Here are potential factors contributing to CoronaVac's varying
efficacy rates and expert interpretations.
HOW EFFECTIVE IS CORONAVAC?
Researchers in Turkey said it is 91.25% effective. Turkish trials
had included over 7,000 volunteers, but the efficacy result was
based on data from 1,322 people.
Indonesia said the vaccine is 65% effective based on trials
involving some 1,600 people.
Researchers in Brazil said it was 50.4% effective at preventing
symptomatic infections, barely enough for regulatory approval and
below the 78% announced a week earlier.
Brazil has run the biggest trials so far with around 13,000
participants.
WHAT CONTRIBUTES TO DIFFERENT EFFICACY RATES?
Trial size, patient criteria, duration of post-vaccination
observation, target groups, prevalence of the virus in each site are
among the factors that could impact efficacy, experts said.
More rampant infections in Brazil than in other trial sites and its
study design to focus on medical workers could have led to more mild
infections in trials, thus lowering efficacy data, a person familiar
with the matter said.
The new lower efficacy finding included people with very mild
symptoms who did not need clinical assistance, while the earlier
reading was based on patients with symptoms that needed some
assistance, Brazilian researchers said.
IMPACT OF TARGET GROUPS
Brazil conducted trials with healthcare workers only, while Turkey
and Chile recruited both medical workers and general public, and
Indonesia general public only.
Medical workers could be more alert to mild symptoms and report
those more proactively than general public, which Sinovac suspects
may be among the reasons behind the less robust 50% reading, the
person said.
Fake positive results delivered by high-sensitivity COVID-19 tests
may have also worsened the reading, the person added.
HOW EXPERTS INTERPRET IT?
Experts say it is difficult to interpret the efficacy results as the
full datasets are not out.
"This highlights the problem of issuing data by press release rather
than publication in a peer-reviewed journal," Lawrence Young, a
virologist and professor at Britain's University of Warwick, said.
[to top of second column] |
Paul Hunter, professor in
Medicine at University of East Anglia, noted the
dosage interval of two weeks was very short and
may have contributed to the less-than-impressive
efficacy.
POSSIBLE TO COMBINE TRIAL RESULTS?
Sinovac said its trial designs are not identical
among countries, but the results are sufficient
to prove that the vaccine is safe and effective.
Jerome Kim, head of vaccine research group International Vaccine
Institute said it would be possible to combine data from multiple
studies with varied trial designs but it could involve additional
statistical manipulation.
"That could compromise the clean interpretation of the results, and
may impact the chance for these data to be accepted by regulatory
bodies."
ARE RECIPIENT COUNTRIES WORRIED?
Indonesia and Turkey have approved the vaccine this week to begin
mass inoculation, with Indonesia's president taking the shot on
Wednesday to encourage vaccinations.
Philippine president defended the country's decision to buy Chinese
made vaccines, saying they are as good as the shots developed by the
Americans and the Europeans.
In Brazil, a decision on the use of CoronaVac will be made on
Saturday.
SINOVAC NOT ALONE WITH VARYING SUCCESS RATES
A vaccine developed by Oxford University and AstraZeneca Plc has two
different success rates.
It showed 62% efficacy when two full doses were administered to
adult participants of all age groups, but it rose to 90% in a
sub-group of smaller number of participants not older than 55 who
were given a half-dose followed by a full dose booster.
On average its vaccine prevented 70% of COVID-19 cases in late stage
trials in Britain and Brazil.
A vaccine developed by an affiliate of China's state-backed
Sinopharm showed 79.34% efficacy, lower than 86% announced by the
United Arab Emirates based on preliminary data from trials there.
(Reporting by Roxanne Liu in Beijing and Miyoung Kim in Singapore;
Additional reporting by Kate Kelland in London; Editing by Himani
Sarkar)
[© 2021 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2021 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content |