Data and analysis thread, started 12 November

[NoGoodPunsLeft]

Previous thread here:

Data and Analysis Thread, started Oct 29 www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/4064113-Data-and-Analysis-Thread-started-Oct-29

Regular lurker but I frequent poster, didn't want to lose the threads.

@TheSunIsStillShining The Moderna trial involved tens of thousands of participants, not five! Five of the people who were given the vaccine developed Covid, compared to 95 people who'd been given the placebo. So 94.5% of the people in the trial who would probably have developed Covid normally were protected by the vaccine. (You'd have expected 95 to catch it, just like in the placebo group, but only 5 did, so 90 out of 95 were protected)

@ceeveebee

Is it that postal tests can’t be posted on Saturday afternoons and sundays?

Just announced the Posties will be emptying daily to stop this problem. Will e interesting to see if it evens the cases across the week.

It's just certain postboxes @snowman. I noticed a sticker on my local post box yesterday saying it was a priority post box and was wondering what that was about. So you need to look out for the stickers.

@churchcoffee

Yes, so anyone wanting to test between Saturday lunchtime and Sunday evening has to wait even if they have the test in their possession, and swab on Monday which is the day they can post it back.

We had a home test arrive on Saturday lunchtime and were told to get the test done between 9pm Saturday and 7am Sunday. It was then picked up by courier 1st thing on Sunday morning (and taken to a lab literally several hundred miles away, the other end of the UK, which seemed a bit odd).

Of course it might have changed since then, but I'd be surprised if they had reduced the availability of testing over the weekend.

Not data, but a quick irrelevant question as the scientists of MN are here. I loved the explanation of how the rapid tests work. Is that roughly how pregnancy tests work too as they look very similar? (Obviously not exactly!)

The Moderna trial involved tens of thousands of participants, not five! Five of the people who were given the vaccine developed Covid, compared to 95 people who'd been given the placebo. So 94.5% of the people in the trial who would probably have developed Covid normally were protected by the vaccine. (You'd have expected 95 to catch it, just like in the placebo group, but only 5 did, so 90 out of 95 were protected)

The odd thing is, only 0.3% of people in the survey developed symptoms - do we know the time period, I assume a number of months, and to be eligible you're going to be an adult 18-60 ? The prevalence of coronavirus in the UK over the last 3 months among that age group has been well over 6%. That means we'd've expected 1-2% to have symptoms, but the vaccinated population was 0.3% - this was tested in a very low prevalence population, which seems odd.

@Firefliess
Technically - by math - you are right. BUT it's not a controlled trial. These people were then left to their own devices in the general population and their movements have not been closely monitored (I am going to double check in a min)
So basically we don't know if these people were wearing masks, how many people they met, etc

Here are some studies that Modena put out in the last few days - if someone is interested

www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2022483

Some details
(www.modernatx.com/sites/default/files/mRNA-1273-P301-Protocol.pdf)

Study Design and Methodology
Participants will be given an electronic
diary (eDiary) to report solicited adverse reactions (ARs) for 7 days
after each dose of IP and to prompt an unscheduled clinic visit for
clinical evaluation and NP swab sample if a participant experiences
any symptoms of COVID-19. All participants will receive safety
calls on Day 8, Day 15, Day 22, Day 36, and Day 43 that will serve
both to monitor for unsolicited AEs and to monitor for symptoms of
COVID-19.
Surveillance for COVID-19 will be performed through weekly
contacts with the participant via a combination of telephone calls and
completion of an eDiary starting at Day 1 through the end of the
study.
------
@sirfredfredgeorge
great questions. I guess that what peer reviewers should/will be asking. I didn't find answers in the linked study from Moderna, but i did lose the will to live after p84.

I really want to know if this is a really well designed trial or not by other scientists. Without politics involved. Because as a layman I can poke holes in it. it is highly plausible that it's exactly because I'm a layman.

I think this study, above all, demonstrates the safeness of the vaccine which is hugely important. But they couldn't convince me that it's worth the vial it's in based on this sketchy data.
Why can't we know what areas the participants were in, what occupation,...
and why didn't they have to wear some ankle monitor thing tracking their movements for example?

That's how Phase 3 trials with @TheSun. They give large number a vaccine and large numbers a placebo and leave them to go about their business as normal until a significant number happen to catch Covid. They do it that was because it's compared unethical to deliberately infect people, and because they need to know that it works for all types of people in a natural real world setting.

@Sirfred. I don't know the numbers or timelines of the Moderna trial. But even the Oxford vaccine (which was the first in the world to enter Phase 3 trials) failed to get large numbers of participants enlisted until after the first wave in the spring was over, so you would expect numbers infected after that to be quite a lot lower. The Moderna one is a US company, though I'm not sure where they tested it. I think it's pretty hard to predict areas that are about to get a big wave in a couple of months time, which is what you'd ideally want for trials. Nor can you predict the at risk groups very well either. With hindsight you'd have tried to target UK first year students, Northern England cities, extended Asian families, etc who turned out to catch Covid most. But I think they actually went for NHS staff who, after the early spring at least, were quite well protected with PPE at work and maybe more cautious than some about trying not to catch it.

TheSunIsStillShining I would be interested to know what you understand by a ‘controlled trial’ because I am not sure your meaning is the same as the one everyone else uses.

@TheCountessofFitzdotterel @Firefliess
Fair point both. What I don't mean by it:
infect people to see what will happen. That is highly unethical

What I do mean by controlled:

• monitor and record as closely all variables as possible
• record and compare against general population stats

Late update today again

I've got 21363 and 213 showing?

Isn’t it always late when there’s a press conference?

21350 and 194 last monday

Enough to say that cases are plateuing?

Strange. My local authority is showing 0 cases (usually around 100) today and the cumulative number of cases has actually gone down by about 200. Wonder whether there has been some reallocation of cases? Perhaps the data not quite finished updating but I’ve also checked the other few LAs that I monitor (where family live) and they look fine

Our la message where is is rocketing was that it is in the community not workplaces and schools.
And yet there are rules on meeting up etc...

Mine is showing 6 cases

Definitely something weird going on. Manchester has over 3k cases reported in one day today (usually about 300) , but they must all be from previous weeks as the specimen data for the past week looks fine.

I just realised I hadn't been prompted by the Zoe app today - I had somehow been logged out and when I went back in it had a new option to join a university network showing

They look to be doing similar for schools too

My LA has had a big drop today, I'm hoping it isn't just the Monday effect.

[quote TheSunIsStillShining]@Firefliess
Technically - by math - you are right. BUT it's not a controlled trial. These people were then left to their own devices in the general population and their movements have not been closely monitored (I am going to double check in a min)
So basically we don't know if these people were wearing masks, how many people they met, etc

Here are some studies that Modena put out in the last few days - if someone is interested

www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2022483[/quote]
Just for info and I am not sure if Moderna trial is the same but I would assume so but in the Oxford trial as well as a weekly Covid test and monthly blood tests , I also fill in a weekly survey that asks if any changes in my household and lots of questions on what I have been doing, where I have been going, if I have been wearing a mask and how much I clean
It is quite detailed. I assume they look at those that do test positive and see what they have been up to in the previous 2 weeks and can draw some conclusions from that.

This is new I think?