Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Moderna.
Us humans are starting to make this look easy.
Us humans are starting to make this look easy.
Awarded gold star 4 November 2021
- Woodchopper
- Princess POW
- Posts: 7317
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... rials-showAn interim analysis released on Monday, and based on 95 patients with confirmed Covid infections, found the candidate vaccine has an efficacy of 94.5%. The company said it now plans to apply to the US regulator, the Food and Drug Administration, for emergency-use authorisation in the coming weeks. In the analysis, 90 of the patients received the placebo with the remaining five the vaccine.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
I'm sceptical as to how you could determine efficacy to 1 part in 200 with such a small sample size.Woodchopper wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 12:30 pmhttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... rials-showAn interim analysis released on Monday, and based on 95 patients with confirmed Covid infections, found the candidate vaccine has an efficacy of 94.5%. The company said it now plans to apply to the US regulator, the Food and Drug Administration, for emergency-use authorisation in the coming weeks. In the analysis, 90 of the patients received the placebo with the remaining five the vaccine.
My avatar was a scientific result that was later found to be 'mistaken' - I rarely claim to be 100% correct
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
The nice thing about having a huge surge of cases in the US is that it speeds up the trial. Whereas ordinary countries would need an age to get 95 cases, in the US you can reach that in five minutes by running the trial in a small town in South Dakota.
Awarded gold star 4 November 2021
-
- After Pie
- Posts: 2029
- Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
The Moderna vaccine doesn't have the same cold storage requirements as Pfizer. It should be easier to distribute.
https://investors.modernatx.com/news-re ... 19-vaccineCAMBRIDGE, Mass.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Nov. 16, 2020-- Moderna, Inc. (Nasdaq: MRNA), a biotechnology company pioneering messenger RNA (mRNA) therapeutics and vaccines to create a new generation of transformative medicines for patients, today announced new data showing that mRNA-1273, its COVID-19 vaccine candidate, remains stable at 2° to 8°C (36° to 46°F), the temperature of a standard home or medical refrigerator, for 30 days. Stability testing supports this extension from an earlier estimate of 7 days. mRNA-1273 remains stable at -20° C (-4°F) for up to six months, at refrigerated conditions for up to 30 days and at room temperature for up to 12 hours.
“We believe that our investments in mRNA delivery technology and manufacturing process development will allow us to store and ship our COVID-19 vaccine candidate at temperatures commonly found in readily available pharmaceutical freezers and refrigerators,” said Juan Andres, Chief Technical Operations and Quality Officer at Moderna. “We are pleased to submit these extended stability conditions for mRNA-1273 to regulators for approval. The ability to store our vaccine for up to 6 months at -20° C including up to 30 days at normal refrigerator conditions after thawing is an important development and would enable simpler distribution and more flexibility to facilitate wider-scale vaccination in the United States and other parts of the world.”
Masking forever
Putin is a monster.
Russian socialism will rise again
Putin is a monster.
Russian socialism will rise again
-
- Clardic Fug
- Posts: 150
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 5:00 pm
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
According to the FT version of the story, the Phase 3 trial had 30,000 participants.Gfamily wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 12:35 pmI'm sceptical as to how you could determine efficacy to 1 part in 200 with such a small sample size.Woodchopper wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 12:30 pmhttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... rials-showAn interim analysis released on Monday, and based on 95 patients with confirmed Covid infections, found the candidate vaccine has an efficacy of 94.5%. The company said it now plans to apply to the US regulator, the Food and Drug Administration, for emergency-use authorisation in the coming weeks. In the analysis, 90 of the patients received the placebo with the remaining five the vaccine.
https://www.ft.com/content/9d7a2e24-aea ... 9dc80ed5a1
Out of 30,000 participants in the clinical trials, 95 had been identified with confirmed cases of Covid-19, the company said. Among those infected, only five people had received the two-dose vaccine, known as mRNA-1273, while 90 had received a placebo.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
That makes sense.MartinDurkin wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 1:43 pmAccording to the FT version of the story, the Phase 3 trial had 30,000 participants.Gfamily wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 12:35 pmI'm sceptical as to how you could determine efficacy to 1 part in 200 with such a small sample size.Woodchopper wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 12:30 pmhttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... rials-show
My avatar was a scientific result that was later found to be 'mistaken' - I rarely claim to be 100% correct
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!
