Page 24 of 54
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Sat Dec 26, 2020 3:29 am
by Chris Preston
We won't have a vaccine approved before March and it will probably be the end of the year before the population can be vaccinated. If the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine gets approved it will go faster, as it will be manufactured in Australia.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Sat Dec 26, 2020 5:23 pm
by Herainestold
Chris Preston wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 3:29 am
We won't have a vaccine approved before March and it will probably be the end of the year before the population can be vaccinated. If the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine gets approved it will go faster, as it will be manufactured in Australia.
Australia is well known for its scientific expertise. Is there not an Australian vaccine being developed? It seems like Australia is in a good position to develop their own vaccine, as there are a very low amount of infection and there is time to do things properly. I am also wondering if vaccines should be tailored to the chracteristics of each country's population.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Sat Dec 26, 2020 5:37 pm
by shpalman
A very low amount of infection means needing to wait longer to get Phase III data on efficacy, unless you do the trial in a different country (Brazil, for example), and it also means you need to be much more sure about safety. But it does mean that you can afford to wait a bit to get the safety data from countries in which vaccination is more urgent.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Sat Dec 26, 2020 5:45 pm
by Herainestold
shpalman wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 5:37 pm
A very low amount of infection means needing to wait longer to get Phase III data on efficacy, unless you do the trial in a different country (Brazil, for example), and it also means you need to be much more sure about safety. But it does mean that you can afford to wait a bit to get the safety data from countries in which vaccination is more urgent.
Good point. Maybe Australia should just sit tight, be vigilant, watch the results from other countries and then carefully choose the vaccine that has the best characteristics for their country. Too bad we cant do the same here.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Sat Dec 26, 2020 11:41 pm
by Squeak
Herainestold wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 5:45 pm
shpalman wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 5:37 pm
A very low amount of infection means needing to wait longer to get Phase III data on efficacy, unless you do the trial in a different country (Brazil, for example), and it also means you need to be much more sure about safety. But it does mean that you can afford to wait a bit to get the safety data from countries in which vaccination is more urgent.
Good point. Maybe Australia should just sit tight, be vigilant, watch the results from other countries and then carefully choose the vaccine that has the best characteristics for their country. Too bad we cant do the same here.
That's exactly what Australia is found. The risk benefit analysis is very different here compared to places that lost control of covid. Or, as our cousin said on the family Zoom yesterday, we're being punished for doing such a good job by having to let other countries go first. :/
The University of Queensland was involved in research on the vaccine that resulted in false positive HIV tests and has stopped development. At least a couple of other Australian universities are also engaged in covid vaccine research with international partners. When the time comes, we'll likely make our own, for the versions that we have the manufacturing capacity for (i.e. not the mRNA ones).
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 3:13 am
by Millennie Al
Woodchopper wrote: ↑Fri Dec 25, 2020 10:54 am
If the threshold is 80 percent there is a real danger that anti antivaxxers will prevent the US reaching that threshold.
However, there is a strong correlation between antivax views and denying that covid is a serious disease, so many antivaxers will probably make themselves immune by catching it.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 6:14 am
by Chris Preston
Herainestold wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 5:23 pm
Chris Preston wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 3:29 am
We won't have a vaccine approved before March and it will probably be the end of the year before the population can be vaccinated. If the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine gets approved it will go faster, as it will be manufactured in Australia.
Australia is well known for its scientific expertise. Is there not an Australian vaccine being developed? It seems like Australia is in a good position to develop their own vaccine, as there are a very low amount of infection and there is time to do things properly. I am also wondering if vaccines should be tailored to the characteristics of each country's population.
Australia had several vaccines in research. However, the most promising candidate resulted in all the volunteers testing positive for HIV, so has been discontinued. There are several others, but they are much further behind.
