‘ Tough choices’ call over Oxford vaccine
COVID- 19: The Government could face “tough choices” if the vaccine from AstraZeneca and Oxford University is found to be less effective than others, an expert says.
Prof David Salisbury said Ministers would need to think “very carefully” if its efficacy was lower than for other jabs such as those from Pfizer/ BioNTech.
THE GOVERNMENT could face some “tough choices” if the vaccine produced by AstraZeneca and Oxford University is found to be less effective than others, a former Department of Health director of immunisation has said.
Professor David Salisbury said Ministers would need to think “very carefully” about their handling of the vaccine if its efficacy was lower than for other jabs such as those from Pfizer/ BioNTech and Moderna.
The AstraZeneca/ Oxford vaccine is currently being assessed by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency ( MHRA) for use in the UK. Data from two arms of its phase- three trial, announced last week, gave a combined efficacy of 70 per cent.
A half dose followed by a full dose was found to be 90 per cent effective in protecting against Covid- 19, according to a subset of data, but the figure was 62 per cent for people given two full doses. The 90 per cent finding was based on a dosing regimen given to 2,741 people, whilethetwo- dose arm of the trial involved 8,895.
AstraZeneca plans to carry out a further global clinical trial to assess the 90 per cent dosing regimen, which it acknowledged was as a result of a dosing error.
Prof Salisbury told BBC Radio 4’ s Today programme there could be issues if the 90 per cent finding did not hold up under scrutiny. It comes after some scientists, including in the US, questioned the validity of the data, including the fact the 90 per cent dosing regimen was only on people aged 55 and under.
“I think this has to be unpicked and it may not be possible to do that with the amount of patients that have been recruited so far,” Prof Salisbury said.
“If this vaccine came through at truly 90 per cent and it is a cheaper vaccine and it requires much less rigorous cold chain ( storage) than the RNA vaccines ( from Pfizer and Moderna), then that would be a great result. But if it comes through at 62 per cent and the other vaccines that are coming through so far are 90 per cent, then I think you have to think very carefully what do we do with a 100 million doses of a product that isn’t protecting as well as the alternatives? I think there are some tough choices.”
Asked whether the MHRA might say 62 per cent was not good enough when the World Health Organisation had set the bar at 50 per cent for an effective vaccine, and AstraZeneca has said the jab protects against serious illness, Prof Salisbury said: “I think they will judge it on the basis of the criteria that were set, and the information that was given to them and I have great faith in their judgment and their ability to do that.
“I think we will have handling issues about a lower- efficacy vaccine when there’s higher- efficacy ones available.”
He said the most effective vaccines may be prioritised for older and more vulnerable people.
A Government scientific adviser said it was too early to make comparisons between vaccine trials, while Oxford University said it would not comment yet.
I think this has to be unpicked and it may not be possible to do that. Professor David Salisbury, former Department of Health director of immunisation.