Sci­en­tists warn Amer­i­cans are ex­pect­ing too much from a coro­n­avirus vac­cine

The White House and many Amer­i­cans have pinned their hopes for de­feat­ing the Covid-19 pan­dem­ic on a vac­cine be­ing de­vel­oped at “warp speed.” But some sci­en­tif­ic ex­perts warn they’re all ex­pect­ing too much, too soon.

“Every­one thinks COVID-19 will go away with a vac­cine,” said William Hasel­tine, chair and pres­i­dent of Ac­cess Health In­ter­na­tion­al, a foun­da­tion that ad­vo­cates for af­ford­able care.

On­go­ing clin­i­cal tri­als are pri­mar­i­ly de­signed to show whether Covid-19 vac­cines pre­vent any symp­toms of the dis­ease — which could be as mi­nor as a sore throat or cough. But the tri­als, which will study 30,000 to 60,000 vol­un­teers, will be too short in du­ra­tion and too small in size to prove that the vac­cines will pre­vent what peo­ple fear most — be­ing hos­pi­tal­ized or dy­ing — by the time the first vac­cine mak­ers file for emer­gency au­tho­riza­tion, ex­pect­ed to oc­cur lat­er this year, Hasel­tine said.

The Unit­ed States should hold out for an op­ti­mal vac­cine, with more proven ca­pa­bil­i­ties, Hasel­tine ar­gued. Oth­ers say the crush­ing toll of the pan­dem­ic — which has killed at least 225,000 Amer­i­cans — de­mands that the coun­try ac­cept the best vac­cine it can achieve with­in the next few months, even if sig­nif­i­cant ques­tions re­main af­ter its re­lease.

“There’s a ten­sion be­tween get­ting every piece of in­for­ma­tion and get­ting a vac­cine [out] in time to save lives,” said William Schaffn­er, a pro­fes­sor of pre­ven­tive med­i­cine and health pol­i­cy at the Van­der­bilt Uni­ver­si­ty Med­ical Can­cer.

“Would we like to know if the vac­cine re­duces ill­ness or mor­tal­i­ty? Of course,” said Pe­ter Lurie, a for­mer FDA of­fi­cial and the cur­rent pres­i­dent of the Cen­ter for Sci­ence in the Pub­lic In­ter­est. “But there is a re­al time pres­sure. This is a pan­dem­ic. It’s ex­plo­sive.”

Re­searchers de­bat­ed how rig­or­ous­ly to test COVID-19 vac­cines at a Thurs­day pub­lic meet­ing of the Food and Drug Ad­min­is­tra­tion ad­vi­so­ry com­mit­tee on vac­cines.

“Sim­ply pre­vent­ing mild cas­es is not enough and may not jus­ti­fy the risks as­so­ci­at­ed with vac­ci­na­tion,” said Pe­ter Doshi, an as­so­ciate pro­fes­sor at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Mary­land School of Phar­ma­cy who de­tailed his con­cerns in an ed­i­to­r­i­al in The BMJ.

But vac­cine ex­perts say there are good rea­sons to fo­cus on milder cas­es of Covid-19.

Vac­cines that pre­vent mild dis­ease typ­i­cal­ly pre­vent se­vere dis­ease, as well, said Arnold Mon­to, an epi­demi­ol­o­gist at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Michi­gan’s School of Pub­lic Health and tem­po­rary chair of the vac­cine com­mit­tee.

For ex­am­ple, the orig­i­nal stud­ies of the measles vac­cine showed on­ly that it pre­vent­ed measles, not hos­pi­tal­iza­tions or deaths, said Kath­leen Neuzil, di­rec­tor of the Uni­ver­si­ty of Mary­land’s Cen­ter for Vac­cine De­vel­op­ment and Glob­al Health.

Lat­er stud­ies found that measles vac­cines dra­mat­i­cal­ly re­duce mor­tal­i­ty. Ac­cord­ing to the World Health Or­ga­ni­za­tion, world­wide deaths from measles fell by 73% from 2000 to 2018 be­cause of vac­cines.

“There sim­ply does not ex­ist an ex­am­ple in vac­ci­nol­o­gy of vac­cines that are ef­fec­tive against mild dis­ease that are not more ef­fec­tive in se­vere dis­ease,” said Philip Krause, deputy di­rec­tor of the vac­cine of­fice at the FDA’s Cen­ter for Bi­o­log­ics Eval­u­a­tion and Re­search, at Thurs­day’s hear­ing.

Paul Of­fit, who de­vel­oped the ro­tavirus vac­cine, com­pared pre­vent­ing the coro­n­avirus to fight­ing a fire.

“If you put out a small fire in the kitchen, you don’t have to wor­ry about the whole house catch­ing fire,” said Of­fit, a mem­ber of the FDA ad­vi­so­ry com­mit­tee on vac­cines.

Prov­ing that a vac­cine pre­vents se­vere ill­ness and death is hard­er than show­ing it pro­tects against mild ill­ness be­cause hos­pi­tal­iza­tions and deaths are much rar­er. That’s es­pe­cial­ly true among the type of health-con­scious peo­ple who vol­un­teer for vac­cine tri­als, who are prob­a­bly more like­ly than oth­ers to wear masks and so­cial­ly dis­tance, Schaffn­er said.

