NEWS
Beyond Air® Publishes Peer-Reviewed Journal Article in Scientific Reports with Clinical Data Showing Nitric Oxide was Safe and Beneficial Adjunct Therapy for Subjects with Viral Pneumonia
Beyond Air (NASDAQ: XAIR) has published a peer-reviewed article in Scientific Reports, demonstrating the safety and benefits of nitric oxide (NO) as an adjunct therapy for viral pneumonia. The study, conducted on COVID-19 patients, showed that 150-ppm intermittent inhaled NO administered with the LungFit® PRO device was well-tolerated and beneficial compared to usual care. Key findings include:
1. Mitigation of viral pneumonia severity
2. Enhanced recovery with reduced time to reach stable room air saturation
3. Shortened duration of supportive oxygen need
The company views these results as promising for further investigation of inhaled NO in treating viral and bacterial lung infections. Beyond Air is currently focusing on commercializing LungFit PH for treating term and near-term neonates with hypoxic respiratory failure.
1. Mitigation of viral pneumonia severity
2. Enhanced recovery with reduced time to reach stable room air saturation
3. Shortened duration of supportive oxygen need
The company views these results as promising for further investigation of inhaled NO in treating viral and bacterial lung infections. Beyond Air is currently focusing on commercializing LungFit PH for treating term and near-term neonates with hypoxic respiratory failure.
Disclaimer: Community is offered by Moomoo Technologies Inc. and is for educational purposes only.
Read more
Comment
Sign in to post a comment
Spread kindness and love. Life is short. Don’t let greed eat you.
1195Followers
74Following
8469Visitors
Follow
Lnova : :o
Arrayfunction : I am losing faith in humanity the more your posts expose me to the underbelly of human society that is PR for medical companies
The trial is not at all impressive. "In this prospective, open-label, multi center study subjects aged 18-80 diagnosed with viral pneumonia . . .'
So they basically just left a bunch of canisters around hospitals waiting for people to just walk in with viral pneumonia. No controls. No randomization. No experimental design.
Pulling the journal equivalent of the IG influencer renting a Lamborghini for a day to make content by publishing in "Scientific Reports" - which is a trash tier journal under the "Nature" umbrella.
Jaguar8 OP Arrayfunction : Not all clinical trials use RCTs. There are different ways of conducting trials. I myself did an exploratory and quasi- experimental mixed intervention study. RCTs are considered the pinnacle of clinical trials, but then certain studies can be achieved without it.
Jaguar8 OP : And also this publication is peer-reviewed so what you are claiming is altogether different.
Arrayfunction Jaguar8 OP : Yeah, I understand there are different types of trials. The fact we use RCTs at all presents an ethical dilemma I have no answer for. I hope we can develop enough Bayesian analyses frameworks and companies will work together and contribute data so we can test drugs with external control arms instead of actually giving sick people no treatment.
Observational studies are fine - it's just disingenuous wording on their part. It doesn't show much of anything in terms of the metrics.
You are right, trash tier probably was too strong a word, my slang bleed too far. But it's not a very high quality journal. The impact factor calculation has a ton of problems with it, but since there needs to be some kind of metric Scientific Reports sits at 3.8 vs Nature's 50.5.
Jaguar8 OP Arrayfunction : Observational studies can be advantageous depending on the variable under investigation. However, they are not suitable for drug studies involving pharmacokinetics and similar parameters. Despite any perceived inferiority, Scientific Reports undergoes peer review by field experts, thereby maintaining its credibility.
Why don’t you recommend those suggestions to the scientific community since you have a lot to say and criticize about trials?
Arrayfunction Jaguar8 OP : Oh, I tried! I was always sad I didn't clear the last round of hiring interviews for Home | Share, Integrate & Analyze Cancer Research Data | Project Data Sphere a few years back because the external control arm was their goal.
You are also correct. Every study has its pros and cons in terms of the classic 3 way tradeoff of precision, realism and generalizability. And Phase 4 / aftermarket trial data has proven to be incredibly important in the past for public safety when adverse events were either unknown or not reported.
I was focused too much on knowing just how much work it would take to keep all that data clean and consistent and protected vs what could be done with it.
I will keep my opinions to myself for a while. Thanks for providing the constructive feedback, genuinely.