What happens when a medical doctor finds a positive result, but it turns out that a test didn’t really measure it?
How does that happen?
That’s exactly what happened in a trial of a drug called Becton Dickinson’s (BD) EDS-100 drug, a drug that was designed to treat the common cold, in which it led to a false positive in over a million patients.
The trial results, which were published online by the Journal of the American Medical Association, revealed that some of the EDS drug’s participants, which included the patients themselves, were actually more likely to develop pneumonia, pneumonia pneumonia-like illness, or even worse, cirrhosis.
The study, conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Biosecurity, found that some individuals who had been taking the drug had higher rates of respiratory infections and respiratory failure than those who had not been using it, with the overall rate of respiratory illness being almost twice as high as it would have been had they been taking a placebo.
It’s been suggested that the drug’s use in this trial was in part to mask a greater increase in the rate of pneumonia in the participants.
The findings are troubling news for patients, as well as for drug companies.
As we reported previously, the drug was designed as a drug to treat a very rare form of pneumonia, which causes pneumonia, and in this case, it failed to provide the same protection to those who weren’t taking the vaccine.
The CDC’s James Hennen said that Bectons failure to protect people against the rare condition was not due to any of the drug company’s safety issues, but rather because it was simply not effective in reducing the pneumonia rate.
“This study is a reminder that there are some things we can learn from the human trials, but these are the kind of studies that we really want to make sure that we’re using every opportunity to understand what the risks are and make sure we’re getting the best science,” Hennens said.
“I think the good news is that the trial was able to identify that some patients were getting pneumonia, even though the data was not very strong,” he added.
“That suggests that the vaccine did a pretty good job of controlling the pneumonia rates, and that the other drug was really going to do nothing.”
The authors of the study also suggested that BDS’ EDS vaccine may have a similar effect to other medicines used in the treatment of pneumonia and other respiratory infections, and it may be the case that the EBS vaccine may be more effective in protecting against those who are more likely than others to develop a potentially fatal disease.
Hennes also noted that the drugs that were used in this study did not provide the best protection against respiratory infections.
The vaccine did not protect against the bacterial pneumonia that patients who were given the drug actually contracted, and patients with bacterial pneumonia were also more likely in the placebo group to develop respiratory infections as a result of the vaccine’s effects.
He also noted a potential limitation of the trial, noting that it was based on data collected on a very small number of people who were not vaccinated with the drug, which is an important point as many patients in the trial are immunocompromised.
“The trial was designed for about 10 people who have a very high risk of pneumonia,” Henna said.
Although he stressed that the data did not necessarily mean that patients in this clinical trial who were vaccinated with BDS would not develop pneumonia or other respiratory problems, he noted that “we don’t want to be putting too much weight on the outcome in this small trial.”
That’s because many of the people who took part in the study were also vaccinated with another drug, called TAC-V, which also works in the same way as BDS EDS, according to the Centers to Prevent Disease.
That drug was developed by a company called AstraZeneca (AZN) and the BBS study team is a part of a larger group of investigators working to find a vaccine that would work for everyone in the U.S. “It’s a very exciting study, but we need to make some important safety and efficacy recommendations for future studies,” HENNEN said.
Bectonic is also working on a drug designed to combat the common coronavirus, and a similar trial was recently published.
A study of the new drug was published earlier this month in the Journal, and the results were not much different than the one published by the CDC.
But a review of the Bectonal study found that the patients in both the BDT and BBS trials developed the same type of pneumonia.
And, of course, as the CDC notes, “there is evidence that the efficacy of these drugs may vary according to age and ethnicity.”
“We have been in contact with the CDC and their research teams to inform them of this important and important finding,” said Sarah M. Mink, CEO and president of the