“When we looked at hos­pi­tal­iza­tions in old­er adults with in­fluen­za, those were two-year tri­als,” Neuzil said. In an on­go­ing study, in which “we’re look­ing at ty­phoid vac­cines in near­ly 30,000 chil­dren, it’s a two-year tri­al.”

The Covid-19 pan­dem­ic has of­fi­cial­ly in­fect­ed about 8.7 mil­lion Amer­i­cans. Con­sid­er­ing that the true num­ber of Amer­i­cans in­fect­ed is es­ti­mat­ed to be six to 10 times high­er than re­port­ed, the mor­tal­i­ty rate is about 0.6%, said Amesh Adal­ja, a se­nior schol­ar at the Johns Hop­kins Uni­ver­si­ty Cen­ter for Health Se­cu­ri­ty.

Sci­en­tists agree that the ide­al vac­cine would pro­vide “ster­il­iz­ing im­mu­ni­ty” — which means pre­vent­ing not on­ly dis­ease symp­toms but any in­fec­tion with the virus, said Corey Casper, a vac­ci­nol­o­gist with the Fred Hutchin­son Can­cer Re­search Cen­ter and chief ex­ec­u­tive of­fi­cer at the In­fec­tious Dis­ease Re­search In­sti­tute in Seat­tle.

For ex­am­ple, two dos­es of measles vac­cines pre­vent 97% of peo­ple from even be­com­ing in­fect­ed with that virus.

Few ex­pect Covid-19 vac­cines to be that ef­fec­tive. “We’re try­ing to low­er that bar and de­ter­mine how much low­er is ac­cept­able,” Casper said.

Pre­vent­ing mild dis­ease could curb dis­ease and pre­vent ill­ness, Casper said.

“We’re prob­a­bly not go­ing to have the per­fect vac­cine,” he said. “But I do think we’re like­ly to have vac­cines that, if we can show they’re safe, can put an in­flec­tion point on this pan­dem­ic. … I think it’s still im­por­tant to have a vac­cine that has some ef­fect even on mild ill­ness.”

Flu shots aren’t su­per ef­fec­tive — with ef­fec­tive­ness each year rang­ing from 19% to 70% — but they’re still ex­treme­ly use­ful, Casper said.

Dur­ing the 2018-19 U.S flu sea­son, vac­ci­na­tion pre­vent­ed an es­ti­mat­ed 4.4 mil­lion in­fluen­za ill­ness­es, 2.3 mil­lion med­ical vis­its, 58,000 hos­pi­tal­iza­tions and 3,500 in­fluen­za-as­so­ci­at­ed deaths, ac­cord­ing to the Cen­ters for Dis­ease Con­trol and Pre­ven­tion.

A tri­al of 30,000 to 60,000 peo­ple is al­ready fair­ly large by his­tor­i­cal stan­dards. Dra­mat­i­cal­ly ex­pand­ing the size be­yond that isn’t prac­ti­cal in a com­pressed time frame, Krause said.

“If the end­point of the tri­al is se­vere dis­ease, the tri­als may need to be al­most 10 times as big,” he said at the meet­ing. “And those tri­als would be in­fea­si­ble and we would nev­er get a vac­cine.”

On the oth­er hand, “if there is a vac­cine that ap­pears to have high ef­fi­ca­cy or ap­pears to be ca­pa­ble of sav­ing lives, one doesn’t want to stop that vac­cine if there is a sig­nif­i­cant chance that it will save lives,” Krause said.

Al­though the coro­n­avirus vac­cine tri­als are mea­sur­ing se­vere dis­ease or death, these are “sec­ondary end­points,” mean­ing the cur­rent size of the study isn’t large enough to pro­duce a sta­tis­ti­cal­ly sig­nif­i­cant an­swer, Neuzil said.

Whether vac­cines re­duce se­vere dis­ease and death will be­come clear in lat­er stud­ies, af­ter vac­cines are dis­trib­uted, Neuzil said.

Of­fit said the de­bate re­volves around one ques­tion: “How much un­cer­tain­ty are we will­ing to live with, know­ing that we’re fac­ing a virus that has brought us to our knees?”


By Liz Sz­abo and JoNel Alec­cia

First pub­lished at KHN (Kaiser Health News) — a non­prof­it news ser­vice cov­er­ing health is­sues. It is an ed­i­to­ri­al­ly in­de­pen­dent pro­gram of KFF (Kaiser Fam­i­ly Foun­da­tion), which is not af­fil­i­at­ed with Kaiser Per­ma­nente.

Im­ple­ment­ing re­silience in the clin­i­cal tri­al sup­ply chain

Since January 2020, the clinical trials ecosystem has quickly evolved to manage roadblocks impeding clinical trial integrity, and patient care and safety amid a global pandemic. Closed borders, reduced air traffic and delayed or canceled flights disrupted global distribution, revealing how flexible logistics and supply chains can secure the timely delivery of clinical drug products and therapies to sites and patients.

