David Boulware's @NEJM data has been released and it's an interesting read.

All the criticisms that were made of the paper remain valid, and confirm that the study was intended not to see a venefit of #hydroxychloroquine https://twitter.com/JDMasekela/status/1284272947549671425?s=20

As noted by commentators, #hydroxychloroquine showed a reduction in symptom rate from 18% to 10% (p=0.1) when used early (1-2 days of exposure), but the study is underpowered to show anything of statistical significance.

It was stopped early and should never....

...have been published in its current form in a supposedly reputable journal such as the @NEJM

Only 20 respondents claimed to have tested positive during the study period which should be celebrated as an unbelievably low rate of transmission BUT...

Even accepting the study groups "composite primary outcome" there are enough patients to find an effect when you ONLY consider contacts of covid positive people, 1-2 days from exposure

HCQ = 7.8%
Folate = 17%
(p=0.02)

As we have previously contended one of the main problems with the study is that is included a LOT of people who were not suitable.

The main group being those NOT exposed to covid-19.

Of 821 subjects, only 463 (289 HCW and 174 non-HCW) were actually #covid19 contacts

...that's right. 44% of the whole study "of the use of #Hydroxychloroquine in contacts of #covid19" didn't even fulfill this simple requirement. So the final data was watered down with subjects in whom you would never expect to see a difference in outcome.

Add to that the use of folate as a "placebo" and you would need 5 times the number of subjects to see a difference in this kind of study. Yet still it was stopped early.

Oh, "but they didn't use folate in Canada" you say @DrToddLee ?

Yeah about that....

21 Canadian patients were recruited.

Yep. 21 out of 821. That's what the data file says. ("Canada"=1).

So there were 21 patients who had an actual placebo control. Try doing statistics on 21 patients with no symptoms.

Of course, none of this tells us whether or not the respondents to the survey were real people or not. There was no verification performed. No timestamps were provided with the data set. The Redcap data forms weren't provided. Only 86% received the drug etc...

So we can safely conclude that this study didn't answer the question it claimed to answer. At all.

Anybody doctor that refers to it to claim that #hydroxychloroquine is ineffective is lying.

And the @NEJM should not have published its conclusion.

#lancetgate

*benefit