Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

On 4 June 2020, after a week of increasing scientific concern and scrutiny, first The Lancet, then the New England Journal of Medicine, retracted studies that were based on inaccessible data. The studies have been extremely damaging to chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine COVID-19 clinical trials around the globe. MORU researchers played a key role in bringing this scandal to light, whose consequences continue to play out.

It has been a wild, rough ride for the COPCOV global prevention study to determine if chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine can prevent Covid-19 in hospital staff working with patients potentially infected with coronavirus.

On 21 May, COPCOV’s UK arm began enrolling participants at two sites, at the Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals and the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford, with several more sites slated to come online shortly thereafter.

Then, on 22 May The Lancet published a study by Mehra et al. This paper claimed that hydroxychloroquine significantly increased the risk of death in Covid-19 infected patients.

Immediately following publication of the Lancet article, the UK regulator MHRA ‘paused’ participant enrolment in COPCOV UK. In quick order, the WHO halted the hydroxychloroquine arm of their global SOLIDARITY study, and regulatory authorities in several countries including France asked investigators to pause ongoing randomised controlled clinical trials involving hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine.

Both  the paper in The Lancet and an earlier one in the  New England Journal of Medicine  (NEJM) by three of the same authors as in The Lancet used data provided by the US company Surgisphere – owned by US cardiologist Dr Sapan Desai, the second author in both studies.

MORU researchers thought early on that it seemed likely or even probable that the article was based on flawed data provided by the US company Surgisphere.  James Watson engaged with Columbia University statistician Andrew Gelman and his blog of 40,000 participants. Nick White, Nick Day, Charlie Woodrow, Will Schilling and the COPCOV team worked behind the scenes to closely examine the publication’s data and detail details about Surgisphere and its data. In this ABC Australia interview, James talks about the doubts and what then transpired.

This international effort culminated in an open letter on 28 May signed by over 200  clinicians, medical researchers, statisticians, and ethicists from across the world to the authors and Richard Horton, Editor of the Lancet. Expressing methodological and data integrity concerns, the signatories asked that Surgisphere provide details on data provenance, called for independent validation of the analysis and open access to all data sharing agreements in each jurisdiction cited in the paper to ensure that any mined data was legally and ethically collected.

Weak responses from The Lancet and authors continuing refusal to share the study data by Surgisphere, led to growing examination of Surgisphere and its data by international media and researchers. Many found it surprisingly unlikely that a company of 5 employees could have developed a major global database of confidential hospital records from across the globe, as it claimed.

Attention then turned to a study of coronavirus patients published in the New England Journal of Medicine early May by some of the same authors, including Harvard’s Dr Mandeep R. Mehra. This paper was also based on data from the Surgical Outcomes Collaborative (Surgisphere Corporation, Chicago, IL, USA). This paper had many of same flaws as The Lancet paper. The authors claimed to have electronic patient record data from a high proportion of all hospitalised COVID-19 patients in the countries they are linked with. Yet countries such as UK and Turkey did not have as many hospitalised patients in the entire country as claimed to have been in the Surgisphere linked hospitals at the time of the study.  

On 2 June, James Watson and scientists, researchers, clinical trials experts and statisticians wrote an open letter to the New England Journal and to the authors pointing out the major discrepancies and requesting again that Surgisphere’s data be made public.

The same day, 2 June, the NEJM, followed by The Lancet on 3 June published editorial Expressions of Concern about the two papers.

Pressure continued to increase on the journals and authors. On 4 June, after a review of data, the WHO reversed its decision to halt its global SOLIDARITY hydroxychloroquine trials.

Later that same day, 4 June, after a week of increasing scientific concern and scrutiny, first The Lancet, then a little over an hour later the New England Journal of Medicine, retracted the studies that were based on inaccessible data, provided by the Surgisphere corporation.

Noting that extremely damaging impact of the studies to chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine COVID-19 clinical trials around the globe, MORU made a statement that concluded:

“Many important questions will need to be answered in the coming weeks and months, but we would like to use this unfortunate opportunity to make two relevant recommendations which we believe are in the public interest.

  1. Medical and scientific journals should not accept papers based on inaccessible data
  2. Regulatory authorities and other agencies responding to such reports should satisfy themselves of the veracity and applicability of published data and the correctness of analyses before they act.”

The scandal and its consequences continue to play out. On 8 June, the University of Utah terminated the faculty appointment of Dr Amit Patel, one of the authors of both papers.

As of publication, the MHRA has yet to ‘unpause’ COPCOV UK participant enrolment.

- Nick Day and John Bleho

Similar stories

Researchers call for access to Ivermectin for young children

MORU Bangkok Publication Research

Millions of children weighing less than 15kg are currently denied access to Ivermectin treatment due to insufficient safety data being available to support a change to the current label indication. The WorldWide Antimalarial Resistance Network’s new meta-analysis provides evidence that supports removing this barrier and improving treatment equity.

The COPCOV Trial’s position statement on “A living WHO guideline on drugs to prevent COVID-19.”

COPCOV COVID-19

Following WHO recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine in the prevention of COVID-19, including its use in controlled trials, we are reviewing the guideline and available evidence. We are concerned that this judgement from the authors of the guideline is scientifically unsound.

Evidence supports WHO recommendation for primaquine combined with ACTs to block Plasmodium falciparum transmission

MORU Bangkok Publication Research

Evidence from a new study, initiated by the Primaquine Roll Out Group and conducted at WWARN, supports the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation for use of 0.25mg/kg dose of primaquine (PQ) combined with artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACT) to block Plasmodium falciparum transmission.

Indonesia’s decision to prioritise COVID-19 vaccination to citizens aged 18-59 years old questionable

MORU Bangkok

The Indonesian government policy to exclude the elderly in the first phase of the COVID-19 vaccination program could hinder the vaccine’s impact in lowering mortality rates. COVID-19 mortality rates in Indonesia, the highest in Southeast Asia, are dominated by those in the 60 years and above age bracket. In this article published in The Conversation, Kartika Saraswati and fellow DPhil students elaborate how, by prioritising vaccination for elderly, Indonesia may optimally reduce the hospital burden and COVID-19 deaths amidst a limited vaccine supply during the first vaccination phase.

Check-list recommended to improve reporting of microscopy methods and results in malaria studies

MORU Bangkok Publication Research

A study to explore the variations of how microscopy methods are reported in published malaria studies has recommended standardised procedures should be implemented for methodological consistency and comparability of clinical trial outcomes.

Susie Dunachie awarded flagship NIHR career development award

Awards & Appointments MORU Bangkok

Susie Dunachie joins a prestigious group of leading health researchers in the latest cohort of NIHR Global Research Professors. These awards fund research leaders of the future to promote effective translation of research and to strengthen health, public health and care research leadership at the highest academic levels. Research conducted by Global Research Professors directly benefits people in LMICs. A Consultant in Infectious Diseases and Medical Microbiology, Susie works on the development of a vaccine to prevent death from melioidosis in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus in LMICs, and supports vaccine research in Thailand. Congratulations!