logo
COVID antivirals are heavily marketed. It's not clear how well they work

COVID antivirals are heavily marketed. It's not clear how well they work

Observational studies of the drugs included in the analysis concluded that the drugs halve the risk of hospitalisation, but the researchers are concerned that the results might be biased by differing trial designs. Generally, scientists look to randomised controlled trials for gold-standard evidence.
New Zealand stopped subsidising Lagevrio in 2024 due to concerns about its effectiveness.
Australia's COVID-19 Evidence Taskforce recommends against using the drug, which costs $1102 a pack.
Despite that, Australian doctors gave out 315,000 scripts last year, plus another 243,000 for Paxlovid. Lagevrio and Paxlovid were the fifth and ninth-most-expensive drugs to taxpayers in 2023-24.
The taskforce only recommends Paxlovid for unvaccinated people. It offers a limited recommendation for those who have been vaccinated but are elderly and have multiple risk factors, while noting the evidence is 'unclear'.
'In our systematic review, there were no randomised controlled trials conducted in vaccinated people since 2022 that reported a benefit from COVID-19 antivirals against hospitalisation or death,' said Dr Laura Edwards, a researcher at the University of NSW who led the study.
'It is timely to re-evaluate whether the cost we are paying for these drugs is appropriate.'
It is plausible that the drugs may be useful for a small cohort of extremely high-risk people, who are elderly and have multiple risk factors, says Cheng. But this group is rarely enrolled in medical trials, making it difficult to work out the true efficacy.
Loading
'I'm not entirely sure there's much benefit in that group. But there probably isn't any harm done by it.'
Dr Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz, a senior fellow at the University of Wollongong, has published an analysis of Paxlovid's cost-benefit. He said there was evidence of a small reduction in hospitalisation risk, making the drug still worth subsidising.
'I think that Australia has a very reasonable, pragmatic approach, prioritising high-risk individuals who will benefit and not paying for low-risk people who probably won't.'
In a statement, Pfizer pointed to the first study of Paxlovid, which demonstrated an 86 per cent reduction in the risk of hospitalisation or death: 'Real-world data collected during the Omicron period among high-risk populations who have received COVID-19 vaccinations reinforce the effectiveness of Paxlovid in preventing hospitalisations and deaths.'
MSD, which sells molnupiravir, said it stood behind the drug.
The Department of Health said both antivirals were under review by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, with results expected mid-2026.
Lagevrio and Paxlovid work by stopping the virus that causes COVID-19 from multiplying in our cells, theoretically giving the immune system a leg up against it.
The first studies by the drug companies found the two pills cut the risk of hospitalisation or death by about 50 per cent and 89 per cent respectively in unvaccinated people.
Loading
But Lagevrio's 50 per cent effectiveness was only seen in a study that stopped halfway. When the full trial was analysed, whether it offered any benefit at all became debatable. A large independent study in 2022 also found it was likely no better than a placebo.
A study published by Pfizer last year concluded Paxlovid's protective effect in vaccinated patients, including those at high risk, was so small as to not be statistically significant.
That study began in 2021 but was only published in 2024.
Research conducted by the Grattan Institute late last year found that wealthier Australians were far more likely to be prescribed COVID antivirals than those at the bottom of the income ladder, despite people living in disadvantage typically having much greater risk factors for severe disease.
'Essentially, like so many things in our healthcare system, the treatments and services weren't going to the people who need them most,' said Peter Breadon, the Institute's health program director.
Nearly all Australians have either been vaccinated or survived a COVID-19 infection, meaning there is less benefit from antivirals. And the Omicron variant is less likely to hospitalise or kill a patient than the preceding Delta variant.
'COVID is a different disease to what it was,' said Cheng, who is now director of infectious diseases at Monash Health.
'[Patients] don't get pneumonia and lung white-out, generally. It's almost like we're doing a study in a different disease, which is making it difficult to work out how relevant … what we found out early on [is] to what we know now.'
This stark difference shows up in Pfizer's studies of Paxlovid.
In Pfizer's first study, involving unvaccinated people, 7 per cent of patients given a placebo ended up in hospital and 13 died. In the second study, which involved vaccinated people, just 1.6 per cent of the placebo group were hospitalised.
'For young, fit and healthy people, antivirals are not going to do much. You're at pretty low risk,' said Cheng. 'For older people – those over 65 or 70 – or people who have other medical issues, that's one they should go and see their GP.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

