Ensitrelvir (Xocova®): Japanese Company Shionogi & Co., Ltd. Sets a Model for Success in Translational Research for the Coming Future of Ethical Science
Ensitrelvir (Xocova®): Japanese Company Shionogi & Co., Ltd. Sets a Model for Success in Translational Research for the Coming Future of Ethical Science
The FDA will be working hard to find a reason this shouldn't be used, while the media will stop people hearing about it as long as possible, and then tell everyone why it's dangerous.
I do not take new experimental drugs especially for colds I already have natural immunity to. But it might be helpful for the elderly or immune compromised? If they don’t mind being a Guinea pig…again
"The change from baseline in viral RNA level (log10 copies/mL) on day 4 was significantly greater in the ensitrelvir 125 mg (mean [SD], –2.677 [1.063]; difference from placebo, –1.408; P = 0.0029) and 250 mg (–2.761 [1.291]; difference from placebo, –1.492; P = 0.0039) groups versus the placebo group (–1.269 [1.228])."
That having been said, in Phase 2B, the Viral Titer fraction compared to placebo is only 0.39, and thus the fold change from placebo is *only 2.5 times*.
All that having been said, while PLACEBO (i.e., the immune system) results in very similar reduction of the viral load as well, it happens much slower, which ultimately produces the key benefit for the severely ill: quick reduction of the viral load.
This is the primary niche for these pharmaceutical products.
I'm puzzled by JLW's praise. It *seems* to be a decent product, but is it definitely safe and definitely efficacious? Knowing what we know now, I think it's too early to tell.
Question: Had medicine wanted to develop lots of preperatory antivirals for covid before covid even existed, how successful would they have been? I would think extremely so. I suppose a related way of framing the question is: if medicine sanely went about trying to cure the common cold, would it not have done so 20 different ways by now?
Boy, must they hate the Japanese now. Especially for their pricing.
Maybe those whose bodies have become spike protein factories through repeated jabs would benefit from a course of treatment with this?
Pineapple better. No jabs, but I just ate mine!
Forgive my ignorance- but where can I learn more about how we are measuring viral load in such discussions?
Hard pass!
Ensitrelvir looks to me to have plenty of covalent bonds. Linus Pauling rolls over in his grave!
The FDA will be working hard to find a reason this shouldn't be used, while the media will stop people hearing about it as long as possible, and then tell everyone why it's dangerous.
I do not take new experimental drugs especially for colds I already have natural immunity to. But it might be helpful for the elderly or immune compromised? If they don’t mind being a Guinea pig…again
> achieving an approximately 30-fold reduction (bringing the viral load to 1/300 of its baseline level)
This is *extremely* misleading -- primarily because PLACEBO results in the reduction of the viral load as well.
From Phase 2A publication (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9578433/):
"The change from baseline in viral RNA level (log10 copies/mL) on day 4 was significantly greater in the ensitrelvir 125 mg (mean [SD], –2.677 [1.063]; difference from placebo, –1.408; P = 0.0029) and 250 mg (–2.761 [1.291]; difference from placebo, –1.492; P = 0.0039) groups versus the placebo group (–1.269 [1.228])."
Thus, we have the following results.
From BASELINE:
Dose-------------|----------Viral Titer (fraction)----------|----Viral Titer Fold Change
125 mg----------|----------0.0021------------------------|----------476
250 mg----------|----------0.0017------------------------|----------588
From PLACEBO:
Dose-------------|----------Viral Titer (fraction)---------|----Viral Titer Fold Change
125 mg----------|----------0.039------------------------|----------26
250 mg----------|----------0.032------------------------|----------31
That having been said, in Phase 2B, the Viral Titer fraction compared to placebo is only 0.39, and thus the fold change from placebo is *only 2.5 times*.
All that having been said, while PLACEBO (i.e., the immune system) results in very similar reduction of the viral load as well, it happens much slower, which ultimately produces the key benefit for the severely ill: quick reduction of the viral load.
This is the primary niche for these pharmaceutical products.
2.5 times lower aint chump change imo If you think the virus floating around is not a good thing
2.5 times is also not 30 times and not 300 times, eh?
My entire point is that the original statement by JLW is misleading as fuck.
oh to be sure. what, you think this isnt some pharma company?
I'm puzzled by JLW's praise. It *seems* to be a decent product, but is it definitely safe and definitely efficacious? Knowing what we know now, I think it's too early to tell.
Hi James, Have you found anything on Defluorination of Ensitrelvir inside or outside Humans?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ensitrelvir
Big issue with Pax is rebound. what do we know about reboud with this? IMO, they should dose twice a long
Question: Had medicine wanted to develop lots of preperatory antivirals for covid before covid even existed, how successful would they have been? I would think extremely so. I suppose a related way of framing the question is: if medicine sanely went about trying to cure the common cold, would it not have done so 20 different ways by now?