INTERVIEW
The controversy continues to agitate the scientific community: what is really worth the study on hydroxychloroquine published in the journal The Lancet , May 22, which pointed to an excess mortality of patients receiving this molecule? While this article has been widely criticized, even in the direction of the newspaper, a new study published Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine ( NEJM ) concludes that the ineffectiveness of hydroxychloroquine in preventing coronavirus, explains on Europe 1 Frédéric Adnet, head of emergency at the Avicenne hospital in Bobigny.
>> LIVE - Follow the evolution of the situation Thursday June 4
The NEJM study (to be found here, in English) was carried out in a "double-blind" manner, which means that "neither the doctor nor the patient knows the treatment which has been assigned". In this study, "there was one group who had a placebo, that is, no treatment, and the other who had hydroxychloroquine. It was a preventive treatment for patients at risk of d "have the virus because they have been exposed to sick people. The result of this test shows no difference. We are sure that for prevention, I mean prevention: hydroxychloroquine is useless. affirm it ", supports the specialist in the program Sans Rendez-vous with Mélanie Gomez.
"Very high level of evidence"
If Frédéric Adnet emphasizes the importance of this new study, it is because it comes from a "very high level of evidence" and is "unassailable in its methodology": "The methodology makes it possible to make a link of cause and effect ", he explains, knowing that" none of the studies "has so far been" conclusive, except the one that just came out ". "There have been 15,000 articles on the coronavirus but only ten randomized and prospective studies", he insists.
>> Find the whole of Sans rendez-vous in replay and podcast here
While the WHO decided to resume clinical trials on hydroxychloroquine, the debate today has gone beyond the scientific field. "There is a great deal of confusion linked to the media coverage of this molecule, with announcements at the start that were not rational," observed the head of emergency at the Bobigny hospital. "The Lancet study was a bit catastrophic since it is not retracted but put in brackets" with a "warning" sent by the management of the newspaper.
CORONAVIRUS ESSENTIALS
> First unconventional evening at the restaurant: "It feels like going back three months"
> Economic crisis: "There are going to be two shocks, one on unemployment and one for young people"
> How to distinguish from allergies from the coronavirus?
> Seasonality, cross-immunity, end of the epidemic: the latest questions on the virus
> Can we catch the coronavirus on a plane?
> Coronavirus: 5 mistakes not to make with your mask
Beyond the methodology of the study criticized by many scientists, Frédéric Adnet deplores the fact that this has slowed down research on the coronavirus: "The Lancet study has terrified our supervision and, incomprehensibly, has prevented us to continue our trials on hydroxychloroquine. Even though in clinical trials, the safety of drugs is maximum. If there is a place where there is the least risk of side effects, it is in the trials clinical because everything is hyper controlled, "insists the specialist.