As Indian regulators endorse controversial treatments for Covid-19, a group of high-profile physicians and activists is urging the government to bolster transparency surrounding all drug approvals, the release of clinical trial data, and licenses issued for pharmaceutical manufacturing.

Critics have long complained that Indian government oversight of its pharmaceutical industry is lax, but the issue has intensified in recent weeks over approvals for certain medicines to combat the new coronavirus. In one instance, a drug already used to treat psoriasis was granted emergency use for Covid-19 based on a mid-stage study of just 30 patients; late-stage study requirements were waived.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT Plus and enjoy your first 30 days free!


What is it?

STAT Plus is STAT's premium subscription service for in-depth biotech, pharma, policy, and life science coverage and analysis. Our award-winning team covers news on Wall Street, policy developments in Washington, early science breakthroughs and clinical trial results, and health care disruption in Silicon Valley and beyond.

What's included?

  • Daily reporting and analysis
  • The most comprehensive industry coverage from a powerhouse team of reporters
  • Subscriber-only newsletters
  • Daily newsletters to brief you on the most important industry news of the day
  • STAT+ Conversations
  • Weekly opportunities to engage with our reporters and leading industry experts in live video conversations
  • Exclusive industry events
  • Premium access to subscriber-only networking events around the country
  • The best reporters in the industry
  • The most trusted and well-connected newsroom in the health care industry
  • And much more
  • Exclusive interviews with industry leaders, profiles, and premium tools, like our CRISPR Trackr.
  • If I recall, there was a small randomized study for Favipiravir, but I could be mistaken. To me, the big question, is “why has there not been a large randomized clinical study on Favipiravir? The drug is easy to manufacture. True, there are possible (probably?) teratogenic side effects and it would require a REMS, but why so few studies? The US is barely doing any research on Favi. It seems that it was prematurely approved in India, Russia, China, and a few other countries, based on small data. If it has promise, why are we ignoring Favi?

Comments are closed.

Sign up to receive a free weekly opinions recap from our community of experts.
Privacy Policy