HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Breaking News Gilead Remd...

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 07:53 AM

Breaking News Gilead Remdesivir Trial for Covid-19 Has Met Primary Endpoint

Source: Bloomberg News

Gilead Sciences said it's aware of positive data emerging from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases' study of the investigational antiviral remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19, Bloomberg News reports.

The shares of the company are halted. More information is available on the Bloomberg Terminal.

Developing...

Update:https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-29/gilead-remdesivir-trial-for-covid-19-has-met-primary-endpoint

Read more: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-29/gilead-remdesivir-trial-for-covid-19-has-met-primary-endpoint-k9lbot69





Headline has changed and more information is being added to the link.

Gilead stock has halted!

Suspected something big was up just watching the futures.

52 replies, 3412 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 52 replies Author Time Post
Reply Breaking News Gilead Remdesivir Trial for Covid-19 Has Met Primary Endpoint (Original post)
mobeau69 Apr 2020 OP
groundloop Apr 2020 #1
mobeau69 Apr 2020 #2
lagomorph777 Apr 2020 #8
LisaL Apr 2020 #11
lagomorph777 Apr 2020 #12
LisaL Apr 2020 #13
lagomorph777 Apr 2020 #14
KatyMan Apr 2020 #49
Steelrolled Apr 2020 #27
luvtheGWN Apr 2020 #3
mobeau69 Apr 2020 #4
LiberalArkie Apr 2020 #5
luvtheGWN Apr 2020 #15
LiberalArkie Apr 2020 #21
LisaL Apr 2020 #26
jpak Apr 2020 #46
turbinetree Apr 2020 #6
still_one Apr 2020 #7
LisaL Apr 2020 #9
still_one Apr 2020 #17
still_one Apr 2020 #19
ananda Apr 2020 #22
still_one Apr 2020 #29
LastDemocratInSC Apr 2020 #47
DeminPennswoods Apr 2020 #10
still_one Apr 2020 #18
Hortensis Apr 2020 #31
still_one Apr 2020 #32
Hortensis Apr 2020 #35
still_one Apr 2020 #37
BlueIdaho Apr 2020 #39
Steelrolled Apr 2020 #25
Hortensis Apr 2020 #33
Steelrolled Apr 2020 #48
noneof_theabove Apr 2020 #16
turbinetree Apr 2020 #20
mjvpi Apr 2020 #23
turbinetree Apr 2020 #24
LisaL Apr 2020 #34
Hortensis Apr 2020 #28
LisaL Apr 2020 #38
Hortensis Apr 2020 #45
OilemFirchen Apr 2020 #30
LisaL Apr 2020 #36
OilemFirchen Apr 2020 #40
BlueIdaho Apr 2020 #41
OilemFirchen Apr 2020 #42
BlueIdaho Apr 2020 #43
OilemFirchen Apr 2020 #44
JCMach1 Apr 2020 #50
LisaL Apr 2020 #51
JCMach1 Apr 2020 #52

Response to mobeau69 (Original post)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 08:05 AM

1. Good news. Of course we will soon know that tRump himself developed this drug.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to groundloop (Reply #1)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 08:06 AM

2. LOL. He'll look like an even bigger fool. Most people have seen the light on his con. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to groundloop (Reply #1)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 08:40 AM

8. If the news is true, it's still a very limited help. Requires an IV, in a hospital setting.

Most of us REALLY don't want to get into that situation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #8)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 08:47 AM

11. Could be helpful in nursing homes.

They are already in a hospital like setting with bunch of nurses around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #11)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 08:48 AM

12. I don't think most nursing homes are actually equipped/staffed to deliver IVs.

Not the ones I've seen, anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #12)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 08:51 AM

13. I guess it would have to be a skilled nursing facility.

Or they can invite somebody in who can administer an IV.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #13)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 08:53 AM

14. Yeah, it may be much more practical than sending everybody to the hospital.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #12)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 06:55 PM

49. Most nursing facilities

Last edited Thu Apr 30, 2020, 11:25 AM - Edit history (1)

Have a "skilled" side or skilled beds. Much of the time (at least in TX) they will contract out something as specialized as this- meaning a contracted agency would send in an RN to administer the infusions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #8)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 11:08 AM

27. This is true, but at least

use of IVs is extremely common, and can be accommodated on any floor (doesn't require ICU). Hospitals have been clearing floors for COVID overflow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mobeau69 (Original post)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 08:12 AM

3. Could any of you fill us in on what the article says?

I've hit my limit this month for Bloomberg articles.

