- Probiotics may promote tumor progression?
- Taiwan Professor: Big data confirms that the COVID-19 vaccine is ineffective
- Why are the majority of Monkeypox infected people who have sex with men (MSM)?
- Experimental treatment improves skin cancer survival by 25%
- People who get flu vaccine are 40% less likely to develop Alzheimer’s disease
- Depriving women of the right to abortion is a setback for medical health and society
NEJM: The first “ineffective” COVID-19 vaccine for South African mutantion
NEJM: The first “ineffective” COVID-19 vaccine for South African mutantion. NEJM recently announced the effects of two vaccines on the South African mutant B.1.351, namely ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Oxford-AZ, adenovirus vector vaccine) and NVX-CoV2373 (Novavax-CEPI, recombinant protein vaccine), the latter It is a phase IIa-b clinical study.
The result title of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19
The effect of AZ’s adenovirus vaccine on South African mutants is worrying
The study of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 on the South African variant is a multi-center randomized controlled double-blind study, carried out in South Africa by selecting HIV-negative populations.
A total of 2026 patients were enrolled in the study and divided into two groups. The other group was given the adenovirus vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and the other group was given a placebo.
The results show that this vaccine has no effective protection against mild to moderate symptomatic infections of the South African variant strain. The specific data are as follows-
The second row of data in the table is the result of B.1.351. After the completion of 2 injections, the number of people in the vaccine-immunized group infected with the variant strain and having mild to moderate symptoms was not significantly different from that in the placebo group. The protective effect on mild to moderate symptoms after B.1.351 infection is only 10.4%.
The paper clearly pointed out in the conclusion that such results show that ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has no protective effect against mild to moderately symptomatic infections of the South African mutant.
In the “discussion” part of the paper, the researchers proposed that although current studies suggest that ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has a certain protective effect against severe infections of South African variants, they believe that the study is not comprehensive, and whether ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 is really sufficient The protective efficacy of the South African mutant strain against severe infection requires further research to confirm.
NVX-CoV2373 is a phase II study, Can’t draw a final conclusion yet
NVX-CoV2373 is a recombinant protein vaccine that uses nanomolecular technology and has not yet entered the phase III clinical phase. The results of this release are only part of the phase II study.
Partial results of Phase II of NVX-CoV2373 released by NEJM
This study included 6,324 local South African subjects who were randomized without double-blind. The results are shown as follows-
Among HIV-negative and baseline plasma antibody-negative populations, the vaccine’s protective efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 infection is 60.1%. Among HIV-negative and baseline plasma antibody-positive populations, the vaccine’s effective protection against symptomatic COVID-19 infection is 52.2 %, a decrease.
In addition, the study did not carefully verify whether the patient was infected with B.1.351 like the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 study, but roughly believed that B.1.351 was prevalent in South Africa. Therefore, the data showed that it was effective for B.1.351. In other words, the data has How much is representative of the South African mutant strains still needs further research and investigation.
(source:internet, reference only)