Trump’s previous endorsement of hydroxychloroquine catalyzed a tremendous shift in the South Asian country, spurring the world’s largest producer of the drug to make much more of it, prescribe it for front-line health workers treating the virus and deploy it as a diplomatic tool, despite mounting evidence against using the drug for COVID-19, reports AP.
Trump said Monday that he wastaking hydroxychloroquineas a measure of protection against the virus. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, however, has cautioned against using it outside of hospitals because of the risk of serious heart problems.
Suhhil Gupta, a pharmacist in New Delhi, said Tuesday that Trump’s announcement shouldn’t carry any weight in India.
“He’s not a pharmacist. His statements are not relevant to the field,” Gupta said.
Still, India’s policy on the decades-old drug, used to prevent malaria and treat lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, drastically changed after Trump tweeted in March that the drug, used together with an antibiotic, could be “game changers” in the fight against the pandemic. India’s health ministry quickly approved it as a prophylactic for health care workers and others at high risk of infection, and as a treatment for critically ill patients.
Officials in Mumbai even drew up a plan to administer hydroxychloroquine to thousands of slum dwellers as a preventive measure against the virus.
Indian health officials have declined repeated requests for comment, limiting communications to daily health briefings, the last of which occurred May 11.
The rules say that drugs such as hydroxychloroquine be used only after a rigorous scientific and ethical review, continued oversight by an ethics committee and ensuring informed consent – none of which happened with HCQ, according to Dr. Amar Jesani, a medical ethics expert.
The Mumbai proposal was ultimately shelved amid questions of the ethics of administering HCQ, as the drug is known, without first subjecting it to clinical trials. Still, the Indian government has recommended more and more people use it, contravening 2017 rules for emergency use of untested drugs, Jesani said.
India initially banned HCQ exports, but lifted the ban after Trump threatened “retaliation.” At the same time, India’s government ordered manufacturers to ramp up production from 1.2 million to 3 million pills a month – causing company shares to skyrocket. From the U.S. to Australia, sales jumped.
Officials have even said that Indian plantations could increase the growing capacity of cinchona trees, whose bark contains the compound quinine, which has been used to treat malaria since the 1860s. Quinine can also be made synthetically.
The Indian government itself purchased 100 million HCQ pills, according to government data, to distribute to states and donate to countries including Afghanistan, Myanmar and the Dominican Republic.
India is the world’s largest producer of generic drugs, a fast-growing industry that has brought down pharmaceutical prices globally. During the HIV/AIDs crisis, India played a similar role as in the coronavirus pandemic, boosting global supplies of life-saving drugs.
The problem this time, experts say, is that the hydroxychloroquine hype is based on a flimsy study, with little to no evidence that it prevents or treats COVID-19.
Still, a sharp rise in demand has reduced supplies for patients with lupus and rheumatoid arthritis.
India’s hurried guidance has also impeded scientific trials that could determine whether the benefits of taking HCQ outweigh the risks.
“We should do a trial. I think that is the right way to come to answer on this question. But the (government) made our job harder,” said Dr. Bharath Kumar, whose team has proposed a trial. Meanwhile, evidence against using HCQ for the coronavirus is growing.
A U.S. study of 368 patients in veterans’ hospitals, the largest study yet examining HCQ’s value as a coronavirus antidote, found no benefits and even more deaths among those given the drug.
The Indian government’s own assessment of 19 drugs found that HCQ wasn’t the most promising. A task force noted that while HCQ was readily available, the strength of scientific evidence for the mechanism of action was fairly low.