Thanks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to luvtheGWN (Reply #3)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 08:15 AM

4. It's everywhere now. Try this from CNBC...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to LiberalArkie (Reply #5)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 08:58 AM

15. Thank you.

Without a control group (as in a proper clinical trial) they really have no way of knowing if the drug helped or not. It could very well be that those who improved, would have improved without it. And since it didn't help half of the patients.........

Sorry to sound like a downer about this, but all I can say is that it's "hopeful" but definitely unproven.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to luvtheGWN (Reply #15)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 09:52 AM

21. It might help with some by just knowing they are taking something for it. Placebo effect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to luvtheGWN (Reply #15)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 10:52 AM

26. We are discussing several trials on one thread.

The one where drug met primary goal had a control group taking placebo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to luvtheGWN (Reply #15)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 12:40 PM

46. It was a large randomized double-blind placebo study

The placebo group was the control.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mobeau69 (Original post)


Response to mobeau69 (Original post)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 08:33 AM

7. WHO messed up big time by accidently releasing incomplete data from China, (supposedly), which

did not demonstrate any difference.

One has to wonder if that released data from WHO by someone, was a manipulation


Anyway, it is good to see positive data against this virus, which hopefully has the potential to hold things at bay until a vaccine is released


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #7)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 08:42 AM

9. That study in China was on severely sick patients.

It sounds like remdesivir has to be given early in the infection to give it a chance to work. So for severely sick patients it might be too late to get any benefits, since symptoms develop slowly overtime.
So that's when testing become so important. If you have to give the drug early, you obviously have to test quickly.
Another issue is that this drug is given via an IV, so patients would have to go into an office or clinic to get their IVs, which adds another complication.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #9)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 09:03 AM

17. That is what I heard also, but still it was still an incomplete trial. I am trying to understand

what they mean by "early", and as you pointed out because symptoms develop overtime, testing become critical, but from my understanding, besides that they still don't have sufficient testing resources, the criteria they use in most places in order to even get the test may have to be revised


Thanks for your info Lisa


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #9)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 09:21 AM

19. They will administer the drug in an infusion center or something like that. I am skeptical

that they would administer it in an office setting, and as you said because it is given through IV, depending where people are, that may make it quite difficult for some people to get there

At least they found something that seems to help, and this might open the door to other treatments

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #19)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 09:59 AM

22. That's what I was thinking.

It's certainly better than the nothing we have so far,
except for an occasional convalescent plasma treatment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ananda (Reply #22)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 11:20 AM

29. Yes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #9)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 01:08 PM

47. All anti-viral drugs must be given early to be effective.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #7)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 08:45 AM

10. The WHO release of the China study

apparently showed that for very, very ill patients, remdisivir didn't keep them from dying. That's a pretty high expecation for a drug, imho.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DeminPennswoods (Reply #10)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 09:04 AM

18. Still the data should not have been released because it was incomplete, also it is a

catch 22 situation, because they need to more testing, and they need to test asymptomatic people also, because no one knows when an asymptomatic person because symptomatic in my opinion





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #18)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 11:40 AM

31. It was treatment information, released AS incomplete and

leaving the door open to possible efficacy in other patients.

Clinicians need to know what is known, and in the beginning nothing met the standards we would like to have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #31)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 11:47 AM

32. This latest result showed definite shorter course of the disease and that is good

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #32)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 11:52 AM

35. Fantastic if it turns out to be reliable as research continues.

Less time for the virus to implant and damage tissues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #35)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 11:53 AM

37. +++

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DeminPennswoods (Reply #10)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 11:58 AM

39. The "China" Remdesivir study failed to enroll enough participants

To reach statistical relevance. Without enough enrollees there is nothing to be learned from that study. It was abandoned prior to completion so - any and all data from that broken study are unreliable.