I don't see much point in trying to tailor vaccines for the characteristics of a country's population. Ethnic and racial differences in vaccines responses tend to be relatively small and unpredictable. Basically, you would need to do a large trial for each vaccine to determine what the best mix might be. In that time, most of the population could have been vaccinated. Of far more importance is the country's infrastructure, which allows vaccines to be effectively delivered. The mRNA vaccines are going to be less useful in developing countries with poor transport infrastructure than developed countries.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 8:57 am
by sTeamTraen
Reports this morning are saying the Oxford/AZ vaccine hit 95% efficacy, and 100% effectiveness against serious disease, in the new trial, using the accidentally discovered half-dose-first protocol.
This vaccine is also apparently designed to prevent transmission, and as we know it is cheap and easy to handle.
I haven't yet
got out of bed and off my phone had time to go behind the paywalls for more detail. This looks huge, as long as people are prepared to believe whatever AZ's explanation for the rather disappointing initial trial's results were. It could be that 95% is within the confidence interval of the original half-then-full sample, which was 90% with a limited number of cases, but I'm sure the conspiracists will be saying "Well, that's very convenient".
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 10:11 am
by lpm
Hooray!
That part is done, clever ways to speed up production is what counts now.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 10:17 am
by shpalman
That's good news (especially as
Italy has ordered a load of it for the first half of 2021 which will now be good for 30 million people instead of 20 million), but if I'm going to have to go behind a paywall to read about it, I'd rather it be a scientific journal paywall (and scientific journals aren't paywalling covid research at the moment).
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 3:45 pm
by Herainestold
Chris Preston wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 6:14 am
Australia had several vaccines in research. However, the most promising candidate resulted in all the volunteers testing positive for HIV, so has been discontinued. There are several others, but they are much further behind.
I don't see much point in trying to tailor vaccines for the characteristics of a country's population. Ethnic and racial differences in vaccines responses tend to be relatively small and unpredictable. Basically, you would need to do a large trial for each vaccine to determine what the best mix might be. In that time, most of the population could have been vaccinated. Of far more importance is the country's infrastructure, which allows vaccines to be effectively delivered. The mRNA vaccines are going to be less useful in developing countries with poor transport infrastructure than developed countries.
Given the large differences in infection and mortality rares in different people, ie. BIPOC people, Ltinx etc, wouldn't it be better to have vaccines tailored for each group? A one size fits all approach might be good for quick blanket coverage, but the best results would occur with vaccines designed for each user group.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2020 4:07 pm
by sTeamTraen
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2020 1:44 am
by Millennie Al
sTeamTraen wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 8:57 am
Reports this morning are saying the Oxford/AZ vaccine hit 95% efficacy, and 100% effectiveness against serious disease, in the new trial, using the accidentally discovered half-dose-first protocol.
That tweet refers to "new data", but where has this data come from? It's too soon to have results from another trial.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2020 6:54 am
by Woodchopper
Suspicions grow that nanoparticles in Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine trigger rare allergic reactions
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/12 ... -reactions
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Tue Dec 29, 2020 2:17 pm
by shpalman
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2020 7:36 am
by shpalman
UK approves the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine because of course it does.
Italy has ordered about 40 million doses of this one but I expect European approval to take rather longer.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2020 8:38 am
by shpalman
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has approved two full doses of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine.
However, unpublished data suggests that leaving a longer gap between the first and second doses increases the overall effectiveness of the jab.
There was not enough clear data to approve the half-dose, full-dose idea.
In other words, they rushed through the (probably) less-effective and slightly wasteful full-full dose protocol, not the (possibly) better half-full protocol, because there isn't enough data on the latter yet (because, weirdly, a
a tweet linking to a paywalled Times article doesn't count).
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2020 8:55 am
by Stephanie
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2020 9:00 am
by lpm
So they tested full-full and found it not as good.
And are going with untested full-12weeks-full.
Are they just guessing this will match half-full or is there evidence from other vaccines or studies?
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2020 9:48 am
by discovolante
shpalman wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 8:38 am
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has approved two full doses of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine.
However, unpublished data suggests that leaving a longer gap between the first and second doses increases the overall effectiveness of the jab.
There was not enough clear data to approve the half-dose, full-dose idea.
In other words, they rushed through the (probably) less-effective and slightly wasteful full-full dose protocol, not the (possibly) better half-full protocol, because there isn't enough data on the latter yet (because, weirdly, a
a tweet linking to a paywalled Times article doesn't count).
