A Phase 2, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Dose Escalation Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of SPI-1005 in Severe COVID-19 Patients

Treggiari et al., NCT04483973, NCT04483973, Jun 2026
Mortality -125% improvement lower risk ← → higher risk Recovery -13% Ebselen  Treggiari et al.  LATE TREATMENT RCT Is late treatment with ebselen beneficial for COVID-19? Double-blind RCT 25 patients in the USA Trial underpowered for serious outcomes c19early.org Treggiari et al., NCT04483973, June 2026 0 0.5 1 1.5 2+ RR
RCT 25 severe COVID-19 patients showing no significant differences with SPI-1005 (ebselen).
Standard of Care (SOC) for COVID-19 in the study country, the USA, is very poor with very low average efficacy for approved treatments1. Only expensive, high-profit treatments were approved for early treatment. Low-cost treatments were excluded, reducing the probability of early treatment due to access and cost barriers, and eliminating complementary and synergistic benefits seen with many low-cost treatments.
Important missing comments or errors? Let us know.
risk of death, 125.0% higher, RR 2.25, p = 0.62, treatment 4 of 16 (25.0%), control 1 of 9 (11.1%).
risk of no recovery, 13.3% higher, RR 1.13, p = 0.78, treatment mean 2.64 (±2.01) n=11, control mean 2.33 (±2.42) n=6, relative WHO score, day 30.
Effect extraction follows pre-specified rules prioritizing more serious outcomes. Submit updates
Treggiari et al., 29 Jun 2026, Double Blind Randomized Controlled Trial, placebo-controlled, USA, preprint, 1 author, trial NCT04483973 (history). Contact: info@soundpharma.com.
$0 $500 $1,000+ Efficacy vs. cost for COVID-19 treatment protocols c19early.org July 2026 USA Angola Colombia Kenya Mozambique Myanmar South Africa Peru Philippines Vietnam Japan Nepal China Uzbekistan Iran Bangladesh Ethiopia Ghana Germany Mexico South Korea Saudi Arabia Algeria Morocco Yemen Poland India Venezuela DR Congo Madagascar Thailand Uganda Egypt Nigeria Taiwan Zambia Bolivia Fiji Bosnia-Herzegovina Jordan Georgia Switzerland Ukraine Côte d'Ivoire Bulgaria Greece Slovakia Singapore Iceland New Zealand Trinidad and Tobago Mongolia Czechia Israel Belarus North Macedonia Hong Kong Qatar Panama Serbia CAR Syria USA favored high-profit treatments.The average efficacy of treatments was very low.High-cost protocols reduce early treatment, andforgo complementary/synergistic benefits. More effective More expensive 75% 50% 25% ≤0%
$0 $500 $1,000+ Efficacy vs. cost for COVID-19treatment protocols worldwide c19early.org July 2026 USA Angola Colombia Kenya Mozambique Myanmar South Africa Peru Philippines Vietnam Japan Nepal China Uzbekistan Iran Bangladesh Ethiopia Ghana Germany Mexico South Korea Saudi Arabia Algeria Morocco Yemen Poland India Venezuela DR Congo Madagascar Thailand Uganda Egypt Nigeria Taiwan Zambia Bolivia Fiji Jordan Georgia Switzerland Ukraine Côte d'Ivoire Eritrea Bulgaria Greece Slovakia Singapore Iceland New Zealand Mongolia Czechia Israel Belarus North Macedonia Hong Kong Qatar Panama Serbia CAR USA favored high-profit treatments.The average efficacy was very low.High-cost protocols reduce early treatment,and forgo complementary/synergistic benefits. More effective More expensive 75% 50% 25% ≤0%
Late treatment
is less effective
Please send us corrections, updates, or comments. c19early involves the extraction of 200,000+ datapoints from thousands of papers. Community updates help ensure high accuracy. Treatments and other interventions are complementary. All practical, effective, and safe means should be used based on risk/benefit analysis. No treatment or intervention is 100% available and effective for all current and future variants. We do not provide medical advice. Before taking any medication, consult a qualified physician who can provide personalized advice and details of risks and benefits based on your medical history and situation. IMA and WCH provide treatment protocols.
  or use drag and drop   
Submit    
Post
Share
@CovidAnalysis
FAQ
Public domain CC0 1.0