COVID antivirals are heavily marketed. It's not clear how well they work
COVID antivirals are heavily marketed. It's not clear how well they work

The Age

time4 hours ago

  • The Age

COVID antivirals are heavily marketed. It's not clear how well they work

Observational studies of the drugs included in the analysis concluded that the drugs halve the risk of hospitalisation, but the researchers are concerned that the results might be biased by differing trial designs. Generally, scientists look to randomised controlled trials for gold-standard evidence. New Zealand stopped subsidising Lagevrio in 2024 due to concerns about its effectiveness. Australia's COVID-19 Evidence Taskforce recommends against using the drug, which costs $1102 a pack. Despite that, Australian doctors gave out 315,000 scripts last year, plus another 243,000 for Paxlovid. Lagevrio and Paxlovid were the fifth and ninth-most-expensive drugs to taxpayers in 2023-24. The taskforce only recommends Paxlovid for unvaccinated people. It offers a limited recommendation for those who have been vaccinated but are elderly and have multiple risk factors, while noting the evidence is 'unclear'. 'In our systematic review, there were no randomised controlled trials conducted in vaccinated people since 2022 that reported a benefit from COVID-19 antivirals against hospitalisation or death,' said Dr Laura Edwards, a researcher at the University of NSW who led the study. 'It is timely to re-evaluate whether the cost we are paying for these drugs is appropriate.' It is plausible that the drugs may be useful for a small cohort of extremely high-risk people, who are elderly and have multiple risk factors, says Cheng. But this group is rarely enrolled in medical trials, making it difficult to work out the true efficacy. Loading 'I'm not entirely sure there's much benefit in that group. But there probably isn't any harm done by it.' Dr Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz, a senior fellow at the University of Wollongong, has published an analysis of Paxlovid's cost-benefit. He said there was evidence of a small reduction in hospitalisation risk, making the drug still worth subsidising. 'I think that Australia has a very reasonable, pragmatic approach, prioritising high-risk individuals who will benefit and not paying for low-risk people who probably won't.' In a statement, Pfizer pointed to the first study of Paxlovid, which demonstrated an 86 per cent reduction in the risk of hospitalisation or death: 'Real-world data collected during the Omicron period among high-risk populations who have received COVID-19 vaccinations reinforce the effectiveness of Paxlovid in preventing hospitalisations and deaths.' MSD, which sells molnupiravir, said it stood behind the drug. The Department of Health said both antivirals were under review by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, with results expected mid-2026. Lagevrio and Paxlovid work by stopping the virus that causes COVID-19 from multiplying in our cells, theoretically giving the immune system a leg up against it. The first studies by the drug companies found the two pills cut the risk of hospitalisation or death by about 50 per cent and 89 per cent respectively in unvaccinated people. Loading But Lagevrio's 50 per cent effectiveness was only seen in a study that stopped halfway. When the full trial was analysed, whether it offered any benefit at all became debatable. A large independent study in 2022 also found it was likely no better than a placebo. A study published by Pfizer last year concluded Paxlovid's protective effect in vaccinated patients, including those at high risk, was so small as to not be statistically significant. That study began in 2021 but was only published in 2024. Research conducted by the Grattan Institute late last year found that wealthier Australians were far more likely to be prescribed COVID antivirals than those at the bottom of the income ladder, despite people living in disadvantage typically having much greater risk factors for severe disease. 'Essentially, like so many things in our healthcare system, the treatments and services weren't going to the people who need them most,' said Peter Breadon, the Institute's health program director. Nearly all Australians have either been vaccinated or survived a COVID-19 infection, meaning there is less benefit from antivirals. And the Omicron variant is less likely to hospitalise or kill a patient than the preceding Delta variant. 'COVID is a different disease to what it was,' said Cheng, who is now director of infectious diseases at Monash Health. '[Patients] don't get pneumonia and lung white-out, generally. It's almost like we're doing a study in a different disease, which is making it difficult to work out how relevant … what we found out early on [is] to what we know now.' This stark difference shows up in Pfizer's studies of Paxlovid. In Pfizer's first study, involving unvaccinated people, 7 per cent of patients given a placebo ended up in hospital and 13 died. In the second study, which involved vaccinated people, just 1.6 per cent of the placebo group were hospitalised. 'For young, fit and healthy people, antivirals are not going to do much. You're at pretty low risk,' said Cheng. 'For older people – those over 65 or 70 – or people who have other medical issues, that's one they should go and see their GP.'

