From the CBC:
“A
behind-the-scenes look at why Canada delayed 2nd doses of COVID-19 vaccines”
This is an
excerpt from Second Opinion, a weekly roundup of health and medical science
news emailed to subscribers every Saturday morning. If you haven't subscribed
yet, you can do that by clicking here.
Danuta
Skowronski was poring over Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine data on a Friday night in
mid-December when she had an "aha!" moment. The epidemiology lead at
the British Columbia Centre for Disease Control realized she could actually
"correct" the data Pfizer had submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration on the effectiveness of just one dose of its vaccine. In
clinical trials, Pfizer couldn't accurately determine the efficacy of a single
shot because participants had already received their second dose after three
weeks, and there was no comparative one-dose study done. Pfizer reported an
efficacy of 52 per cent for one shot, compared to the more commonly cited 95
per cent after the second. But
Skowronski, who has been working on vaccine effectiveness analyses for more
than 15 years, realized the company had included in its analysis the two-week
time period immediately after vaccination — before the body's immune response
typically kicks in. She told CBC News vaccines are never expected to protect
"instantaneously," and that there is always a "grace
period" of a couple of weeks that factors into vaccine effectiveness. "What
we found was that they were underestimating the efficacy of the first dose, and
rather than the efficacy being 52 per cent, it was actually 92 per cent, "
she said. "For us, that was a game changer." The finding led the
National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) to change the recommended
time between doses of COVID-19 vaccines from three weeks to an unprecedented
four months. B.C. announced it would be delaying second doses earlier this
week. Ontario, Quebec, Alberta, Manitoba and Newfoundland and Labrador quickly
followed suit. Canada is now an outlier in the global vaccination rollout. No
other country in the world has delayed second doses up to four months, and
there is no evidence yet on the long-term effect it could have on immunity to
COVID-19. Some scientists say we are
venturing into uncharted waters. Others are comfortable with the risk.
Why is
Canada delaying second doses? NACI says if second doses are stretched to
four months across the country starting this month, close to 80 per cent of
Canadians over 16 could get at least one shot of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna
vaccine by the end of June. But Canada's chief science adviser, Mona
Nemer, says the decision to delay doses amounted to a "population level
experiment." "The comment from the chief science adviser was
most unfortunate," said Skowronski. "It did not reflect the careful
risk-benefit analysis that went into this decision, and frankly, that is a
science and an art to be able to do that." Canada's chief science adviser issues
warning about B.C.'s 'experiment' with vaccine timing. But aside from a vague
reference to "real-world effectiveness" from Canada and other
countries in NACI's recommendations, little evidence has been communicated to
Canadians to convince them that the change in vaccine rollout strategy is the
right move. NACI says its decision to delay second doses is based on
emerging real-world data from Quebec, B.C., Israel, the U.K. and the U.S. that
showed "good effectiveness" of between 70 and 80 per cent from a
single dose of the vaccines "for up to two months in some studies." But it also makes clear that these studies
haven't yet collected four months of data on the long-term effectiveness of a
single dose, meaning NACI is betting on the "high levels of
protection" shown so far. "It's shown us really good vaccine effectiveness
two months after receipt of the first dose and that the effectiveness isn't
decreasing over time," Dr. Shelley Deeks, vice-chair of NACI and a lead
author of the recommendations, said in an interview. "After looking
at it from all of these angles, and given that we are in a situation of limited
supply, the committee came to a strong consensus that we recommend the interval
to be extended to four months." Stretch
interval between COVID-19 vaccine doses up to 4 months, national advisory committee
recommends Deeks said NACI will continue monitoring vaccine effectiveness data
as it comes out around the world to determine if it needs to further alter its
recommendations — meaning another change to Canada's vaccine rollout strategy
is possible. "If we need to reassess and revise the
recommendations, we will," she said. "But this will allow more
Canadians to receive the first dose and have a vaccine in a more timely manner
and will have an impact on serious disease."
'Not based
on evidence' The move has effectively doubled Canada's doses of COVID-19
vaccines overnight, but some scientists are critical of the move to experiment
with delaying intervals. "The decision is not based on evidence.