Wtf
Is there any prospect of the half-full regime being approved in future, and if so presumably that leaves the people dosed early (I.e. the ones who need it more) with potentially less protection as they are unlikely to get it again any time soon?
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2020 10:55 am
by shpalman
discovolante wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 9:48 am
Is there any prospect of the half-full regime being approved in future, and if so presumably that leaves the people dosed early (I.e. the ones who need it more) with potentially less protection as they are unlikely to get it again any time soon?
You mean, give someone who received the full--full protocol the half--full protocol at some later date to give them the "~95%" protection instead of the ~60% protection?
If half--full is better than full--full due to the immune response wiping out the viral vector too quickly, giving someone half--full after they've already been given full--full is not going to work at all, unless by the time the SARS-CoV-2 mutates they've developed a different adenovirus vector for 2022's vaccination programme.
It will be interesting to see how many doses of each of this and the Pfizer and Moderna ones become available in the UK and if there will be any strategy as to who gets which one (which isn't just "whichever one we happened to have, whoever happens to be nearest"), but that's for the "rollout" thread.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:34 am
by discovolante
shpalman wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 10:55 am
discovolante wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 9:48 am
Is there any prospect of the half-full regime being approved in future, and if so presumably that leaves the people dosed early (I.e. the ones who need it more) with potentially less protection as they are unlikely to get it again any time soon?
You mean, give someone who received the full--full protocol the half--full protocol at some later date to give them the "~95%" protection instead of the ~60% protection?
If half--full is better than full--full due to the immune response wiping out the viral vector too quickly, giving someone half--full after they've already been given full--full is not going to work at all, unless by the time the SARS-CoV-2 mutates they've developed a different adenovirus vector for 2022's vaccination programme.
It will be interesting to see how many doses of each of this and the Pfizer and Moderna ones become available in the UK and if there will be any strategy as to who gets which one (which isn't just "whichever one we happened to have, whoever happens to be nearest"), but that's for the "rollout" thread.
Well that's annoying. Hopefully decreased transmission as well leading to a hodge podge type 'solution' that will hopefully work before the effect of the vaccine 'wears off' (soz don't know technical term).
I mean I'm just flailing around here, obviously, without having a clue. Obviously we don't want to f.ck about with getting vaccines approved but it seems like it it being used as a substitute for any other policy, also without an actual plan for how the program is going to work long term. But yes that's for the rollout thread.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2020 12:59 pm
by discovolante
Just pondering about this in case anyone has any comments to make. My friend was in the Oxford trial, she is not yet unblinded but thinks if she got the vaccine she would have had the full-full dose. So now whatever happens it sounds like she wouldnt be able to benefit from the half-full regime, or the waiting-longer(?) regime. I assume this sort of stuff is covered in ethics approval stuff? Just curious really.
ETA she also works in the health and social care sector so may have been able to have the pfizer vaccine sooner if she hadn't been in the Oxford trial.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2020 1:18 pm
by JQH
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2020 1:29 pm
by shpalman
discovolante wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 12:59 pm
Just pondering about this in case anyone has any comments to make. My friend was in the Oxford trial, she is not yet unblinded but thinks if she got the vaccine she would have had the full-full dose. So now whatever happens it sounds like she wouldnt be able to benefit from the half-full regime, or the waiting-longer(?) regime. I assume this sort of stuff is covered in ethics approval stuff? Just curious really.
ETA she also works in the health and social care sector so may have been able to have the pfizer vaccine sooner if she hadn't been in the Oxford trial.
It's more likely she had the full--full dose but it's not obvious: the half--full protocol was accidentally given to 1367 trial participants (out of 2741) in the UK and the full--full protocol was given to 2377 participants (out of 4708).
I think the waiting-longer regime has been developed to excuse inevitable delays in the UK's vaccine rollout (which is also why it's stupid to rush this approval through, as if they're even able to keep up with administering the Pfizer one faster than it arrives from Belgium).
She'd still benefit from the Pfizer one.