- shpalman
- Princess POW
- Posts: 8428
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
- Location: One step beyond
- Contact:
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Doing the analysis at ~100 cases gives you about 1% precision (assuming the vaccine generally works).MartinDurkin wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 1:43 pmAccording to the FT version of the story, the Phase 3 trial had 30,000 participants.Gfamily wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 12:35 pmI'm sceptical as to how you could determine efficacy to 1 part in 200 with such a small sample size.Woodchopper wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 12:30 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... rials-show
https://www.ft.com/content/9d7a2e24-aea ... 9dc80ed5a1Out of 30,000 participants in the clinical trials, 95 had been identified with confirmed cases of Covid-19, the company said. Among those infected, only five people had received the two-dose vaccine, known as mRNA-1273, while 90 had received a placebo.
You need a lot of participants if you need to wait for them to "naturally" catch covid rather than challenging them - the more participants you have the sooner you will have a statistically useful number of infections.
having that swing is a necessary but not sufficient condition for it meaning a thing
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Yes, I see - about 0.3% of the participants became infected in the study, and the 90:5 ratio, represents ~5.5% the overall infection rate amongst the vaccinated group. One more or less in the non-placebo group would have moved the ratio about 1% either way.shpalman wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 1:53 pmDoing the analysis at ~100 cases gives you about 1% precision (assuming the vaccine generally works).
You need a lot of participants if you need to wait for them to "naturally" catch covid rather than challenging them - the more participants you have the sooner you will have a statistically useful number of infections.
My avatar was a scientific result that was later found to be 'mistaken' - I rarely claim to be 100% correct
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!
- shpalman
- Princess POW
- Posts: 8428
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
- Location: One step beyond
- Contact:
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
A challenge trial is obviously faster and potentially more accurate but ethically a whole other problem.
Covid doesn't have a massively high R_0 or IFR so I think it's more important to vaccinate lots of people in the trial to check there aren't lots of serious adverse reactions, and then to make sure it basically works better than nothing. 90% or 91% or 94% or 95% or whatever doesn't change things that much, since R_t will be way less than one as once the susceptible population is down to 5-10% of the actual population.
Well it's not that simple of course if the people who get the vaccine first will be those most at risk and not necessarily those who might be spreading it the most. In that case you might want to assume that the subject will definitely be exposed to covid at some point so that factor gives you their risk of getting infected. In that case it's more like a factor of 2 difference between 90% and 95%, even if that's still the ratio between two small numbers.
Covid doesn't have a massively high R_0 or IFR so I think it's more important to vaccinate lots of people in the trial to check there aren't lots of serious adverse reactions, and then to make sure it basically works better than nothing. 90% or 91% or 94% or 95% or whatever doesn't change things that much, since R_t will be way less than one as once the susceptible population is down to 5-10% of the actual population.
Well it's not that simple of course if the people who get the vaccine first will be those most at risk and not necessarily those who might be spreading it the most. In that case you might want to assume that the subject will definitely be exposed to covid at some point so that factor gives you their risk of getting infected. In that case it's more like a factor of 2 difference between 90% and 95%, even if that's still the ratio between two small numbers.
having that swing is a necessary but not sufficient condition for it meaning a thing
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
I'm cautiously optimistic about this, which by 2020 standards probably means I'm about to have my heart broken.
I literally cannot wait to go back to huffing strangers' fomites all day, and will do the second we've been jabbed. f.ck this sh.t.
I literally cannot wait to go back to huffing strangers' fomites all day, and will do the second we've been jabbed. f.ck this sh.t.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
- discovolante
- Light of Blast
- Posts: 4204
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
I go through phases when I'm watching stuff on TV where I barely bat an eyelid and other times when I'm like HOW ARE YOU STANDING SO CLOSE TO EACH OTHER?? Remind me what it's like to suffer someone's bad breath, or be worried about your own?Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 3:12 pmI'm cautiously optimistic about this, which by 2020 standards probably means I'm about to have my heart broken.