Other studies are continuing around the globe. Soon enough we will know - regardless of how many conspiracy theories show up on DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #7)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 10:48 AM

25. I think WHO has lost much credibility over this crisis

and the name is tainted. Maybe WHO would be better off focusing on deployment and administrative matters, out of the spotlight, and have a new international group, outside of the UN and not including politicians, be the scientific clearinghouse for the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Steelrolled (Reply #25)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 11:48 AM

33. Well, Trump has frozen U.S. funding to WHO, which is most of it

of course. You may not get WHO abandoning its role right in the middle of a planet-wide pandemic, though. China's stepped in to pledge $30M to keep it going.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #33)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 06:23 PM

48. Realistically I don't expect anything to change

and certainly not while this pandemic is active. I have personally learned though, that positions and statements from the WHO are not necessarily based on scientific fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mobeau69 (Original post)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 08:59 AM

16. not about the drugs

but it is all about this:

Welcome to the United Corporations and Churches of America [UCCA]
Where the real product is the Stock
and the true customer is the Stockholder.
In gawd we trust.
All others can pay foreign loan shark interest rates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mobeau69 (Original post)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 09:22 AM

20. I want to know what "early and late" mean in these "trials........

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-gilead-remdesivir/gilead-says-remdesivir-shows-improvement-in-covid-19-patients-when-used-early-idUSKBN22B1T9

where were the 397 people in the trial stages, where did they get the 62% and 49% result and did they do the following:


Physicians won’t get clarity until the medications have gone through what are known as randomized, controlled trials. In these kinds of clinical tests, half of a pool of patients is randomly given the drug, and the other half—the control group—is given an otherwise identical dosage that’s missing the active ingredient.

“If you don’t have a control, you will never know if a drug helped or harmed,” says Andre Kalil, a professor in the department of internal medicine at the University of Nebraska Medical Center.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/04/what-you-should-know-about-experimental-therapies-for-coronavirus/

And what about the lack of testing this country............just call me curious, what other maladies did these people have besides having the infection, did they use a placebo..................

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to turbinetree (Reply #20)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 10:26 AM

23. Bingo

Real science takes time. That’s why the 12 to 18 month window has been talked about from the beginning.

I’d be interested in who had recently purchased futures options for Gilead. When the private sector solves problems, profit is paramount to problem solving. Not to say that people working at Gilead on a cure are anything short of heroes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mjvpi (Reply #23)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 10:29 AM

24. What I found interesting was that when you add 62%+49% it does not equal 100

out of the 397....................what gives.......this is suppose to be a controlled group...........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to turbinetree (Reply #24)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 11:51 AM

34. It shouldn't add to a 100 % because they are talking about patients released from the hospital

and comparing two groups in one of which patients were treated early and another where patients were treated late.
This is not even the trial where drug met the endpoint, which was a different study.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mobeau69 (Original post)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 11:17 AM

28. It's a real shame when positive news about development of a drug results in

all these suspicious, negative posts. This is potentially good news, as far as it goes. The organization sponsoring the study into this drug will be making a statement, and that's probably worth holding off forming opinion for.

The Food and Drug Administration acknowledged that officials were discussing approval of remdesivir for treatment of Covid-19 patients, presumably under emergency use provisions. ... Remdesivir has never been approved as a treatment for any disease. It was developed to fight Ebola, but results from a clinical trial in Africa were disappointing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #28)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 11:53 AM

38. I guess it's big pharma or something like that, and we are better off

if a deadly disease has no cure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #38)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 12:33 PM

45. :) Seemingly. Of course when we finally do have medication

that'll save our lives, that'll be new opportunity for some to rail unhappily that it was all a plot to get our money and now they have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mobeau69 (Original post)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 11:34 AM

30. JFTR:

Gilead will be releasing their earnings tomorrow.

Stay safe, investors!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OilemFirchen (Reply #30)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 11:52 AM

36. These companies put a lot of money and effort into drug development.

So it's pretty nice when the drug actually works, no?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #36)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 12:01 PM

40. Non-sequitur.

But yeah, of course.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OilemFirchen (Reply #30)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 12:02 PM

41. Would you say the same about AIDS drugs

And the drug manufacturers that created them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueIdaho (Reply #41)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 12:03 PM

42. Asked and answered above. (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OilemFirchen (Reply #42)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 12:06 PM

43. So that's a yes... then...

What a pity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueIdaho (Reply #43)

Wed Apr 29, 2020, 12:08 PM

44. Huh?

What's a pity?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mobeau69 (Original post)

Thu Apr 30, 2020, 04:43 AM

50. Yet, the British trial was NS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Reply #50)

Thu Apr 30, 2020, 06:24 AM

51. Significance depends on the number of participants.

If not enough are enrolled, then you might not achieve the significant results.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #51)

Thu Apr 30, 2020, 12:53 PM

52. I just really dislike false hope articles like the OP

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31022-9/fulltext


When most likely the drug does little or nothing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread