No. This study found no evidence of effectiveness as a treatment for COVID-19 in patients who need it.
A sample size of 20 is sufficient to satisfy a .05 statistical significance threshold that hydrochloroquine had even the slightest positive effect. In this population, it did not.
All therapeutic drugs are developed using in vitro and pre-clinical (non human animal) treatment groups no bigger than 20. When a well controlled and randomized study comparng two groups that are each four times larger than 20, we have a VERY strong indication that this drug delivers not only too little effect to be a useful treatment for COVID-19, but it very likely delivered absolutely NO EFFECT AT ALL in hospitalized patients. Don't expect any reputable physician or scientist to dismiss this evidence.
This is very bad news for the prospect for treating patients who need it using this drug -- those people who are likeliest to die or endure lasting harm. The other 80% of positive patients don't need any therapy except time.
A sample size of 20 is sufficient to satisfy a .05 statistical significance threshold that hydrochloroquine had even the slightest positive effect. In this population, it did not.
All therapeutic drugs are developed using in vitro and pre-clinical (non human animal) treatment groups no bigger than 20. When a well controlled and randomized study comparng two groups that are each four times larger than 20, we have a VERY strong indication that this drug delivers not only too little effect to be a useful treatment for COVID-19, but it very likely delivered absolutely NO EFFECT AT ALL in hospitalized patients. Don't expect any reputable physician or scientist to dismiss this evidence.
This is very bad news for the prospect for treating patients who need it using this drug -- those people who are likeliest to die or endure lasting harm. The other 80% of positive patients don't need any therapy except time.