The authors defended the drug's effectiveness and safety, arguing it ultimately would save more lives, all things considered. This is science's dirty little secret come out in the public. It rarely gets such a public outing, because the relationships in academia and in research labs throughout the world are usually very closed to public scrutiny. That no matter how objective scientists pretend to be, there are often ulterior motives working, consciously and unconsciously.
Drug manufacturers pay researchers to confirm a drug's effectiveness.
If the researcher fails to find the effectiveness, that researcher is all but cut off from future funding opportunities and studies by that drug company. Science can be objective. But humans conduct science and humans are notoriously subjective. Humans also have to interpret the science and data, which can lead to further errors. Only after a drug has been out on the market and approved by the FDA do truly independent researchers, who have no direct financial incentives to find a drug effective or ineffective, get a crack at the investigation.