UK's strategy with regard to the vaccine has been spot on, but I do not understand why the hesitation for the Moderna vaccine. They have been leading the race from the beginning (first to develop the vaccine, first to start trials), so it is. a bit surprising that the UK ordered only 5m vaccines from them.That's why i say maybe i was wrong to say it was totally down to putting all eggs in one basket, and some is down to bad luck. It so happened that two of the three leading the vaccine race are the ones the UK has ordered the least of.
The EU's has used that approach all along. They have concluded negotiations but then waited until the last minute to confirm orders, and used their buying power to push up the list. The UK by contrast has been quick to sign deals early but all reports suggest they had decided to opt out of the Moderna vaccine.
Those other vaccine dates are estimates. Some of them are still in phase 1 or 2 and i believe Valneva is still pre-trial.
We were having meetings as a practice with NHS england regarding pfizer and moderna once the comms went out that GPs would be assisting in mass vaccine programme. Became obvious that no solution was forthcoming regarding storage problem with regards to freezers in surgeries, mobile units for homebound patients etc etc. Logistically very very difficult. Ideally you want something quick and easier to roll out en masse, scalability a bit issue. If its the army or specialist vaccination centres doing them then fine but questions regarding homebound patients remain in that scenario, access with travel etc.
We know from phase II data regarding Oxford vaccine, it is well tolerated especially among older adults.
I was watching a zoom session with a clinical virologist who is quite prominent and he reported mainly two issues with the Oxford vaccine
- limited data looking specifically at BAME population
- relatively more side effect burden compared to pfizer and moderna, apparently you get up to 5 days of mild-to-moderate aches and pains type symptoms in Oxford vaccine (which is why for the Oxford vaccine their placebo had to be the MenACWY vaccine compared to saline for the mRNA vaccines) - it will be crucial to highlight issues of mild aches/pains but stress importance of second jab, although there are some who think nocebo effect is there as well and question whether honesty is the best policy. Will be tricky.
I think the efficacy data will change once we vaccinate more people, and more data will emerge, I think if it works well enough to get life back to normal and we can role out quickly (now with potentially help from primary care too) its worth doing.
I don't know what will be decided to be honest but getting the ball rolling with mass vaccination programmes with any of the three candidates is of massive benefit in the aggregate to society.
Would prefer though for clinical papers and data to be made available to all physicians and health policy makers though. Transparency is paramount. I wouldn't inject anybody without having those things to hand first personally.
We were having meetings as a practice with NHS england regarding pfizer and moderna once the comms went out that GPs would be assisting in mass vaccine programme. Became obvious that no solution was forthcoming regarding storage problem with regards to freezers in surgeries, mobile units for homebound patients etc etc. Logistically very very difficult. Ideally you want something quick and easier to roll out en masse, scalability a bit issue. If its the army or specialist vaccination centres doing them then fine but questions regarding homebound patients remain in that scenario, access with travel etc.
We know from phase II data regarding Oxford vaccine, it is well tolerated especially among older adults.
I was watching a zoom session with a clinical virologist who is quite prominent and he reported mainly two issues with the Oxford vaccine
- limited data looking specifically at BAME population
- relatively more side effect burden compared to pfizer and moderna, apparently you get up to 5 days of mild-to-moderate aches and pains type symptoms in Oxford vaccine (which is why for the Oxford vaccine their placebo had to be the MenACWY vaccine compared to saline for the mRNA vaccines) - it will be crucial to highlight issues of mild aches/pains but stress importance of second jab, although there are some who think nocebo effect is there as well and question whether honesty is the best policy. Will be tricky.
I think the efficacy data will change once we vaccinate more people, and more data will emerge, I think if it works well enough to get life back to normal and we can role out quickly (now with potentially help from primary care too) its worth doing.
I don't know what will be decided to be honest but getting the ball rolling with mass vaccination programmes with any of the three candidates is of massive benefit in the aggregate to society.
Would prefer though for clinical papers and data to be made available to all physicians and health policy makers though. Transparency is paramount. I wouldn't inject anybody without having those things to hand first personally.
yeah its possible, a big rate limiting step though will be if a significant amount of patients buy into this vaccine being "inferior" or only getting the first jab due to hyperfocus around this thing from media outlets and social media once we start vaccinating (+/- side effects).Saw that the control got a saline jab for the 2nd dose. Assuming that means the side effects are limited only to the first dose?
Hehe good oneSo one Neymar, or 74m does of vaccine.
Either way, it's a lot of money to pay for a little prick.
