactly matched up with 190 corresponding non-hydroxychloroquine treated patients based on the exact underlying propensity score.

ETA: I see now that you mentioned this as well though it doesn't say anywhere that only the data from these 380 were included in the results. I'll go back to check that. If it is the case, I stand corrected though it's nowhere near enough numbers to give any conclusive evidence.

And it says that those with cardiac risks were not given it, not sure where you got from it that some were.

And this is an important caveat they included at the end:
However, our results should be interpreted with some caution and should not be applied to patients treated outside of hospital settings. Our results also require further confirmation in prospective, randomized controlled trials that rigorously evaluate the safety, and efficacy of hydroxychloroquine therapy for COVID-19 in hospitalized patients.

As I said, if this turns out to be a wonder drug, I'll be overjoyed. But I don't think this study can give us any more than cautious optimism at this point.

Anecdotal evidence that posters are coming up with here doesn't mean anything either becaues who is to say that people wouldn't have felt better without it? (I have a close assoicate who believes that the fact she put onions around her home made her feel better from Covid a few hours later. True story. I'm still not peddaling that as a cure.)

amother

Amethyst

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 8:46 pm

Two of my relatives were given hydroxychloriquine and died anyway. Anecdotes don’t make up data.

amother

Wine

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 9:05 pm

I read it through again and the figures shown to seem to be clearly including all patients, not just the 380.

Results: Of 2,541 patients, with a median total hospitalization time of 6 days (IQR: 4-10 days),
median age was 64 years (IQR:53-76 years), 51% male, 56% African American, with median
time to follow-up of 28.5 days (IQR:3-53). Overall in-hospital mortality was 18.1% (95%
CI:16.6%-19.7%); by treatment: hydroxychloroquine+azithromycin, 157/783 (20.1% [95% CI:
17.3%-23.0%]), hydroxychloroquine alone, 162/1202 (13.5% [95% CI: 11.6%-15.5%]),
azithromycin alone, 33/147 (22.4% [95% CI: 16.0%-30.1%]), and neither drug, 108/409 (26.4%
[95% CI: 22.2%-31.0%]). Primary cause of mortality was respiratory failure (88%); no patient
had documented torsades de pointes. From Cox regression modeling, predictors of mortality
were age >65 years (HR:2.6 [95% CI:1.9-3.3]), white race (HR:1.7 [95% CI:1.4-2.1]), CKD
(HR:1.7 [95%CI:1.4-2.1]), reduced O2 saturation level on admission (HR:1.5 [95%CI:1.1-2.1]),
and ventilator use during admission (HR: 2.2 [95%CI:1.4-3.3]). Hydroxychloroquine provided a
66% hazard ratio reduction, and hydroxychloroquine+azithromycin 71% compared to neither
treatment (p<0.001).
Conclusions and Relevance: In this multi-hospital assessment, when controlling for COVID-19
risk factors, treatment with hydroxychloroquine alone and in combination with azithromycin was
associated with reduction in COVID-19 associated mortality. Prospective trials are needed to
examine this impact.

amother

Wine

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 9:08 pm

OOC, does anyone know if hydroxychloroquine is being used in Israel at all?

Laiya

Sun, Jul 05 2020, 9:08 pm

amother [ Wine ] wrote:

The study's write-up seemed pretty thorough, and the Tables list which patients were part of the 190 pairs and which were not. In any case I'll quote directly from the study.

In response to the first bolded from your post, that only the 190 pairs were used to find the conclusion that those treated with hcq had 51% better mortality rates:

wrote:

Further, a total of 190 hydroxychloroquine patients exactly matched up with 190 corresponding non-hydroxychloroquine treated patients based on the exact underlying propensity score. Table 3 contains a descriptive summarization of these patients within both the unmatched and propensity matched settings, confirming that the propensity matched groups have identical underlying patient characteristics. The Cox regression result for the two propensity matched groups (Table 4) indicates that treatment with hydroxychloroquine resulted in a mortality hazard ratio decrease of 51% (p = 0.009). The resulting Kaplan-Meier survival curves within the propensity matched setting displayed significantly better survival in the hydroxychloroquine treated group, with the enhanced survival persisting all the way out to 28 days from admission (Fig. 2).

As for your second bolded regarding cardiovascular risks:

wrote:

DATA SOURCES
The data source for analysis of patient information was derived from electronic medical records in the Electronic Information System. Study variables collected on each patient included the following; 1) patient demographics: age, gender, race, body mass index (BMI) on admission, stratified into four categories: <18.5; 18.5-24.9; 25.0-29.9 and ≥ 30; 2) clinical characteristics: admission date, discharge date, length of stay (LOS), comorbidities including: cardiovascular disease (CVD),

and again, the comorbidity of cardiovascular disease is listed in each of Tables 1-4, and finally under

wrote:

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Demographic and clinical characteristics were descriptively summarized for all patients and subsets by treatment group, to test the null hypothesis that treatment course between hydroxychloroquine, hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin, azithromycin, and other (no hydroxychloroquine or azithromycin) were similar. Multivariable Cox regression models and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to compare survival among treatment groups while controlling for demographics (e.g., age, gender), preexisting medical conditions (e.g. CVD, lung disease)