Oxford vaccine and it's relative merits

[herecomesthsun]

FT article here

62% effective?

90% effective?

one or two doses?

would you take it?

What do you think?

Thanks for posting the Lancet article. It seems that there were three differences in the low dose group - the low dosage, no participants over 55 and that the second dose was given with a longer interval. I wonder if the data given to the MHRA shows which was the key factor.

In terms of efficacy, they only report efficacy after the second dose, suggesting the first dose may have a relatively weak effect. This is the efficacy chart for Oxford after 2 jabs. It looks OK, though not as compelling as the stunning BioNtech results (also attached).

Whilst scientifically interesting in practical terms we are not going to have the choice of the more effective vaccine and we will have to take what we can get.

If it isn't dangerous and it works a bit then it's better than nothing. What is the point of getting all steamed up about having the 'better' one when that is neither possible nor even necessary.

Remember there will be other vaccines after Oxford (I happen to work for one of the companies). And you won't get to choose which one you get :-)

@Scottishgirl85

Remember there will be other vaccines after Oxford (I happen to work for one of the companies). And you won't get to choose which one you get :-)

Whilst we can’t choose which one i have I know right now I can’t have the Pfizer one. So many people in the same position as me would need to have another one which will be quite likely the Oxford one (or any in the future)

It was interesting to read that Oxford is yet to lodge a formal application with the EMA. Anyone know why they’d be dragging their heels in other countries? Seems odd to me.

www.independent.ie/irish-news/health/oxford-vaccine-unlikely-to-be-rolled-out-in-eu-in-january-as-ema-look-for-more-data-on-quality-of-vaccine-39910182.html

@CovoidOfAllHumanity NI seem to have successfully managed Pfizer rollout to care homes - vaccinations to residents and staff in 80% of all care homes already (obviously not everyone will have had the vaccine there due to various factors I.e. pregnant staff or existing allergies etc) but it’s a cracking start, hopefully similar can be achieved in the rest of the U.K. although NI’s small size does definitely help it here

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/health/covid-vaccine-administered-northern-ireland-19536834.amp

I wish they'd tell England how to do it in that case. I work with older people in care homes and in our area nothing at all has been done in care homes or rehab wards and they basically admit that they are not really trying and are waiting for the Oxford one to come online.

Zero staff in our organisation (mental health and community care) have received the vaccine either despite working in care homes and on dementia wards with very vulnerable people every day. The only people who appear to be getting it around here are in the acute hospital. I know they are opportunistically vaccinating over 80s at OP appts and staff with any left over but we were told that in our organisation we should abandon hope of any staff vaccinations with the Pfizer as we were allocated no doses and there is no process for us to get any access. Meantime we've had 2
ward outbreaks and all visiting has been banned for over 2 months.

Even questions about exactly how many vaccines have been given out in our area and to whom are 'strictly embargoed' and have not been answered. I have therefore given up trying to get the Pfizer vaccine for my vulnerable patients as it's like hitting your head on a brick wall.

Oxford is the only chance my patients and the staff caring for them have got it seems so I am happy to grab it with both hands whatever the effectiveness as otherwise it is pretty clear we will be getting nothing at all.

I have no skin in the game myself as I have already been infected and am officially immune. I'd happily give up my vaccine to get someone else immunity but I don't feel I am anywhere close to being offered any vaccine at all despite my job supposedly putting me in the top priority group.

I guess it makes me a bit frustrated when people talk as though it matters if we get a 60% effective vaccine or a 90% effective one. I think most people are greatly overestimating their chances of
getting anywhere near a Pfizer vaccine at any time in the near future and would do well to downsize their expectations and accept the 'inferior' one which will be better than nothing.

It’s been approved !!!
www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55280671

As I understand it nobody has become seriously unwell or died of covid after having the vaccine, some people still might catch covid and get a mild illness. That's good enough for me. I've already had covid and it was bloody awful. We just dont know whether it stops you from transmitting the virus yet, it's too soon.

@herecomesthsun

I am wondering whether anyone has worked out the implications of vaccinating say 2 million people a month with the Oxford vaccine, what effect would that have on hospitalisations/ deaths / our ability to restore more normality to daily life.

The adult population of UK is about 52m

The number (estimated) in the current 'most vulnerable' is about 25m

Once they are done, then they say that over 90% of deaths will be prevented, plus tens of thousands of hospital admissions

So when they are done the risk of overwhelming the NHS ebbs so far that easing of restrictions is a real possibility.

It's the 'protect the vulnerable, let the rest of us get on with it' thought pattern in action. The vaccine turns the vulnerable into the 'rest of us'.

Snag is that for an unknown proportion (between 10-40%) will not be protected as intended, and we do not know if it confers sterilising immunity, so it's not going to be clear when it is safe enough.

My bet would be an easing of restrictions for the summer (when disease might reduce spontaneously when the sun is stronger, as so many viruses do and as this one appeared to do in its first summer) and then no need to reimpose for the autumn

@EasterIssland
I can’t have the Pfizer one so hoping I can have the Oxford one
Interesting point /is this because of medical reasons (not prying as to what, just interested to know of there are reasons why one it other vaccine might be given)?

