@AstraZeneca “expressed confidence that the vaccine would offer protection against serious cases, because it created neutralising antibodies similar to those of other coronavirus vaccines.”
Nevertheless the preliminary findings, first reported by the Financial Times and since confirmed by AstraZeneca, do suggest the vaccine offers only limited protection against mild and moderate disease caused by the variant.
The study is due to be published tomorrow.
The @UniofOxford told Reuters it was working with AstraZeneca to optimise the pipeline in vaccine production if it needed to adapt to a change in the virus.
It has said a new vaccine to work against mutated versions of the virus could be ready to deploy in the autumn, if needed.
Whilst this development is not ideal, we shouldn’t be alarmed just yet.
And we already know the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine gives people good protection against the B1.1.7 coronavirus variant which is now dominant in the UK.
So @whippletom has managed to get hold of the data before the preprint is published. He’s put together a useful thread here:
I’m seeing worrying comments from people that feel taking the Oxford/AZ jab is now pointless.
This is *absolutely* the wrong take: it remains a highly effective vaccine against severe illness for both the original virus AND the UK variant. Most likely the South African one too.
So take whatever vaccine you’re offered - the most important thing is to keep people out of hospitals.
If the vaccines do need to be updated (we don’t know yet), it will happen by autumn. Spring and summer will help keep transmission low until then.
There is no cause for alarm.
If you need further convincing please take a minute or so to watch this reassuring clip from the lead researcher on the vaccine, Professor Sarah Gilbert.
Today’s reported UK first vaccine dose figure falls fractionally short of the half million mark - but it’s still slightly up on the equivalent figure from one week earlier.
The total rises to almost 11.5 million first doses administered.
1. There are still some people that believe the COVID threat is exaggerated by the @PHE_uk "Deaths within 28 days of a positive test" measurement.
However, deaths are separately recorded and logged by mentions on death certificates, and both counts are shown here.
2. It’s important to remember that a doctor can certify the involvement of COVID-19 in a person’s death based on symptoms and clinical findings.
A positive test result is *not* required.
3. A few other important things to mention here. First, there’s a lag in reporting of at least 11 days for data based on death registrations, and this is likely to affect the Christmas period in particular.
I fully expect the @ONS line to follow the recent @PHE_uk upward slope.
Clinical trial results showed tocilizumab and sarilumab reduced the relative risk of death by 24%, when administered to patients within 24 hrs of entering intensive care.
Most data came from when the drugs were administered in addition to a corticosteroid, e.g. dexamethasone.
Patients receiving these drugs, typically used to treat rheumatoid arthritis, left intensive care 7 to 10 days earlier on average.
“The rollout of these treatments could therefore contribute significantly towards reducing pressures on hospitals over the coming weeks and months.”