A controversial research paper that created significant interest in using an antimalarial medication for COVID-19 has now been officially withdrawn.

On Tuesday, a scientific publication removed a March 2020 study that first presented hydroxychloroquine as a potential treatment during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, affirming that the initial excitement was unwarranted.

The antimalarial drug was briefly hailed as a promising therapy for the newly identified coronavirus, a time when medical options were limited. This study was released just as many nations were entering lockdowns, while hospitals were overwhelmed, offering a rare glimmer of hope when doctors lacked options for combating the deadly virus.

However, experts soon expressed skepticism regarding the study’s methodology, scale, and ethical considerations. Subsequent research failed to validate its claims.

Now, the International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, which initially published the study, along with three of its 18 co-authors (not including the lead scientist), has agreed to retract the paper. They issued a formal withdrawal statement.

The French Society of Pharmacology and Therapeutics labeled the research as a clear instance of scientific misconduct, highlighting manipulation and bias intended to “falsely represent” the drug as effective against COVID-19. “This controversial study was the foundation of a global scandal,” the society emphasized in a statement released on Tuesday.

“The promotion of these findings led to widespread prescriptions of hydroxychloroquine for millions, posing unnecessary risks and resulting in potentially thousands of preventable deaths. Additionally, it caused a surge in irrelevant studies that hindered research into effective treatments.”

The temporary go-to treatment

In 2020, then-President Donald Trump publicly stated he was taking hydroxychloroquine to ward off a COVID-19 infection, despite the U.S. Food and Drug Administration warning against its use. Trump regularly promoted the drug, and his administration, along with various governments, sought to acquire large quantities of it, although he did not use it himself when diagnosed with COVID-19 in late 2020.

Hydroxychloroquine is associated with serious side effects, including cardiac problems, heart rhythm disturbances, liver failure, and kidney issues. The FDA had issued a warning against using it for COVID-19 treatment.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, prescriptions for hydroxychloroquine surged by 80 times from March 2019 to March 2020.

The drug is usually prescribed to manage uncontrolled immune responses in conditions like rheumatoid arthritis and lupus, as well as for treating and preventing malaria. However, its use for COVID-19 occasionally created shortages for patients who needed it for legitimate medical reasons.

Critique of the research

Right at the start of the pandemic, the study’s lead researcher, Didier Raoult, promoted hydroxychloroquine as a quick fix for the ongoing health crisis.

The now-retracted research involved only 36 COVID-19 patients, with 20 reportedly receiving hydroxychloroquine along with azithromycin, an antibiotic. The review by the journal indicated that it could not confirm whether the patients had fully consented to the treatment, which violates ethical guidelines in research.

According to Dutch microbiologist and scientific integrity consultant Elisabeth Bik in a blog post from 2020, the exclusion of six patients whose poor health outcomes could have affected the study’s positive results raises significant questions about the findings.

Raoult, previously the head of IHU Méditerranée Infection, also authored multiple papers that have been discredited, as reported by Science. The IHU is currently under criminal investigation related to those studies. Additionally, Raoult has stirred controversy by rejecting widely accepted scientific theories, including evolution and climate change.

‘Politicizing science doesn’t lead us closer to the truth’

The retracted paper serves as a case study in the dangers of politicizing scientific research, according to Ivan Oransky, a co-founder of Retraction Watch, an organization that examines concerns related to retracted studies on hydroxychloroquine.

Oransky expressed doubts that those promoting the ineffective use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 would alter their stance due to the retraction; instead, it could reinforce their beliefs, as they might view the retraction as a targeted attack by the scientific mainstream.

“It’s likely frustrating for everyone involved, regardless of their viewpoint,” Oransky, who also teaches medical journalism at New York University, stated. “Truth cannot be attained through the politicization of science.”

He remarked that during the early days of the pandemic, research was rapidly conducted as scientists raced to understand the SARS-CoV-2 virus and to seek effective treatments for severely ill patients.

Oransky added that in the fast-evolving context of a pandemic, it’s common for scientific understanding to shift or for mistakes to occur in hasty studies. It’s crucial for public health officials and researchers to admit when they err.

“If not, we risk entering a progressively worsening cycle,” he cautioned.