It's really based on an extrapolation of the evidence," said Brad Wouters,
executive vice-president of science and research at the University Health
Network in Toronto. "We've only been giving this vaccine for two
months, so we don't have data out to four months — no one in the world has been
waiting four months for a second dose." Wouters says it's unclear if the delay
will impact the effectiveness of the second dose, and the decision comes with a
lot of uncertainty in the months ahead. Skowronski says once good protection is
established, it doesn't suddenly disappear or "fall off a cliff."
Instead, protection against a disease wanes gradually after a vaccination,
which buys researchers time to "re-evaluate the optimal timing of the
second dose." She said that
longer intervals between a first and a second dose of a vaccine are generally
preferred because shorter intervals can interfere with the immune boost
response and longer intervals are often associated with ultimately higher
antibody levels. Alyson Kelvin,
an assistant professor at Dalhousie University in Halifax and virologist at the
Canadian Center for Vaccinology, says the clinical trials on COVID-19 vaccines
ran with the shortest time frame possible so they could get data out quickly,
but previous studies on other vaccines show longer intervals are generally
better. Skowronski says it's unclear why Pfizer went with a three-week interval
for their clinical trials, but it may have been due to pressure to get the
vaccine out or because they didn't expect to have such good protection with the
first dose. "The only reason to go with a shorter interval is if you don't
get good protection with the first dose, and a second dose administered sooner
could top it up a lot," Skowronski said. "That's a scenario that we are not
dealing with here. We're getting excellent protection after the first dose, and
we have a clear and present danger threat now with ongoing elevated pandemic
disease risk on top of that scarcity of vaccine supply."
Lack of
clear communication for Canadians While Skowronski is confident delaying
the second dose is the right move for Canada, she and other experts feel the
communication to Canadians from NACI on the decision could have been more
clear. She said it's important to stress to Canadians that they still
need a second dose eventually to have as much protection from COVID-19 as
possible and that they should take any vaccine offered to them to combat its
spread. Dr. David Naylor, who co-chairs the federal government's
COVID-19 immunity task force, said the decision to delay doses is
"defensible," but agreed the decision could have been explained much
more clearly to Canadians. "There
didn't seem to be an organized communications strategy overall," he said. "The unhappy result is that a
decision which might have been welcomed as a wider tide lifting many more boats
and helping us end the epidemic more quickly has instead caused a real
undercurrent of anxiety. I hope that subsequent communications will clear the
air."
Benefits and
risks of delaying 2nd doses of COVID-19 vaccine Wouters says he worries
about how Canadians will interpret the move to delay doses given the limited
understanding the average person might have on the issue. "There
wasn't a lot of information about why the decision was made, what the evidence
was, what the process was," he said. "There could certainly be a lot
more transparency around the process and how that was done." Dr.
Allison McGeer, a medical microbiologist and infectious disease specialist at
Toronto's Mount Sinai Hospital, says there is "overwhelming" evidence
in favour of delaying second doses. "People who haven't spent time
in vaccination and thinking about vaccination are always really anxious about
the stuff you don't know in the future with vaccines," she said. "I'm comfortable with those
uncertainties, and with the fact that we can deal with them when we get there.
But if you're not comfortable with that, there is a tendency to really worry
about the potential consequences of doing that." Skowronski says Canadians
should expect health experts to adapt to and absorb emerging evidence as it
becomes available and incorporate that into recommendations. "You
don't do business as usual in the midst of a crisis," she said. "You
don't want experts that are holding steadfast to an earlier opinion or
viewpoint while knowledge has amassed and moved on. "You want your
experts keeping pace with those developments and making decisions based on what
is known as time evolves, especially during a dynamic crisis like an unfolding
pandemic."
^ From the
beginning of Covid-19 Canada has been behind the ball and they continue to be behind
in getting enough Covid Vaccines for Canadians that their health experts are
going against International norms to delay the 2nd Vaccine dose.
They continue to risk the lives and health of Canadians because the Canadian
Provincial, Territorial and Federal Governments have failed in preparing for buying,
getting and distributing the vaccines. ^
https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/canada-covid-19-vaccine-delay-risk-1.5939134
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.