Live data from Hacker News

Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

ox.ac.uk

61–70 of 569 posts

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#61

"These preliminary data indicate that the vaccine is 70.4% effective, with tests on two different dose regimens showing that the vaccine was 90% effective if administered at a half dose and then at a full dose, or 62% effective if administered in two full doses."

Isn't it more common to determine the dosing regime in Phase I/II trials, and use the Phase III trial as the final test for efficacy?

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#62
post #5

The key differentiator here is the storage requirements (2-8c ‘normal refrigerator’). That’s much more accessible to developing / low GDP countries as opposed the cumbersome and expensive storage requirements of the other two.

Another huge differentiator is price. At $3 to $4, many countries will jump on board ASAP and stay away from the expensive vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna.

Maybe for less developed countries, but i think for major economies, the price difference is insignificant relative to the benefits of any vaccine.

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#63

That headline is not quite correct. From the article: > Phase 3 interim analysis including 131 Covid-19 cases indicates that the vaccine is [on average] 70.4% effective when combining data from two dosing regimens ... In the two different dose regimens vaccine efficacy was 90% in one and 62% in the other And to be clear, it's not just one dose vs two: > tests on two different dose regimens showing that the vaccine wa…

Another article I read seemed to indicate they haven’t investigated the half dose regimen fully so it sounds like until more testing is done that’s not the recommended path (in which case the headline is being generous).

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#64

Title is misleading. They tested few configurations, we should use the most optimal one, not the average. Much better source: https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-centre/press-releases/2020... Good: + likely 90% effective if we use optimal dosing + no significant side effective. Looks better than Pfizer or Moderna. + already pre-produced at huge scale, 3 Bln doses in 2021 + easy to store and administer, just regular fri…

Another entry in the “good” column: no hospitalisations or severe cases of the disease were reported in participants receiving the vaccine.

I agree about the confusion, though. I worry that people will avoid this vaccine, in the hopes of receiving the Moderna/Biontech one instead.

That would be a real shame, because the results here are extremely positive. The media’s reporting of this is concerning.

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#65
post #31

Incoming possible Silly, Stupid and Lazy Questions, 1. Are there any vaccine ( of any Disease ) that are 100% effective? Or do we operate ( as I would assume ) something like 5 Nines effective rate and call it 100%? 2. Across all type of Vaccine, what are the average or median effective rate? i.e Should we expect Vaccine to be 90%+ effective in the first place? Or is that a wrong expectation to make? 3. What happens…

1. Smallpox vaccine is 100% effective 2. 90% is high. 3. Probably not. Immune systems are weird and incredibly complicated (think even more complicated than the brain).

I dont think its true that smallpox is 100% effective

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the storage requirements for the other two?

-80ºC for Pfizer vaccine and -20ºC for mRNA vaccine. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/11/17/9355633...

mRNA is confusing to use as short for Moderna here. It's also a type of vaccine. Pfizer vaccine is also mRNA.

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#67
post #33
post #16

This statement seems a big deal: "There were no hospitalised or severe cases in anyone who received the vaccine" Is that also true of the Pfizer and Moderna trials? Are the various trials measuring 'effectiveness' in the same way? Is there a standard for 'effectiveness' in these Covid-19 trials? It will take some digging and real effort to compare the risks and benefits of the various vaccines coming to market.

So, the Oxford vaccine stated "... no hospitalised or severe cases ..." The Pfizer press release states: "There were 10 severe cases of COVID-19 observed in the trial, with nine of the cases occurring in the placebo group and one in the BNT162b2 vaccinated group." So, zero severe cases for Oxford, and one for Pfizer. Interesting. Should also point out the Pfizer trial may have had 43,000 participants, and the Oxford…

"So, zero severe cases for Oxford, and one for Pfizer. Interesting." What is interesting? That they probably both have the same rate, and we are seeing a statistical fluctuation because of the low sample number?

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were no hospitalisations or severe incidents for either the Pfizer and Moderna trials were was related to the vaccine. And it's pretty easy to compare the vaccines. It will mostly come down to price, ease of manufacture and ease of distribution i.e. temperature. Given that for the 3 viruses all have no risks associated with their use.

Eh, I think speed to manufacture/distribute is more important. The cost of these is trivial compared to social distancing/lockdown.

Only in the richest countries. Due to the totally different age pyramid and thus few severe cases, vaccination might not be worth it for the poorest countries even at this lower price.

Re: Oxford University breakthrough on global COVID-19 vaccine

#69
post #15
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does anyone here who understands vaccines know how starting with a smaller does can improve effectiveness? It goes against my intuition.

This vaccine is a viral vector vaccine. Immunity against the vector can be an issue, but this is moderately informed speculation.

But it's a chimpanzee vector. Not a human one.
Post reply on HN