I literally cannot wait to go back to huffing strangers' fomites all day, and will do the second we've been jabbed. f.ck this sh.t.
And god, I even got jealous watching the episode of Peep Show where Jeremy ends up eating someone's dead dog out of a bin bag because at least they got to randomly meet some people in a pub and see where the night took them. To disaster, in their case, but that's not the point.
Anyway to go a bit more back on topic, if we end up with a number of viable vaccines (say 2 or 3, I don't really know), that are effective in different ways e.g. reducing symptoms, stopping spread etc - how could that work in practice? If we could technically distribute both, would that need further safety tests? How does intellectual property work in this situation in terms of the vaccine companies sharing information and collaborating?
To defy the laws of tradition is a crusade only of the brave.
- shpalman
- Princess POW
- Posts: 8428
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
- Location: One step beyond
- Contact:
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
I wonder how long it will take before we have that kind of detail, and how long it will take before there's freedom to pick and choose which vaccine, rather than getting whatever is available to the at-risk population as soon as possible.
having that swing is a necessary but not sufficient condition for it meaning a thing
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Even with a vaccine it's not going to be over any time soon. You might not be able to go back to normal after you've been jabbed, because the vaccine won't work for all so you'll have to wait till enough people have had it before you can start licking doorknobs again.Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 3:12 pmI'm cautiously optimistic about this, which by 2020 standards probably means I'm about to have my heart broken.
I literally cannot wait to go back to huffing strangers' fomites all day, and will do the second we've been jabbed. f.ck this sh.t.
But if you're young, you'll probably be in the back of the queue, so maybe!
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
hahahaha omg, sorry disco but that has made me crack right up. The quintessential 2020 sentiment.discovolante wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 3:24 pmAnd god, I even got jealous watching the episode of Peep Show where Jeremy ends up eating someone's dead dog out of a bin bag because at least they got to randomly meet some people in a pub and see where the night took them. To disaster, in their case, but that's not the point.
I definitely remember a time when I could actually relax while out of the house. I think it was February. And yes, watching TV characters stand close to each other in bars already seems as anachronistic as watching them light up a fag in a restaurant.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Yeah for sure, that's why I put 'we' - I'm not that worried about the risks to my own health (I've taken far bigger ones in the name of having a good time), but I really don't want to endanger other people. I'd like to be able to hug my mum without worrying I've just killed her, for instance.monkey wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 3:51 pmEven with a vaccine it's not going to be over any time soon. You might not be able to go back to normal after you've been jabbed, because the vaccine won't work for all so you'll have to wait till enough people have had it before you can start licking doorknobs again.Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 3:12 pmI'm cautiously optimistic about this, which by 2020 standards probably means I'm about to have my heart broken.
I literally cannot wait to go back to huffing strangers' fomites all day, and will do the second we've been jabbed. f.ck this sh.t.
But if you're young, you'll probably be in the back of the queue, so maybe!
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
There is an XKCD for that. (Spoilered for off-topicness.)Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 3:53 pmhahahaha omg, sorry disco but that has made me crack right up. The quintessential 2020 sentiment.discovolante wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 3:24 pmAnd god, I even got jealous watching the episode of Peep Show where Jeremy ends up eating someone's dead dog out of a bin bag because at least they got to randomly meet some people in a pub and see where the night took them. To disaster, in their case, but that's not the point.
I definitely remember a time when I could actually relax while out of the house. I think it was February. And yes, watching TV characters stand close to each other in bars already seems as anachronistic as watching them light up a fag in a restaurant.
Spoiler:
Jaap's Page: https://www.jaapsch.net/
- discovolante
- Light of Blast
- Posts: 4204
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Hahaha no need to apologise, it was meant to be a bit funnyBird on a Fire wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 3:53 pmhahahaha omg, sorry disco but that has made me crack right up. The quintessential 2020 sentiment.discovolante wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 3:24 pmAnd god, I even got jealous watching the episode of Peep Show where Jeremy ends up eating someone's dead dog out of a bin bag because at least they got to randomly meet some people in a pub and see where the night took them. To disaster, in their case, but that's not the point.
