[BostonCard]

Solidarity is about 5 times bigger than the ACTT trial, so we'd know if it was saving lives. Gilead is making a pile though. Also interesting that the much larger trial did not show a decrease in hospitalization, the reason for the EUA by the FDA and if IIRC, it was not stopped at an original endpoint of the study, but one that was decided on after the trial had already started. Not necessarily fishy, but could be a sign of cherry picking good looking data to justify an early end.

Disheartening. I'm just hoping one of the vaccines pans out, but science is sobering.

Rember ACTT was run by the NIH, not Gilead.  I'm going to speculate here, but my guess is that ACTT recalculated the power after they looked at the number of events and concluded that the effect magnitude would have to be massive for them to move mortality.

BC

[BostonCard]

Solidarity is about 5 times bigger than the ACTT trial, so we'd know if it was saving lives. Gilead is making a pile though. Also interesting that the much larger trial did not show a decrease in hospitalization, the reason for the EUA by the FDA and if IIRC, it was not stopped at an original endpoint of the study, but one that was decided on after the trial had already started. Not necessarily fishy, but could be a sign of cherry picking good looking data to justify an early end.

Disheartening. I'm just hoping one of the vaccines pans out, but science is sobering.

Rember ACTT was run by the NIH, not Gilead.  I'm going to speculate here, but my guess is that ACTT recalculated the power after they looked at the number of events and concluded that the effect magnitude would have to be massive for them to move mortality.

BC