4 ms·

Oxford/AZ vaccine leak: Germany expects only 8% efficacy in ages 65+

26 points by tpmx 6y ago

LandR 6y ago
This is apparently purely down to the fact that people over 65 were recruited later than those under 65 in the phase 3 trials. This means that once the trial had ended their wasn't enough infected versus uninfected in the over 65 groups to get a proper efficacy number. It may / probably will be a lot higher than 8%. This feels like scaremongering.
- tpmx 6y ago
  Thanks. I posted this here because a) Handelsblatt is kinda serious/reliable, b) I wanted an explanation. Edit: Do have any source/reference to your explanation? (German language is okay.)
- InTheArena 6y ago
  Maybe. But it’s no less a thesis then the thesis that the vaccine is more effective with a half dose. This is why test design matters. You can’t say which of the thesis is true.
Will_Do 6y ago
I've been skeptical of the AZ vaccine for awhile. I don't know much about biology but I do know statistics. And many of their published results smelled of p-hacking[^1] by cherry-picking the best countries and the best (often accidental!) vaccination regime. Well credentialed people don't actively criticize it because despite those statistical issues, the vaccine is likely still 60-70% effective which is a big deal. But! If the stats side of the house is a clown show, it hurts my confidence in the entire house, especially when BioNTech and Moderna have been great in this respect. [1]: Perhaps not in the typical sense of "getting a statistically significant result" but in the closely related sense of "getting a larger effect size
- ggm 6y ago
  That's quite some allegation. You would want to be very confident you understand things to allege p-jacking.
- mchusma 6y ago
  While I do agree with you a bit, I think the big problem with Astrazeneca is that people hated on it so much that it's banned in the US. This is despite the fact that statistically it is extremely likely to be both safe and 100ish% effective at preventing death. If we could magically jump in a time machine and vaccinate the whole US with Astrazeneca last Feb, would we have had a pandemic? No. We would have had some cases, maybe a few deaths, but nothing resembling this year. So I get it. You don't love the studies. I agree they aren't perfect. But I think it would be helpful if everyone who wanted to point a study flaw would end with a disclaimer: "But of course the FDA should instantly lift the ban on Astrazeneca, because such a ban is absurd."
  - ggm 6y ago
    > it's banned in the US cite? Its banned in Iran.
    - tssva 6y ago
      In the US all medications must be approved by the FDA before they can be used; therefore, technically all medications are banned by default. Since the FDA has not approved the vaccine it remains banned.
      - jjk166 6y ago
        Pending approval and banned have wildly different connotations and I honestly can't assume such a substitution was done in good faith. It's like saying an engaged couple is divorced because they're not currently married.
        tssva 6y ago
crowf 6y ago
I don't understand the article, but why is this a leak? Shouldn't it be public knowledge how effective a vaccine is expected to be?
- piracy1 6y ago
  Often times there is a strict timeline for results and when they're processed and released to the world, I assume leak means someone just kinda went around the regular and pretty slow channels of reporting this info. Perhaps this info would be published when the trial is done in a month or however long.
InTheArena 6y ago
This was the concern with the mismatching sample groups. If the decreased efficacy was because of age differences rather the dosing differences - congrats! You just convinced the entire UK to adopt only a significant alt wise dosing scheme because the vaccine is actually worse at people Over 65. The science behind this vaccine has been sloppily done. Let’s hope that the USA trials and the J&J vaccine make up for it.
ggm 6y ago
This has been comprehensively rejected as untrue by AstraZeneca, widely reported by Reuters and other agencies. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu-astrazeneca-ger-idUSKBN29U2D9 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu-ast... https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2021/jan/25/coronavirus-live-news-biden-to-reinstate-covid-travel-ban-as-world-nears-100m-cases?page=with:block-600f4fb68f086b454d1ebbc2#block-600f4fb68f086b454d1ebbc2 https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2021/jan/25/coronavir...

26 points by tpmx 6y ago

This is apparently purely down to the fact that people over 65 were recruited later than those under 65 in the phase 3 trials. This means that once the trial had ended their wasn't enough infected versus uninfected in the over 65 groups to get a proper efficacy number. It may / probably will be a lot higher than 8%. This feels like scaremongering.

tpmx 6y ago
Thanks. I posted this here because a) Handelsblatt is kinda serious/reliable, b) I wanted an explanation. Edit: Do have any source/reference to your explanation? (German language is okay.)
InTheArena 6y ago
Maybe. But it’s no less a thesis then the thesis that the vaccine is more effective with a half dose. This is why test design matters. You can’t say which of the thesis is true.

Will_Do 6y ago

I've been skeptical of the AZ vaccine for awhile. I don't know much about biology but I do know statistics. And many of their published results smelled of p-hacking[^1] by cherry-picking the best countries and the best (often accidental!) vaccination regime. Well credentialed people don't actively criticize it because despite those statistical issues, the vaccine is likely still 60-70% effective which is a big deal. But! If the stats side of the house is a clown show, it hurts my confidence in the entire house, especially when BioNTech and Moderna have been great in this respect. [1]: Perhaps not in the typical sense of "getting a statistically significant result" but in the closely related sense of "getting a larger effect size

ggm 6y ago
That's quite some allegation. You would want to be very confident you understand things to allege p-jacking.
mchusma 6y ago
While I do agree with you a bit, I think the big problem with Astrazeneca is that people hated on it so much that it's banned in the US. This is despite the fact that statistically it is extremely likely to be both safe and 100ish% effective at preventing death. If we could magically jump in a time machine and vaccinate the whole US with Astrazeneca last Feb, would we have had a pandemic? No. We would have had some cases, maybe a few deaths, but nothing resembling this year. So I get it. You don't love the studies. I agree they aren't perfect. But I think it would be helpful if everyone who wanted to point a study flaw would end with a disclaimer: "But of course the FDA should instantly lift the ban on Astrazeneca, because such a ban is absurd."
- ggm 6y ago
  > it's banned in the US cite? Its banned in Iran.
  - tssva 6y ago
    In the US all medications must be approved by the FDA before they can be used; therefore, technically all medications are banned by default. Since the FDA has not approved the vaccine it remains banned.
    - jjk166 6y ago
      Pending approval and banned have wildly different connotations and I honestly can't assume such a substitution was done in good faith. It's like saying an engaged couple is divorced because they're not currently married.
      - tssva 6y ago

crowf 6y ago

I don't understand the article, but why is this a leak? Shouldn't it be public knowledge how effective a vaccine is expected to be?

piracy1 6y ago
Often times there is a strict timeline for results and when they're processed and released to the world, I assume leak means someone just kinda went around the regular and pretty slow channels of reporting this info. Perhaps this info would be published when the trial is done in a month or however long.

InTheArena 6y ago

This was the concern with the mismatching sample groups. If the decreased efficacy was because of age differences rather the dosing differences - congrats! You just convinced the entire UK to adopt only a significant alt wise dosing scheme because the vaccine is actually worse at people Over 65. The science behind this vaccine has been sloppily done. Let’s hope that the USA trials and the J&J vaccine make up for it.

ggm 6y ago

This has been comprehensively rejected as untrue by AstraZeneca, widely reported by Reuters and other agencies. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu-astrazeneca-ger-idUSKBN29U2D9 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu-ast... https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2021/jan/25/coronavirus-live-news-biden-to-reinstate-covid-travel-ban-as-world-nears-100m-cases?page=with:block-600f4fb68f086b454d1ebbc2#block-600f4fb68f086b454d1ebbc2 https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2021/jan/25/coronavir...