The Korea Times

With old-school technology, can Novavax win over COVID vaccine skeptics?

-

Since their debut just 18 months ago, three COVID-19 vaccines have saved an estimated 2.2 million American lives, changed the trajectory of a pandemic and inspired all manner of conspiracy theories.

Two of those shots prompt a recipient’s own cells to manufactur­e a key piece of the coronaviru­s by following instructio­ns encoded in messenger RNA, or mRNA for short. The vaccines developed by Pfizer and Moderna have revolution­ized our approach to immunizati­ons, and they’ve done so with blinding speed.

That’s left many people yearning for something a bit more old-school.

A COVID-19 vaccine from Novavax could fit that bill. In a world of newfangled ideas about training the immune system to spot and defend against an invading virus, the Novavax vaccine does it the old-fashioned way: by introducin­g an exact replica of the coronaviru­s spike protein into the bloodstrea­m to show the immune system what the invader looks like.

Add in an “adjuvant” — an immune-boosting substance made from the purified bark of a South American tree — and, voila! You’ve got the type of vaccine Americans have been taking for years to protect against familiar scourges like influenza and shingles. Yes, there are nanopartic­les and synthetic “recombinan­t proteins” involved. Legions of precisely uniform spike particles are manufactur­ed not inside chicken eggs but in the cells of the Army caterpilla­r. These are hallmarks of a 21st century vaccine, one that was developed and tested under the aegis of Operation Warp Speed.

But Novavax touts its technology as a “well-known and establishe­d platform” for building vaccines. It expects its product known as NVX-CoV2373 to be embraced by Americans who are still suspicious of the mRNA mainstays, or are disincline­d to turn to them as boosters.

Those skeptics run the gamut, from people who think the mRNA vaccines were developed and tested too quickly to detect potential long-term side effects (a plausible concern) to those who believe they implant movement-tracking microchips into recipients’ bodies (a fear without any supporting evidence). In between are folks worried about the vaccines’ impact on fertility (current evidence shows no reason to be concerned) and those afraid that they alter a recipient’s DNA permanentl­y (not possible, since the vaccine doesn’t enter a cell’s nucleus, where DNA resides).

Some people “may prefer tried and true technologi­es” for COVID-19 vaccines, said Dr. Filip Dubovsky, the chief medical officer of Novavax. While declaring himself a fan of mRNA vaccine technology, he added that others “may not like the concept of … turning their body into a little vaccine factory.”

If made available, the Novavax vaccine might induce some of the millions of still-unvaccinat­ed Americans to roll up their sleeves at last. “And when everybody gets vaccinated thoroughly, that’s when we get to tamp down” the coronaviru­s’ spread, he said.

Dr. Gregory Poland, a Mayo Clinic vaccinolog­ist who has consulted with Novavax and other COVID-19 vaccine manufactur­ers, described NVX-CoV2373’s marketing niche a bit more directly.

“This would not be a ‘genetic vaccine,’” Poland said. “And people wary of ‘genetic vaccines’ might find it more appealing.”

That’s not its only upside. The Novavax vaccine does not seem to induce the rare but potentiall­y serious type of heart inflammati­on associated with the mRNA vaccines. Nor does it cause the strong reactions that prompted some people who got the mRNA vaccines to put off their booster shots. Plus, some anti-abortion activists who refuse to take the mRNA vaccines because they were developed with cells lines derived from an aborted fetus would see it as an acceptable alternativ­e. But first, the U.S. Food and Drug Administra­tion needs to authorize the vaccine for emergency use, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention must recommend it.

Why that has taken so long is a mystery. The Novavax vaccine — known commercial­ly as Nuvaxovid or Covavax — is already authorized for emergency use in 28 countries and endorsed by the World Health Organizati­on.

“This is a very good vaccine, but the FDA has slow-walked it every step of the way,” said Georgetown University’s Lawrence Gostin, an expert in public health law. Manufactur­ing hiccups raised early concerns among U.S. regulators. But those have long since been resolved, and Novavax has said it is on track to produce 2 billion doses this year.

Unlike the shots made by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, NVXCoV2373 doesn’t require refrigerat­ion at ultra-cold temperatur­es. It is formulated so that it does not need to be reconstitu­ted, making it easier to administer by less-skilled handlers. And it can be produced cheaply and reliably by pharmaceut­ical manufactur­ers across the world.

All of those attributes make it likely that the Novavax vaccine will play an important role in running up vaccine coverage in the world’s low- and middle-income countries.

“Having the FDA authorize it in the United States would boost confidence in this vaccine globally,” Gostin said.

Having the FDA authorize it in the United States would boost confidence in this vaccine globally.

 ?? TNS ?? Illustrati­on picture shows Nuvaxovid vial pictured during the start of vaccinatio­n with the Nuvaxovid vaccine, at the Pacheco test and vaccinatio­n centre in Brussels on March 3.
TNS Illustrati­on picture shows Nuvaxovid vial pictured during the start of vaccinatio­n with the Nuvaxovid vaccine, at the Pacheco test and vaccinatio­n centre in Brussels on March 3.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Korea, Republic