Study dismissing benefits of malaria drugs under lens
NEWDELHI: The Lancet has alerted its readers that it is reviewing the data and methods of a study published in it that claimed the malaria drugs, hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, provided coronavirus disease (Covid-19) patients no benefits while raising the risk of abnormal heart rhythms and death after scientists, clinicians and governments questioned its validity.
The review has put the spotlight on Surgisphere, a Chicagobased company that owns the questionable database that has been used in studies published in The Lancet and also New England Journal of Medicine, the world’s two most highly-cited medical journals.
An investigation by the The Guardian revealed that Surgisphere has a sci-fi author and an adult-content model among its handful of employees; that employees have little or no data or scientific training; and that it has provided data for multiple studies on Covid-19 co-authored by its chief executive Sapan Desai. The investigation further shows that the company has consistently failed to adequately explain its data source or methodology. Desai has been named in three medical malpractice suits, unrelated to the Surgisphere database, according to The Guardian.
The study, published by The Lancet on May 22, drew flak for using questionable data and flawed methodology and refusing to share data sources, including the names of participating hospitals or countries. Last week, around 120 leading scientists and clinicians wrote an open letter to the study’s authors and The Lancet asking for details about the provenance of the data and called for the study to be independently will update this notice as soon as we have further information,” said a statement issued by The Lancet on Wednesday.
The Lancet’s editor-in-chief Richard Horton tweeted The Guardian link, calling it “an important investigation---governments and WHO changed Covid-19 policy based on suspect data from US company,” which led to angry responses questioning the quality of peer review in medical journals.
“The key concerns for us were that the data was questionable and there were clear differences in the hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine treated group that made analysis unreliable and any results misleading. If not for the name of the journal, the paper would have not have been taken as seriously. I do not think there is any lasting harm. What you see is the scientific process of self-correction. There was a questionable paper, questions were asked, The Lancet has put out an expression of concern regarding the paper. Let us wait and see. The truth will come out by this process,” said Dr Anurag Agrawal, director, Csirinstitute of Genomics and Integrative Biology, New Delhi.
Dr Agrawal is among India’s top scientists who have also written to WHO chief scientist Soumya Swaminathan questioning the decision to suspend hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine part of the multi-country Solidarity Trial following The Lancet study. “We are not saying that hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine are totally safe or that there is any certain benefit. Nobody knows. All we are saying is that the risks and benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine are open questions that need to be answered,” he said.