Following testing in clinical trials, the use of remdesivir for treatment of COVID-19 has been authorized for use in parts of the world, including the USA and Europe. These early authorizations were largely based on results from two clinical trials. A third study published by Wang et al. was deemed inconclusive. We demonstrate the utility of Bayesian reanalyses in the context of non-significant results like the Wang et al. trial. Results of a reanalysis of the three trials show ambiguous evidence for the primary outcome of clinical improvement and moderate evidence against efficacy of remdesivir for the secondary outcome of mortality rate. We recommend that regulatory bodies take all available evidence into account for endorsement decisions.