So much talk about introducing 3rd doses in Canada. This hits close to home because ... I live in Canada!
But I have lived in LMIC, have a parent from a LMIC, and believe that vaccine equity is incredibly important.
Nevertheless, widespread 3rd doses are getting pushback. 🧵
1. Do vaccines work and vaccine efficacy wane?
Hell ya! We have tons of data demonstrating this. Here is just one figure from @FT that shows waning immunity (and then booster effect).
Yes, mRNA is better than AZ, but both wane from their peak efficacy d/t decr neutralizing Abs.
And this RCT—coupled with epidemiologic data from Israel, UK, and others—submitted to FDA clearly shows that a 3rd dose massively improves vaccine efficacy (with a relative efficacy of 95%). The results are not subtle.
On top of this, most jurisdictions in the 🌍 who had early access to 💉 are now moving to boost their populations. US now giving 3rd dose to as many ppl as possible, whereas some other jurisdictions are being more strategic. (e.g. UK says >6m post-2nd dose AND 40yo+, HCW, etc.)
This has helped the UK and Belgium. We likely don't want to be like Netherlands (who just started boosting widely days ago). @FT@jburnmurdoch
So why isn't Canada doing the same?
Could it be that we think the laws of immunology are different in the Great White North?
H/T @chaim_bell to this 🔥 scene from "My Cousin Vinny" where the lawyer asks if the "Laws of Physics cease to exist on your stove"?
Well, 🇨🇦 did choose to give a 2nd dose ~12 weeks after the first dose. How protective will that prove? Who knows? We do know that it gave a higher post-2nd dose nAb titre, but waning still started shortly thereafter (sciencedirect.com/science/articl…).
We also know that real world experience in Canada (e.g. Ontario and BC) is that the vaccines have been holding up for now. Smart colleague @DrJeffKwong a few weeks ago showed that VE for symptomatic disease was at 81% and it was 90% for severe disease. BUT ...
6m ago, we only had vaccinated <5% of our popn. Over the ensuing 2 months, we administered 19M people. Those 19M will be starting to reach 6m very soon.
Maybe they won't need boosters at 6m, but at 7m or 8m. Almost doesn't matter.
I won't go into the math of it all, but if you look at data from @COVIDSciOntario dashboard, there are hints of the vaccine efficacy waning—I mean, hospitalizations for unvaxed are roughly where they were in Aug or Oct; not so much for fully vaxed. But this is very early days.
I hope you have stayed with me: 1. Vaccines work. 2. Vaccines wane. 3. 3rd doses protect us +++ better than a waned 2nd dose. 4. Spread out dosing was good, but we don't know how good and for how long.
Now, the final questions (drum roll please) ...
What probability would you give that VE will wane in a clinically meaningful way for most people after 6-8m of getting 2nd dose? (25%? 50%? 75%?)
What probability would Canada be able to give 3rd dose to 19M (along with giving 2 doses to 5-11) from, say, Xmas day to February 24?
So:
Do we need to give 3rd to everyone now? No
But it is a strategic mistake
- to convey that a 3rd dose is a "luxury" rather than appropriate evidence-based prevention
- to take a chance and start giving 3rd doses once we see a problem—because it will come at us hard & fast.
Will we need more doses? Maybe. Probably.
In fact, there is already a hint from Israel that further doses are likely.
I call this a 3rd dose, but we don't know how much more (if any) we will need.
Yesterday, @COVIDSciOntario released updated treatment guidelines, focusing on patients with mild illness. It is a substantial change from prior guidance, so we thought we would walk people through the noteworthy changes.
First, as always, this is the work of +++people incl. the, er, volunteers of the Drugs & Biologics Clinical Practice Guidelines Working Group of @COVIDSciOntario. Co-chair is @MPaiMD.
Second, the update is a response to: 1. New data & evidence 2. Changes in drug supply & demand.
The first thing you will notice is that we have done away with Tiers (cue the cheers), and instead have put in a grid that takes a more nuanced approach to risk for disease.
[NEW] We are now aiming for treating pts whose risk of progression is comparable to ~5% hospitalization.
"W-w-wait! Paxlovid is NOT first line? I thought everyone was saying this is the best thing since the mute function!"
You have it right. If you look carefully at our guidelines on the 2nd page (where we cover outpt therapy for "Mildly Ill Patients") you can see where it lies.
"That is waaaay too small to see on my phone."
Sorry, let me try again.
"Oh, I think I can see. So Paxlovid is only for the highest risk patients, and only if they cannot get sotrovimab or remdesivir?"
That's right. And in Ontario, we don't have enough remdesivir for outpts.
Clinical Practice Guideline Summary: Recommended Drugs and Biologics in Adult Patients with COVID-19 - Ontario COVID-19 Science Advisory Table covid19-sciencetable.ca/sciencebrief/c…
The guidelines are based on a blend of pathogenesis, clinical trials, and local realities of drug supply and burn rate.
If we got it right, phew!
If we got it wrong, recognize that this is a rapidly evolving situation, with new evidence, new variants, and new drug availability.
Omicron has shortened the presymptomatic period, but we have little certainty of the rest of the time course.
I have received messages, texts, and reply-tweets regarding my stance on COVID management in ON (and elsewhere). As a strong early proponent of a #COVIDzero approach for a variety of reasons which, I believe, will show merit historically, I have never minimized COVID. However ...
1. I continue to have uncertainty regarding the severity of Omicron. I believe we will establish considerably more certainty in days ahead. Certainly, some evidence is emerging of a lesser severity—both mechanistically & epidemiologically—but I remain uncertain and thus cautious.
2. I don't accept the experience of the UK, Denmark, or anywhere else right now because they are at roughly the same time period in Omicron as we are—very early. The reasons why we cannot generalize from Gauteng are well documented, including in my weekly newsletter from Dec. 18.
1. The dominance of Omicron in cases means that the monoclonal antibody cocktail of casirivimab + imdevimab is no longer useful. It is sotrovimab or bust! 2. Because we don't have tons of sotrovimab, we are recommending it for the groups most likely to gain overall benefit.
These are symptomatic mildly ill patients who are:
70+ years with 1 additional risk factor
50+ AND Indigenous + 1 additional risk factor
Residents of LTC or other congregate care
Hospital-acquired
* other high-risk patients can also be considered (e.g. +++ immunocompromise)
1/ People are increasingly fed up with COVID, so measures to control Omicron cannot/should not rely on measures used for prior waves. (Which means that governments would be wise not to allow COVID to reach a crisis situation.)
When I highlighted several days ago that case growth was worrying me, several Twitterati assumed that I was alluding to lockdowns. (I was doing nothing of the sort)
But failure to pay attention to cases in EUR shows that countries can be forced into lockdowns if they don't act.
2/ Engineering/environmental controls (e.g. ventilation, filtration) will be the smallest imposition on people's lives.
Better masking (understanding, adherence, quality) would make a difference.
This is without assuming any properties of Omicron.