I definitely remember a time when I could actually relax while out of the house. I think it was February. And yes, watching TV characters stand close to each other in bars already seems as anachronistic as watching them light up a fag in a restaurant.
But yeah I get vicarious anxiety watching people randomly walk into bars and pubs and stuff on telly. Can't beat a bit of mild trauma.
To defy the laws of tradition is a crusade only of the brave.
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Sorry, read that as "I". Stupid incorrect head words.Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 3:58 pmYeah for sure, that's why I put 'we' - I'm not that worried about the risks to my own health (I've taken far bigger ones in the name of having a good time), but I really don't want to endanger other people. I'd like to be able to hug my mum without worrying I've just killed her, for instance.
Carry on.
- sTeamTraen
- After Pie
- Posts: 2572
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:24 pm
- Location: Palma de Mallorca, Spain
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Naturally, the pushback against this new vaccine has already started. Apparently if you look at it under a microscope, you can see the face of the dead baby who is dissolved in every dose.
Something something hammer something something nail
- shpalman
- Princess POW
- Posts: 8428
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
- Location: One step beyond
- Contact:
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Meh, a person refusing it just means my place in the queue skips one place forward.
having that swing is a necessary but not sufficient condition for it meaning a thing
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
There's a global aspect and a local aspect. In a rational world, it might be that the Pfizer vaccine goes to rich countries who can handle the cold chain, while Moderna's is prioritised for poorer countries. On a local scale, we might give Vaccine A, which reduces symptoms but not infection, to older people, and prioritise Vaccine B, which is good at controlling infection, for younger people.discovolante wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 3:24 pmAnyway to go a bit more back on topic, if we end up with a number of viable vaccines (say 2 or 3, I don't really know), that are effective in different ways e.g. reducing symptoms, stopping spread etc - how could that work in practice? If we could technically distribute both, would that need further safety tests?
That's in the medium term. In the short term (next 6 months say), jabs will go to the countries with the deepest pockets and the most vulnerable people. In the longer term (>2 years say) when the fires are largely out and it's just mopping up, we should have enough time and data to manage things more efficiently.
It's not unprecedented to have a choice of vaccines: see HPV (Gardasil and the other one) for instance.
- discovolante
- Light of Blast
- Posts: 4204
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
Hm that makes sense, thanks. Almost a bit too logical really.Sciolus wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 4:47 pmThere's a global aspect and a local aspect. In a rational world, it might be that the Pfizer vaccine goes to rich countries who can handle the cold chain, while Moderna's is prioritised for poorer countries. On a local scale, we might give Vaccine A, which reduces symptoms but not infection, to older people, and prioritise Vaccine B, which is good at controlling infection, for younger people.discovolante wrote: ↑Mon Nov 16, 2020 3:24 pmAnyway to go a bit more back on topic, if we end up with a number of viable vaccines (say 2 or 3, I don't really know), that are effective in different ways e.g. reducing symptoms, stopping spread etc - how could that work in practice? If we could technically distribute both, would that need further safety tests?
That's in the medium term. In the short term (next 6 months say), jabs will go to the countries with the deepest pockets and the most vulnerable people. In the longer term (>2 years say) when the fires are largely out and it's just mopping up, we should have enough time and data to manage things more efficiently.
It's not unprecedented to have a choice of vaccines: see HPV (Gardasil and the other one) for instance.
To defy the laws of tradition is a crusade only of the brave.
- shpalman
- Princess POW
- Posts: 8428
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
- Location: One step beyond
- Contact:
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
having that swing is a necessary but not sufficient condition for it meaning a thing
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
Re: Developing the Covid-19 vaccine
I hadn't realised there were only about 418,000 elderly people living in UK care homes. The vast majority live in their own homes, there's also the retirement homes. It's going to be pretty easy to vaccinate all care homes.
Awarded gold star 4 November 2021