This was a "retrospective study", a kind of study that is frequently, although not intentionally biased. Not comparable to a double blinded trial, which is required for drug approval. It is biased because the group who received the drug was chosen, based on criteria that the doctors used to determine who would receive it and who would not. For example, it would have excluded patients with cardiac problems which would have been aggravated by the drug (a known side effect). This kind of study is easy to conduct, but can lead to comparing apples and oranges. We'll have to wait for double blinded studies to be completed before we know for sure whether it works. Meanwhile, there will be other drugs (probably monoclonal antibodies) that will be found to be better.
|