COVID antivirals are heavily marketed. It's not clear how well they work
COVID antivirals are heavily marketed. It's not clear how well they work

Sydney Morning Herald

time4 hours ago

  • Sydney Morning Herald

COVID antivirals are heavily marketed. It's not clear how well they work

Observational studies of the drugs included in the analysis concluded that the drugs halve the risk of hospitalisation, but the researchers are concerned that the results might be biased by differing trial designs. Generally, scientists look to randomised controlled trials for gold-standard evidence. New Zealand stopped subsidising Lagevrio in 2024 due to concerns about its effectiveness. Australia's COVID-19 Evidence Taskforce recommends against using the drug, which costs $1102 a pack. Despite that, Australian doctors gave out 315,000 scripts last year, plus another 243,000 for Paxlovid. Lagevrio and Paxlovid were the fifth and ninth-most-expensive drugs to taxpayers in 2023-24. The taskforce only recommends Paxlovid for unvaccinated people. It offers a limited recommendation for those who have been vaccinated but are elderly and have multiple risk factors, while noting the evidence is 'unclear'. 'In our systematic review, there were no randomised controlled trials conducted in vaccinated people since 2022 that reported a benefit from COVID-19 antivirals against hospitalisation or death,' said Dr Laura Edwards, a researcher at the University of NSW who led the study. 'It is timely to re-evaluate whether the cost we are paying for these drugs is appropriate.' It is plausible that the drugs may be useful for a small cohort of extremely high-risk people, who are elderly and have multiple risk factors, says Cheng. But this group is rarely enrolled in medical trials, making it difficult to work out the true efficacy. Loading 'I'm not entirely sure there's much benefit in that group. But there probably isn't any harm done by it.' Dr Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz, a senior fellow at the University of Wollongong, has published an analysis of Paxlovid's cost-benefit. He said there was evidence of a small reduction in hospitalisation risk, making the drug still worth subsidising. 'I think that Australia has a very reasonable, pragmatic approach, prioritising high-risk individuals who will benefit and not paying for low-risk people who probably won't.' In a statement, Pfizer pointed to the first study of Paxlovid, which demonstrated an 86 per cent reduction in the risk of hospitalisation or death: 'Real-world data collected during the Omicron period among high-risk populations who have received COVID-19 vaccinations reinforce the effectiveness of Paxlovid in preventing hospitalisations and deaths.' MSD, which sells molnupiravir, said it stood behind the drug. The Department of Health said both antivirals were under review by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, with results expected mid-2026. Lagevrio and Paxlovid work by stopping the virus that causes COVID-19 from multiplying in our cells, theoretically giving the immune system a leg up against it. The first studies by the drug companies found the two pills cut the risk of hospitalisation or death by about 50 per cent and 89 per cent respectively in unvaccinated people. Loading But Lagevrio's 50 per cent effectiveness was only seen in a study that stopped halfway. When the full trial was analysed, whether it offered any benefit at all became debatable. A large independent study in 2022 also found it was likely no better than a placebo. A study published by Pfizer last year concluded Paxlovid's protective effect in vaccinated patients, including those at high risk, was so small as to not be statistically significant. That study began in 2021 but was only published in 2024. Research conducted by the Grattan Institute late last year found that wealthier Australians were far more likely to be prescribed COVID antivirals than those at the bottom of the income ladder, despite people living in disadvantage typically having much greater risk factors for severe disease. 'Essentially, like so many things in our healthcare system, the treatments and services weren't going to the people who need them most,' said Peter Breadon, the Institute's health program director. Nearly all Australians have either been vaccinated or survived a COVID-19 infection, meaning there is less benefit from antivirals. And the Omicron variant is less likely to hospitalise or kill a patient than the preceding Delta variant. 'COVID is a different disease to what it was,' said Cheng, who is now director of infectious diseases at Monash Health. '[Patients] don't get pneumonia and lung white-out, generally. It's almost like we're doing a study in a different disease, which is making it difficult to work out how relevant … what we found out early on [is] to what we know now.' This stark difference shows up in Pfizer's studies of Paxlovid. In Pfizer's first study, involving unvaccinated people, 7 per cent of patients given a placebo ended up in hospital and 13 died. In the second study, which involved vaccinated people, just 1.6 per cent of the placebo group were hospitalised. 'For young, fit and healthy people, antivirals are not going to do much. You're at pretty low risk,' said Cheng. 'For older people – those over 65 or 70 – or people who have other medical issues, that's one they should go and see their GP.'

