Dr. Katherine Seley-Radtke is featured in a Sun article that describes her efforts to combat the coronavirus. Our advisor is an expert in chemistry, biochemistry, and antiviral drug development. The article, which examines a promising COVID drug she discovered, is a follow-up to a recent Op-Ed that the professor co-authored with ACSH's Dr. Josh Bloom.
Drugs & Pharmaceuticals
The FDA’s re-analysis showed essentially what we already knew. There's a huge antibiotic effect in the treatment of bacterial pneumonia. The effect is the greatest when looking at the early response to antibiotic therapy, but is still large even when looking at later cure.
We have made amazing progress in the treatment of COVID-19. Two therapies – steroids and remdesivir – have already been shown to help. Those who benefit from these treatments owe thanks to patients who volunteered to participate in controlled clinical trials, and the physicians and pharmaceutical companies that lead them.
While it remains popular to attribute the opioid‐related overdose crisis to doctors prescribing pain relievers to patients, the evidence shows there is no correlation between prescription volume and non‐medical opioid use or opioid use disorder.
The FDA’s rigorous oversight – rather than a race to satisfy an aggressive agenda – is imperative during this pandemic.
When we share our thoughts on science as well as our research efforts, the collective good is not well-served if we're speaking only to those who already share our perspective. And specifically, If we cannot convince our own colleagues that there's a serious and growing threat to their ability to continue to treat bacterial infections, then we cannot expect governments to believe us either. That has to change.
Perhaps someday a ballad will be written about the tragic tale of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and its ugly cousin chloroquine (CQ). HCQ, a potential (and controversial) therapy for COVID-19 at one time, is no more. The FDA revoked the emergency authorization of both HCQ and CQ. This was an example of how NOT to develop a drug. A lesson learned -- or not.
Most drug and vaccine candidates fail. However, the success rate varies wildly depending on the therapeutic area. The probability that at least one coronavirus vaccine will win FDA approval is quite high, though that does not mean it will work well.
We have rightfully focused our nation’s health care attention on how best to manage the potentially deadly COVID-19 virus through treatment and/or prevention. The next few months will be telling, but we can now begin to focus on the future — one that may include new health care challenges given that fewer patients have been seeking preventative care or measures during the pandemic. ACSH friend Dr. Robert Popovian (pictured), VP of Pfizer's U.S. Government Relations, and colleague Dave Hering, regional president, North America for Pfizer Vaccines, discuss the challenges ahead.
As an anti-coronavirus therapy, Remdesivir has been rather disappointing. That's primarily because the drug is given intravenously to those who are already very ill with COVID-19. But what would happen if the drug could be delivered directly to the lungs, to prevent severe disease? Gilead is giving it a shot. Here are some of the pros and cons of that approach.
One thing that we know for sure is that the “you use it, you lose it” law of antimicrobial resistance rules. This means that the use of antibiotics -- whether appropriate or not -- will select for the emergence of resistant pathogens. Therefore, we can expect an increase in bacterial resistance in our hospitals – globally.
Virtually every day there's news about one or more clinical trials in progress or being planned. But most people don't fully understand what the different trials mean. ACSH advisor Dr. Katherine Seley-Radtke gives us a primer that clearly explains the entire process. Timely reading.