BAME covid19 issues in UK are sociological and not biological or genetic? So surely this isn't really an issue?We know from phase II data regarding Oxford vaccine, it is well tolerated especially among older adults.
I was watching a zoom session with a clinical virologist who is quite prominent and he reported mainly two issues with the Oxford vaccine
- limited data looking specifically at BAME population
- relatively more side effect burden compared to pfizer and moderna, apparently you get up to 5 days of mild-to-moderate aches and pains type symptoms in Oxford vaccine (which is why for the Oxford vaccine their placebo had to be the MenACWY vaccine compared to saline for the mRNA vaccines) - it will be crucial to highlight issues of mild aches/pains but stress importance of second jab, although there are some who think nocebo effect is there as well and question whether honesty is the best policy. Will be tricky.
Even if they get an emergency license there will have to be some sort of approved product label which will have all the key data incorporated. Whether or not a peer reviewed journal article is available. You won’t have to inject anyone based on the scanty info we’re working off right now.
BAME covid19 issues in UK are sociological and not biological or genetic? So surely this isn't really an issue?
Too early to come to that conclusion. We don’t yet know which regime will be approved. It looks as though the 90% efficacy cohort has much lower patient numbers, which could be a problem when it comes to getting a license. They’ll be kicking themselves they didn’t go with that dose in the Phase III trial, that’s for sure.
AstraZeneca said:One dosing regimen (n=2,741) showed vaccine efficacy of 90% when AZD1222 was given as a half dose, followed by a full dose at least one month apart, and another dosing regimen (n=8,895) showed 62% efficacy when given as two full doses at least one month apart. The combined analysis from both dosing regimens (n=11,636) resulted in an average efficacy of 70%. All results were statistically significant (p<=0.0001). More data will continue to accumulate and additional analysis will be conducted, refining the efficacy reading and establishing the duration of protection.
Not really. It's just one of those acronyms that people like to say because they can get away with it. Doctors use BAME the same way that rappers use the N-word.BAME covid19 issues in UK are sociological and not biological or genetic? So surely this isn't really an issue?
Oxford/Boris have obviously chased the biggest profit opportunity rather than producing the very best vaccine.
The clinical trials, enrolling over 24,000 participants from diverse racial and geographical groups in the UK, Brazil and South Africa, will now continue to final analysis. Further trials are being conducted in the United States, Kenya, Japan and India and the trial team expect to have under 60,000 participants by the end of the year. These trials will provide regulators with further information about the efficacy and safety of the Oxford candidate vaccine, including its ability to both protect against and stop the transmission of COVID-19.
Too early to come to that conclusion. We don’t yet know which regime will be approved. It looks as though the 90% efficacy cohort has much lower patient numbers, which could be a problem when it comes to getting a license. They’ll be kicking themselves they didn’t go with that dose in the Phase III trial, that’s for sure.
Don't we? Announced it will be the 2 shot version here? Of course that could just be an assumption.
Every arm in the study involved 2 shots. Just varying doses.
I missed that. Watch this space then I guess.
I wonder if the approval process specifies dosage specifically or as a maximum?
AstraZeneca-Oxford measured their results in a different way from their two major competitors. The Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech trials only captured Covid-19 infections in their trial pool that advanced far enough to produce symptoms, while the AstraZeneca trials conducted weekly swab tests among their participants, allowing them to detect much less severe cases — including potential asymptomatic infections — among their volunteers. These differences make it trickier to draw apples-to-apples comparisons of the efficacy of the different vaccines.
That would be huge really. I don't think the Astra press release is very clear on who exactly they were testing (or how, because the press release talks about PCR for symptomatic cases separately) or what the symptomatic/asymptomatic split was. The Astra guy described it tonight as "a hint" from one of the UK trial sets. To be continued I guess...https://www.vox.com/21590994/oxford-vaccine-results-covid-19-astrazeneca-trial-pfizer-moderna
AstraZeneca-Oxford measured their results in a different way from their two major competitors. The Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech trials only captured Covid-19 infections in their trial pool that advanced far enough to produce symptoms, while the AstraZeneca trials conducted weekly swab tests among their participants, allowing them to detect much less severe cases — including potential asymptomatic infections — among their volunteers. These differences make it trickier to draw apples-to-apples comparisons of the efficacy of the different vaccines.
this is a decent comparison article, mostly accurate i think and with the regards to efficacy this bit is pretty relevant I think
I am shocked to see how many people have actually sub-consciously bought into anti-vaxx movement without realizing that. I have asked many of my friends whether they will get vaccinated, they aren’t really covid denialists per their admittance, and I am yet to find a person who would say ‘yeah I will get it’. It’s either ‘never in a million years, it’s not dangerous to me’ or ‘will definitely not get any of the first doses as they won’t be tested sufficiently’. So basically I am antivaxx but won’t admit it.