IVF ‘add-ons' are a toxic cherry on a cake iced with desperation and hope
IVF ‘add-ons' are a toxic cherry on a cake iced with desperation and hope

The Age

time10 hours ago

  • The Age

IVF ‘add-ons' are a toxic cherry on a cake iced with desperation and hope

Not all patients who seek fertility treatment are desperate like I was when I sought the help of an IVF specialist. But like anyone seeking medical intervention, IVF patients are vulnerable, often feel powerless and have dreams of starting or completing their family. Often they have also traversed varying forms of grief and loss. When this is combined with a profit-driven industry, you have a recipe for disaster. The IVF process is horrendously expensive and incredibly invasive. Statistically, only one in four transferred embryos will result in a live birth. Of the people who don't get pregnant on their first try, only half will get to a third attempt. The most cited reason for abandoning treatment is 'psychological stress'. Put simply: no one would choose to have IVF for shits and giggles. In the past two months, we've seen two cases of Monash IVF admitting to transferring the wrong embryos into patients, two other major clinics provide incorrect information to sperm donors, and a class action against a number of IVF companies for add-on genetic testing that may have incorrectly found embryos were 'abnormal', settle for $56 million. Nowhere is the toxic combination of 'baby want' and profit-seeking more evident than IVF add-ons. These additional 'treatments' are offered to allegedly improve the likelihood of a live birth. Examples include endometrial scratching (scratching the uterine lining to improve the chance of implantation), assisted hatching (a small hole is made in the outer layer of the embryo to aid implantation), and embryo glue (believed to improve embryo attachment to the uterine wall). The cost of these additional treatments can range into the thousands of dollars, but research published by the University of Melbourne in 2021 found that '77 per cent of the 40 Australian IVF clinic websites analysed make 'unsubstantiated claims of benefit about add-ons'. Loading Dr Karin Hammarberg, a senior research fellow at Monash University's School of Public Health and Preventative Medicine who has extensively researched IVF add-ons, says some add-ons have little to no evidence to support their use, and in some cases may have adverse effects. Though none of these add-ons are mandatory, when you speak to a vulnerable person spending thousands of dollars on a treatment and suggest, even subliminally, that these extra treatment options might improve their chances of realising their family, of course they're going to pony up. Speaking to this masthead last week after the latest bungle came to light, Professor Gab Kovacs, who spent decades in the Australian IVF sector, said that what happened 'is human error, and it will happen again,' adding, 'Probably, there are other mix-ups at other clinics that we don't know about.' It's chilling to consider.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store