[quote EmmanuelleMakro]@EasterIssland
I can’t have the Pfizer one so hoping I can have the Oxford one
Interesting point /is this because of medical reasons (not prying as to what, just interested to know of there are reasons why one it other vaccine might be given)?[/quote]
So far the Pfizer is not recommended for breastfeeding women.

Seems like both have now been recommenddd for bf mums. Thanks god for that !

www.gov.uk/government/news/oxford-universityastrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine-approved?fbclid=IwAR0LYfanfJgh9TUjiS2MoTJGtP5tzJNRtyvra-WRix5MFanot_QXK7CFRLk

It is now approved and you have half a shot which Will give you 67 percent protection then go back for second dose within 3 months to boost your protection to over 90 per cent. I can't wait to get it and life get back more normality again.

@caringcarer

It is now approved and you have half a shot which Will give you 67 percent protection then go back for second dose within 3 months to boost your protection to over 90 per cent. I can't wait to get it and life get back more normality again.

That’s incorrect. It’s 52.59% after one dose and 70.42% after two doses.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/regulatory-approval-of-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca/information-for-healthcare-professionals-on-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca

It's two full doses, not half dose/full dose.

It seems that the low dose/full dose Oxford vaccine's 90% efficacy has not been borne out on further scrutiny. Not seen this published, but it is mentioned by Prof. Lawrence Young in this interesting expert scientific reaction to the MHRA's approval of the Oxford vaccine.

www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-the-oxford-astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine-being-approved-for-use-in-the-uk-by-the-mhra/?cli_action=1609335887.639

Prof Saad Shakir of the Drug Safety Research Unit noted that the AstraZeneca trial used two doses four weeks apart and the MHRA approval was for two full doses with a 4-12 week interval between. He goes on;

'However, the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation has recommended an entirely new strategy. Everyone will be given a single dose to give some early immunity to the largest number of people. The second dose will be given 12 weeks later, they say for long term immunity.' He goes on to say that the efficacy of a single dose is unclear as are the many points about these decisions.

Prof Simon Clarke of University of Reading also reiterates that the overall efficacy of the vaccine is 62% after two doses and his opinion that the 70% figure between 22days and 12 weeks is probably a fleeting maximum. He, and several other contributors are clearly concerned that this will leave vulnerable people still vulnerable whilst possibly giving minimal protection to many who perhaps do not really need it. However, though conceding that the Oxford vaccine data for protection after the first dose are unclear, most others seem to disagree.

Pity the Oxford trials were so badly designed.

@TheNighthawk

It seems that the low dose/full dose Oxford vaccine's 90% efficacy has not been borne out on further scrutiny. Not seen this published, but it is mentioned by Prof. Lawrence Young in this interesting expert scientific reaction to the MHRA's approval of the Oxford vaccine.

www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-the-oxford-astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine-being-approved-for-use-in-the-uk-by-the-mhra/?cli_action=1609335887.639

Prof Saad Shakir of the Drug Safety Research Unit noted that the AstraZeneca trial used two doses four weeks apart and the MHRA approval was for two full doses with a 4-12 week interval between. He goes on;

'However, the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation has recommended an entirely new strategy. Everyone will be given a single dose to give some early immunity to the largest number of people. The second dose will be given 12 weeks later, they say for long term immunity.' He goes on to say that the efficacy of a single dose is unclear as are the many points about these decisions.

Prof Simon Clarke of University of Reading also reiterates that the overall efficacy of the vaccine is 62% after two doses and his opinion that the 70% figure between 22days and 12 weeks is probably a fleeting maximum. He, and several other contributors are clearly concerned that this will leave vulnerable people still vulnerable whilst possibly giving minimal protection to many who perhaps do not really need it. However, though conceding that the Oxford vaccine data for protection after the first dose are unclear, most others seem to disagree.

Pity the Oxford trials were so badly designed.

Yes, there was actually a slide during the MHRA press conference in which it was stated the low dose/standard dose regimen did not hold up to full analysis.

The whole thing is a bit of a clusterf**k but the good news is there is reasonable evidence the vaccine limits hospitalisation. Albeit limited evidence as the numbers are very small.

@CovoidOfAllHumanity. Sorry you are having such problems getting vaccinated. I don't know how this is working for care homes in our area due to the logistics, storage, etc but we have been vaccinating at the hospital and at GP hubs this week plus lots of staff getting the leftover doses (from patients who don't turn up for their appointment and from those vials where you draw up perfectly and get 6 out instead of 5)
It is coming and I hope it reaches you soon

The Americans telling it like it is:

U.S. regulators need more evidence: The drugmaker has said that the combined results showed 70 percent efficacy, but Slaoui suggested that U.S. regulators would not be satisfied by that conclusion.

“As far as the American people are concerned, I think it’s important to say one vaccine has 95 percent efficacy, another vaccine has X percent, whatever that number,” Slaoui told reporters, referring to the high efficacy rates for the Pfizer and BioNTech and Moderna vaccines that the FDA has authorized. “We need a clear and concrete number more than a number that is accumulated by adding together different trials with different schedules and different materials.”

Slaoui also questioned Britain's dosing strategy. He said it’s possible a booster shot can be more effective when administered months later, but he said that the U.K. decision was based on theory rather evidence.

“It’s important, I think, to use the vaccine based on how you studied it,” he said.

www.politico.com/news/2020/12/30/astrazeneca-vaccine-april-452371