Scientists publish data on virus drug

Nearly a month after federal scientists claimed that an experimental drug had helped patients severely ill with the coronavirus, the research has been published.

The drug, remdesivir, was quickly authorized by the Food and Drug Administration for treatment of corona-virus patients, and hospitals rushed to obtain supplies.

But until now, researchers and physicians had not seen the actual data. And remdesivir, made by Gilead Sciences, has a spotty history.

It was originally intended to treat hepatitis, but it failed to. It was tested against Ebola, but results were lackluster.

[CORONAVIRUS: Click here for our complete coverage » arkansasonline.com/coronavirus]

So far, remdesivir has not been officially approved for any purpose. The FDA’s emergency use authorization was not a formal approval.

The long-awaited study, sponsored by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, appeared on The New England Journal of Medicine website Friday evening. It confirms the essence of the government’s assertions: Remdesivir shortened recovery time from 15 days to 11 days in hospitalized patients. The study defined recovery as “either discharge from the hospital or hospitalization.”

The trial was rigorous, randomly assigning 1,063 seriously ill patients to receive either remdesivir or a placebo. Those who received the drug not only recovered faster but also did not have serious adverse events more often than those who were given the placebo.

It was an international trial, with most sites in the United States.

Patients were assessed daily, and those administering the evaluations did not know whether a patient had been given remdesivir or the placebo.

A monitoring board reviewed the data at specified intervals and called for a halt to the study when there was clear evidence that the drug was effective.

On April 29, the national institute issued a news release stating as much. But infectious-disease doctors were frustrated, because they did not have access to the findings, which might have affected how patients were treated.