Talk:Casirivimab/imdevimab

Pharmacology High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

COVID-19 Low‑importance

	COVID-19 portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject COVID-19, a project to coordinate efforts to improve all COVID-19-related articles. If you would like to help, you are invited to join and to participate in project discussions.COVID-19Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19Template:WikiProject COVID-19COVID-19 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Viruses Low‑importance

	Viruses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirusesWikipedia:WikiProject VirusesTemplate:WikiProject Virusesvirus articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Casirivimab/imdevimab.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Costs?

These things are usually very expensive to produce. Does anyone here know what Regeneron are charging per dose? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:E414:3A01:193F:3E1C:6B49:6166 (talk) 01:15, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

p=0.22 and p=0.09

Patients who were seronegative and/or had higher baseline viral levels also had greater benefits in terms of symptom alleviation. Among seronegative patients, median time to symptom alleviation (defined as symptoms becoming mild or absent) was 13 days in placebo, 8 days in high dose (p=0.22), and 6 days in low dose (p=0.09).

If the p-value is less than or equal to the alpha (p≤.05), then we reject the null hypothesis, and we say the result is statistically significant. If the p-value is greater than alpha (p > .05), then we fail to reject the null hypothesis, and we say that the result is statistically nonsignificant (n.s.).

How can this be an effective treatment when there is nothing statistically significant about it improving the time to symptom alleviation?

Jamplevia (talk) 17:37, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Science magazine story

Good story in Science. Main point is that for 1/3 of the patients who didn't produce antibodies, mortality was reduced from 30% to 24%.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/06/monoclonal-antibodies-cut-risk-dying-covid-19-only-some-patients
Monoclonal antibodies cut risk of dying from COVID-19—but only in some patients
By Kai Kupferschmidt
Jun. 16, 2021

About one-third of the patients were seronegative when they entered the trial, meaning they did not produce antibodies themselves. That includes people with underlying health conditions that weaken their immune system, but also people who, for unclear reasons, are unable to produce antibodies early on. In this group, 30% of patients given standard care died, versus 24% of those who received the antibody cocktail. That translates to six lives saved for every 100 such patients treated with the drug.

https://www.recoverytrial.net/results/monoclonal-antibody-combination-results
Recovery Trial
Regeneron's monoclonal antibody combination results
PRESS RELEASE
16 June 2021

RECOVERY trial finds Regeneron’s monoclonal antibody combination reduces deaths for hospitalised COVID-19 patients who have not mounted their own immune response

Nbauman (talk) 04:14, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mechanism of Action?

I feel like this article is sorely missing a "Mechanism of Action" section, especially given the fact that REGEN-COV is, to my knowledge, the first mAb treatment (or was that Palivizumab?) that's been commercialized as an antiviral. NixonFan1962 (talk) 18:26, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]