OWID on Case Fatality Rate to date vs median age of population

_{kairosfocus

April 11, 2020

Defending our Civilization, Medicine, rhetoric}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

HT, BA77, here is a plot of CFR vs median age, with size of bubble keyed to number of fatalities:

In this context, Prof Didier Raoult’s 1061 case study’s low fatality rate for elderly persons, 0.5% as reported, seems quite significant.

Related, here is the Chinese CDC report on CFR by age:

Then, we may note Raoult’s observed pattern for treatment:

I trust these will be helpful. END

Comments

Jawa, of course, appeal to peer review does not change actual merits or otherwise. We have to evaluate quality of work on its own merits. KFkairosfocus_{April 16, 2020
April
04
Apr
16
16
2020
02:44 AM
2
02
44
AM
PDT}

Just saw this in bioRxiv: “ bioRxiv is receiving many new papers on coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. A reminder: these are preliminary reports that have not been peer-reviewed. They should not be regarded as conclusive, guide clinical practice/health-related behavior, or be reported in news media as established information.”jawa_{April 14, 2020
April
04
Apr
14
14
2020
02:28 AM
2
02
28
AM
PDT}

BO'H (& EG et al), kindly see the just above and onward links. KFkairosfocus_{April 12, 2020
April
04
Apr
12
12
2020
02:24 PM
2
02
24
PM
PDT}

BA77, thanks for links. The shift in balance of outcomes and clear steady clearing of the virus in 5 - 10 days with stubborn cases up to 15 days implies that there were multiple sampling points per patient so the study is clearly tracking the impact of the treatment. The 0.47% of patients dying (which BO'H correctly pointed out as older people) is itself a sign of effectiveness; these are not statistical flukes or dubious "anecdotes" but case studies on treatments with high effectiveness. It is also clear that the earlier the cocktail is administered the better. All of this fits with other patterns of evidence. Note, their table https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Table_final_website_IHU_09_04_2020.pdf On that table, 46 people representing 4.3% of sample, half being male, avg age just under 70, had poor clinical outcomes, "either death or transfer to intensive care unit (ICU) or hospitalization for 10 days or more." Hypertension and coronary artery disease seem to be particularly dangerous preconditions. KF PS: I am seeing what looks a lot like treatment of about 2500 patients with 10 deaths. Likewise, the list of countries recommending HCQ is instructive: https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/coronavirus-pays-ou-lhydroxychloroquine-est-recommandee/ PPS: I also note, via Google Translate:
Research protocol approved by the ANSM and the Île-de-France CPP in progress at the IHU Méditerranée Infection: Treatment of respiratory infections with Coronavirus SARS-Cov2 by hydroxychloroquine Acronym: SARS-CoV2quine
kairosfocus_{April 12, 2020
April
04
Apr
12
12
2020
02:23 PM
2
02
23
PM
PDT}

Here is a live link to the graph that kf highlighted in the OP. Of note, the graph is updated daily:
Median Age vs. Case fatality rate of COVID-19, Apr 12, 2020 https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/case-fatality-rate-of-covid-19-vs-median-age
Here is another graph that is updated daily that shows 'Total confirmed cases vs. deaths', with grey lines superimposed that show the corresponding case fatality rates,
COVID-19: Total confirmed cases vs. deaths, Apr 12, 2020 https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/covid-19-total-confirmed-cases-vs-total-confirmed-deaths
And again, here are Raoult's results (the test was of course conducted in France),
, 1061 previously unpublished patients met our inclusion criteria. Their mean age was 43.6 years old and 492 were male (46.4%). No cardiac toxicity was observed. A good clinical outcome and virological cure was obtained in 973 patients within 10 days (91.7%). Prolonged viral carriage at completion of treatment was observed in 47 patients (4.4%) and was associated to a higher viral load at diagnosis (p < 10-2 ) but viral culture was negative at day 10 and all but one were PCR-cleared at day 15. A poor outcome was observed for 46 patients (4.3%); 10 were transferred to intensive care units, 5 patients died (0.47%) (74-95 years old) and 31 required 10 days of hospitalization or more. Among this group, 25 patients are now cured and 16 are still hospitalized (98% of patients cured so far). Poor clinical outcome was significantly associated to older age (OR 1.11), initial higher severity (OR 10.05) and low 2 hydroxychloroquine serum concentration. In addition, both poor clinical and virological outcomes were associated to the use of selective beta-blocking agents and angiotensin II receptor blockers (P 3 days of HCQ-AZ than in patients treated with other regimens both at IHU and in all Marseille public hospitals (p< 10-2). Interpretation The HCQ-AZ combination, when started immediately after diagnosis, is a safe and efficient treatment for COVID-19, with a mortality rate of 0.5%, in elderly patients. It avoids worsening and clears virus persistence and contagiosity in most cases. https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Abstract_Raoult_EarlyTrtCovid19_09042020_vD1v.pdf
Of note: here is a link to the OWID website
Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) – Statistics and Research https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus
bornagain77_{April 12, 2020
April
04
Apr
12
12
2020
10:35 AM
10
10
35
AM
PDT}

One of the most interesting things about the CFR chart was the median age of each country.jerry_{April 12, 2020
April
04
Apr
12
12
2020
09:51 AM
9
09
51
AM
PDT}

Just noticed a mistake in my comment 4 - the mean age of all participants was 43.6 years. My apologies for any confusion.Bob O'H_{April 12, 2020
April
04
Apr
12
12
2020
09:03 AM
9
09
03
AM
PDT}

I'm sorry, do you mean "Nope, I didn't miss your point" (in which case I hope you'll amend the OP), or "Nope, you're wrong and the 0.5% does refer to deaths in elderly patients" (in which case I hope you'll explain how you get this interpretation of the figure).Bob O'H_{April 12, 2020
April
04
Apr
12
12
2020
08:58 AM
8
08
58
AM
PDT}

BO'H: Nope. KFkairosfocus_{April 12, 2020
April
04
Apr
12
12
2020
07:31 AM
7
07
31
AM
PDT}

kf - I think you've missed my point. the 0.5% is not, as you state in the OP, the mortality rate in old people. It is the mortality rate in the whole group, with an average age of 48 years.Bob O'H_{April 12, 2020
April
04
Apr
12
12
2020
06:39 AM
6
06
39
AM
PDT}

BO'H: It is true that his deaths were older people, reflecting the pattern of danger. KFkairosfocus_{April 12, 2020
April
04
Apr
12
12
2020
06:05 AM
6
06
05
AM
PDT}

In this context, Prof Didier Raoult’s 1061 case study’s low fatality rate for elderly persons, 0.5% as reported, seems quite significant.
The 0.5% is the proportion of all patients. This is what's written in his abstract:
A poor outcome was observed for 46 patients (4.3%);10 were transferred to intensive care units, 5 patients died (0.47%) (74-95 years old) and 31 required 10 days of hospitalization or more.
I would guess that in his Interpretation, when he writes "The HCQ-AZ combination ... is a safe and efficient treatment for COVID-19, with a mortality rate of 0.5%, in elderly patients." he means that the deaths that occurred were in elderly patients.Bob O'H_{April 12, 2020
April
04
Apr
12
12
2020
05:29 AM
5
05
29
AM
PDT}

OWID on Case Fatality Rate to date vs median age of populationkairosfocus_{April 11, 2020
April
04
Apr
11
11
2020
10:21 AM
10
10
21
AM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply