“Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine has a lower efficacy rate than the vaccines from 
Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech, which are both around 95 percent.

But in South Africa, the Johnson & Johnson vaccine is so far the clear winner. 
Novavax’s shot had an efficacy of 49 percent in South Africa.

And a small trial in South Africa of the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine found that 
it did not offer much protection at all.

The negative results led the South African government to abandon its plan of 
giving a million doses of AstraZeneca vaccines to health care workers. (Despite 
having millions of doses in warehouses)

Last week, the government started giving Johnson & Johnson’s vaccines instead, 
and has so far administered more than 32,000.”

Ref:  Feb. 24, 2021   
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/24/health/covid-vaccine-johnson-and-johnson.html



“AstraZeneca’s Vaccine Does Not Work Well Against Virus Variant in South Africa”

The bad news, coming nearly a week after a million doses of the 
AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine arrived in South Africa, was a big setback for the 
country.

By Benjamin Mueller, Rebecca Robbins and Lynsey Chutel   Published Feb. 7, 2021 
 Updated Feb. 22, 2021
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/07/world/africa/covid-vaccine-astrazeneca-south-africa.html


South Africa halted use of the AstraZeneca-Oxford coronavirus vaccine on Sunday 
after evidence emerged that the vaccine did not protect clinical trial 
volunteers from mild or moderate illness caused by the more contagious virus 
variant that was first seen there.

The findings were a devastating blow to the country’s efforts to combat the 
pandemic.

Scientists in South Africa said on Sunday that a similar problem held for 
people who had been infected by earlier versions of the coronavirus: The 
immunity they acquired naturally did not appear to protect them from mild or 
moderate cases when they were reinfected by the variant, known as B.1.351.

The developments, coming nearly a week after a million doses of the 
AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine arrived in South Africa, were an enormous setback 
for the country, where more than 46,000 people are known to have died from the 
virus.

They were also another sign of the dangers posed by new mutations in the 
coronavirus. The B.1.351 variant has spread to at least 32 countries, including 
the United States.

The number of cases evaluated as part of the studies outlined by South African 
scientists on Sunday were low, making it difficult to pinpoint just how 
effective or not the vaccine might be against the variant.

And because the clinical trial participants who were evaluated were relatively 
young and unlikely to become severely ill, it was impossible for the scientists 
to determine if the variant interfered with the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine’s 
ability to protect against severe Covid-19, hospitalizations or deaths.

The scientists said, however, that they believed the vaccine might protect 
against more severe cases, based on the immune responses detected in blood 
samples from people who were given it. If further studies show that to be the 
case, South African health officials will consider resuming use of the 
AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine, they said.

The new research findings have not been published in a scientific journal. But 
the discovery that the AstraZeneca-Oxford product showed minimal efficacy in 
preventing mild and moderate cases of the new variant added to the mounting 
evidence that B.1.351 makes current vaccines less effective.

Pfizer and Moderna have both said that preliminary laboratory studies indicate 
that their vaccines, while still protective, are less effective against 
B.1.351. Novavax and Johnson & Johnson have also sequenced test samples from 
their clinical trial participants in South Africa, where B.1.351 caused the 
vast majority of cases, and both reported lower efficacy there than in the 
United States.

“These results are very much a reality check,” Shabir Madhi, a virologist at 
University of the Witwatersrand who ran the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine trial in 
South Africa, said of the findings released on Sunday.

The pause in the country’s rollout of the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine means that 
the first shipments will now be put in warehouses.

Instead, South African health officials said they would inoculate health 
workers in the coming weeks with the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, which has shown 
strong efficacy in preventing severe cases and hospitalizations caused by the 
new variant.

Johnson & Johnson has applied for an emergency use authorization in South 
Africa. But health officials there indicated that even before it is authorized, 
some health workers could be given the vaccine as part of an ongoing trial.

In the AstraZeneca-Oxford trial in South Africa, roughly 2,000 participants 
were given either two doses of the vaccine or placebo shots.

There was virtually no difference in the numbers of people in the vaccine and 
placebo groups who were infected with B.1.351, suggesting that the vaccine did 
little to protect against the new variant. Nineteen of the 748 people in the 
group that was given the vaccine were infected with the new variant, compared 
with 20 out of 714 people in the group that was given a placebo.

That equates to a vaccine efficacy of 10 percent, though the scientists did not 
have enough statistical confidence to know for sure whether that figure would 
hold among more people.

Researchers also conducted laboratory experiments on blood samples from people 
who had been vaccinated and found a significant reduction in the activity 
levels of vaccine-generated antibodies against the B.1.351 variant compared 
with other lineages.

Beyond the troubling news about the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine, Dr. Madhi 
reported evidence suggesting that past infection by earlier versions of the 
coronavirus did not protect people in South Africa from the B.1.351 variant.

In order to determine who had previously been infected by the coronavirus, 
researchers tested blood samples from people who had enrolled in a trial of the 
Novavax vaccine, but who were given placebo shots and not the vaccine itself.

The researchers compared the levels of infection by the new variant in people 
who showed evidence of having previously had Covid-19 with the levels of 
infection in people who did not, and found no difference.

That suggested, Dr. Madhi wrote on a slide presented Sunday night, that “past 
infection by ‘original’ variants of SARS-CoV-2 do NOT protect against mild and 
moderate Covid-19 from the B.1.351 variant.”

He said it was possible that the potential of the B.1.351 variant to evade 
immune responses in people who had previously been infected accounted at least 
in part for why South Africa has suffered such a devastating second wave of the 
virus in recent months.

Researchers from the University of Oxford acknowledged on Sunday that the 
vaccine provided “minimal protection” against mild or moderate cases involving 
the B.1.351 variant. They are working to produce a new version of the vaccine 
that can protect against the most dangerous mutations of the B.1.351 variant, 
and have said they hope it will be ready by the fall.

“This study confirms that the pandemic coronavirus will find ways to continue 
to spread in vaccinated populations, as expected,” Andrew Pollard, the chief 
investigator on the Oxford vaccine trial, said in a statement. “But, taken with 
the promising results from other studies in South Africa using a similar viral 
vector, vaccines may continue to ease the toll on health care systems by 
preventing severe disease.”

Moderna has also begun developing a new form of its vaccine that could be used 
as a booster shot against the variant in South Africa.

B.1.351 has become the dominant form of the virus in South Africa and has been 
found in several dozen countries. A small number of cases have been reported in 
South Carolina, Maryland and Virginia.

Scientists believe that B.1.351 may be more adept at dodging protective 
vaccine-generated antibodies because it has acquired a mutation, known as 
E484K, that makes it harder for antibodies to grab onto the virus and prevent 
it from entering cells.

Novavax said its vaccine was just under 50 percent effective in preventing 
Covid-19 in its South Africa trial. Johnson & Johnson reported that its 
single-shot vaccine was 57 percent effective in preventing moderate to severe 
Covid-19 in South Africa, though it still offered complete protection against 
hospitalization and death after four weeks.

Another fast-spreading variant of the virus, known as B.1.1.7 and first 
identified in Britain, does not appear to interfere with vaccines. All five of 
the leading vaccines, and most recently AstraZeneca’s product, have been found 
to offer similar levels of protection against B.1.1.7 compared to earlier 
lineages of the virus.

AstraZeneca’s vaccine has been authorized by around 50 countries, including 
Britain, which has found dozens of cases of the variant first seen in South 
Africa.

In the United States, regulators are waiting on data from a large, late-stage 
clinical trial of the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine that is expected to report 
results in March.

---
_______________________________________________
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Reply via email to