That would be huge really. I don't think the Astra press release is very clear on who exactly they were testing (or how, because the press release talks about PCR for symptomatic cases separately) or what the symptomatic/asymptomatic split was. The Astra guy described it tonight as "a hint" from one of the UK trial sets. To be continued I guess...
I don't know anyone who wouldn't take it. And that includes my son and his mates in their early 20's in the US and Australia. The anti-vaxers I do encounter are online and a scary number are from the UK. I kind of expect that sort of lunacy from the US as the far-right Trump Qanon silliness seems to have become involved but the UK used to be more rational.
We do have our vaccine nutters here but most see a vaccine as a way back to normal and the sacrifices of lockdown and closed borders were to get us to a vaccine with minimal deaths.
From the data so far, there is much to be encouraged from the Oxford AZ developed vaccine.
Assuming it becomes certified, it is going to be interesting as to whether you will be able to choose which vaccine you will be given.
hah, I didn't get it. thank you.This took me way too long and a Google of the Oxford comma to figure out.
Oxford/Boris have obviously chased the biggest profit opportunity rather than producing the very best vaccine.
The clinical trials, enrolling over 24,000 participants from diverse racial and geographical groups in the UK, Brazil and South Africa, will now continue to final analysis. Further trials are being conducted in the United States, Kenya, Japan and India and the trial team expect to have under 60,000 participants by the end of the year. These trials will provide regulators with further information about the efficacy and safety of the Oxford candidate vaccine, including its ability to both protect against and stop the transmission of COVID-19.
https://www.vox.com/21590994/oxford-vaccine-results-covid-19-astrazeneca-trial-pfizer-moderna
this is a decent comparison article, mostly accurate i think and with the regards to efficacy this bit is pretty relevant
Yeah it absolutely is. I noted the following last week and was keen to see how AZ recorded infections. It makes direct comparisons difficult to make.https://www.vox.com/21590994/oxford-vaccine-results-covid-19-astrazeneca-trial-pfizer-moderna
this is a decent comparison article, mostly accurate i think and with the regards to efficacy this bit is pretty relevant
Is it worth bearing in mind that the Moderna trial protocol only tests for obviously symptomatic COVID-19? To be considered a positive case, the participants must test positive AND have at least two symptoms, at least one of which being a specific type.
Still promising news but seems like this could skew the numbers a bit by veiling potential asymptomatic cases/transmission. Would expect the true effectiveness (disease prevention) to be lower than 94.5%, but I say that based on statistical effects rather than any medical knowledge.
Leaving aside the 90% effective small/large dose of the Oxford vaccine and just considering the 70%, I think people are understating how important the price, scaling and practicality of the vaccine is.
Pfizer estimate they can produce up to 1.2bn by end of 2021 while Moderna think they can produce up to 500m. So between the two of them they should be able to immunise 1.5-1.6bn people between both vaccines although both will struggle with third world infrastructure and hot climates.
Oxford should be able to roll it out anywhere and up to 3bn doses by the be of 2021 which would mean 2.1bn people immunised.
I am not disputing this, and no need to type all of your knowledge down here. I am only disputing that people have their rights and others are scared of vaccines UNTIL they are proven. WHY are people trying to shove it down my throat that they will die. Everyone dies sometime, but you can't get away from the FACT that people have the right to be WARY of Vaccines.What does this even mean?
Some people that haven't taken the flu vaccine have died. Probably some people that have taken the flu vaccine have also died from flu. It's not as effective as these vaccines in that regard, after all. But we know they have died. We know people die from flu and covid. And we have a good understanding of the biological mechanisms that cause that process that repeats itself over and over again. It's not a kind of mysticism that an unusually large number of people are dying from a very similar set of symptoms that also align with testing positive for a specific protein that identifies covid. It's a virus that kills many and infects magnitudes more.
So they are IGNORANT if they refuse to take the vaccine until what they feel is right, and wait for a year. Man you need to take a close look at yourself.Well by the time most people are eligible for a shot they'd have a years worth of data to fall back on, bearing in mind testing started as early back as April. But I don't expect many ignorant people will take that into account and will assume the clock starts in December.
