An FDA staffer who reviewed the data on convalescent plasma — and whose name was redacted from a memo released by the agency — was far less enthusiastic, writing that the data . . . (cont)
(cont.) . . . “support the conclusion that [convalescent plasma] to treat hospitalized patients with COVID-19 meets the ‘may be effective’ criteria for issuance of an EUA. "

MAY be. So that 35% effectiveness in use that isn& #39;t from proper clinical trials is what? A big maybe.
That& #39;s because 35% of the people who got plasma therapy didn& #39;t die.

So 65% who did get plasma therapy did die.

And since these weren& #39;t randomized clinical trials, no one can say for certain what, if any, effect the plasma therapy had.

Marvy.
Back to the FDA staffer, "Adequate and well-controlled randomized trials remain nonetheless necessary for a definitive demonstration of … efficacy and to determine the optimal product attributes and the appropriate patient populations for its use.”
Plasma therapy for treatment of COVID-19 is not new, but it& #39;s also not proven. Here& #39;s a breakdown of that in this thread: https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1297583093285494785">https://twitter.com/EricTopol...
You can follow @LauraWalkerKC.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: