COVID-19 studies for: C19 studies:  HC QHC Q IvermectinIVM Vitamin DVitamin D ZincZn REGN-COV2REGN LY-CoVLY RemdesivirRMD
HC Q study #99
Source   PDF   Share   Tweet
See all 181 studies
Late treatment study
Kamran et al., medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.07.30.20165365 (Preprint)
Clearing the fog: Is HC Q effective in reducing COVID-19 progression: A randomized controlled trial
Study of 349 low-risk hospitalized patients with 151 non-consenting or ineligible patients used as controls. SOC included zinc, vitamin C and vitamin D. A statistically significant improvement in PCR negativity is shown at day 7 with HC Q treatment, 52.1% (HC Q) versus 35.7% (control), p=0.001, but no statistically significant difference at day 14, or in progression. Patients were relatively young and there was no mortality. Only 3% of patients had any disease progression and all patients recovered, so there is little if any room for treatment benefit. Progression among higher-risk patients with comorbidities was lower with treatment (12.9% versus 28.6%, p=0.3, very few cases).
Despite the title, this is not an RCT since patients self-selected the arm, or were chosen based on allergies/contraindications. The treatment group had about twice the number of patients with comorbidities. Treatment delay is unknown - it was recorded but not reported in the paper.
Viral load was not measured. As with other studies, PCR may detect non-replicable viral nucleic acid, this is more likely at day 14. Details on the test accuracy are not provided, authors note that RT-PCR sensitivity ranges from 34-80%.
disease progression, ↓5.0%, p=1.00
disease progression, ↓54.8%, p=0.30, with comorbidities
no virological cure, ↓25.5%, p=0.001, risk of viral+ at day 7
no virological cure, ↑10.0%, p=0.52, risk of viral+ at day 14
Source   PDF   Share   Tweet
See all 181 studies
Please send us corrections, updates, or comments.