In fi­nal days at Mer­ck, Roger Perl­mut­ter bets big on a lit­tle-known Covid-19 treat­ment

Roger Perlmutter is spending his last days at Merck, well, spending.

Two weeks after snapping up the antibody-drug conjugate biotech VelosBio for $2.75 billion, Merck announced today that it had purchased OncoImmune and its experimental Covid-19 drug for $425 million. The drug, known as CD24Fc, appeared to reduce the risk of respiratory failure or death in severe Covid-19 patients by 50% in a 203-person Phase III trial, OncoImmune said in September.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 94,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Pascal Soriot (AP Images)

UP­DAT­ED: As­traZeneca, Ox­ford on the de­fen­sive as skep­tics dis­miss 70% av­er­age ef­fi­ca­cy for Covid-19 vac­cine

On the third straight Monday that the world wakes up to positive vaccine news, AstraZeneca and Oxford are declaring a new Phase III milestone in the fight against the pandemic. Not everyone is convinced they will play a big part, though.

With an average efficacy of 70%, the headline number struck analysts as less impressive than the 95% and 94.5% protection that Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna have boasted in the past two weeks, respectively. But the British partners say they have several other bright spots going for their candidate. One of the two dosing regimens tested in Phase III showed a better profile, bringing efficacy up to 90%; the adenovirus vector-based vaccine requires minimal refrigeration, which may mean easier distribution; and AstraZeneca has pledged to sell it at a fraction of the price that the other two vaccine developers are charging.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 94,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

John Maraganore, Alnylam CEO (Scott Eisen/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Al­ny­lam gets the green light for drug #3 — and CEO John Maraganore is ready to roll

Score another early win at the FDA for Alnylam.

The FDA put out word today that the agency has approved its third drug, lumasiran, for primary hyperoxaluria type 1, better known as PH1.

An ultra rare genetic condition, Alnylam CEO John Maraganore says there are only some 1,000 to 1,700 patients in the US and Europe at any particular point. The patients, mostly kids, suffer from an overproduction of oxalate in the liver that spurs the development of kidney stones, right through to end stage kidney disease.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 94,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Leonard Schleifer, Regeneron CEO (Andrew Harnik/AP)

Trail­ing Eli Lil­ly by 12 days, Re­gen­eron gets the FDA OK for their Covid-19 an­ti­body cock­tail

A month and a half after becoming the experimental treatment of choice for a newly diagnosed president, Regeneron’s antibody cocktail has received emergency use authorization from the FDA. It will be used to treat non-hospitalized Covid-19 patients who are at high-risk of progressing.

Although the Rgeneron drug is not the first antibody treatment authorized by the FDA, the news comes as a significant milestone for a company and a treatment scientists have watched closely since the outbreak began.

Bob Nelsen (Photo by Michael Kovac/Getty Images)

Bob Nelsen rais­es $800M and re­cruits a star-stud­ded board to build the 'Fox­con­n' of biotech

Bob Nelsen spent his pandemic spring in his Seattle home, talking on the phone with Luciana Borio, the scientist who used to run pandemic preparedness on the National Security Council, and fuming with her about the dire state of American manufacturing.

Companies were rushing to develop vaccines and antibodies for the new virus, but even if they succeeded, there was no immediate supply chain or infrastructure to mass-produce them in a way that could make a dent in the outbreak.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 94,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Carl Hansen, AbCellera CEO (University of British Columbia)

From a pair of Air Jor­dans to a $200M-plus IPO, Carl Hansen is craft­ing an overnight R&D for­tune fu­eled by Covid-19

Back in the summer of 2019, Carl Hansen left his post as a professor at the University of British Columbia to go full time as the CEO at a low-profile antibody shop he had founded called AbCellera.

As biotech CEOs go, even after a fundraise Hansen wasn’t paid a whole heck of a lot. He ended up earning right at $250,000 for the year. His compensation package included a loan — which he later paid back — and a pair of Air Jordan tennis shoes. His newly-hired CFO, Andrew Booth, got a sweeter pay packet than that — which included his own pair of Air Jordans.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

Unlock this article along with other benefits by subscribing to one of our paid plans.

Bahija Jallal (file photo)

TCR pi­o­neer Im­muno­core scores a first with a land­mark PhI­II snap­shot on over­all sur­vival for a rare melanoma

Bahija Jallal’s crew at TCR pioneer Immunocore says they have nailed down a promising set of pivotal data for their lead drug in a frontline setting for a solid tumor. And they are framing this early interim readout as the convincing snapshot they need to prove that their platform can deliver on a string of breakthrough therapies now in the clinic or planned for it.

In advance of the Monday announcement, Jallal and R&D chief David Berman took some time to walk me through the first round of Phase III data for their lead TCR designed to treat rare, frontline cases of metastatic uveal melanoma that come with a grim set of survival expectations.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

Unlock this article along with other benefits by subscribing to one of our paid plans.

Am­gen sev­ers 14-year Cy­to­ki­net­ics part­ner­ship, bail­ing on ome­cam­tiv af­ter mixed PhI­II re­sults

Amgen is shrugging off a 14-year development alliance and the tens of millions of dollars spent to develop a new heart drug at Cytokinetics after a Phase III trial turned up weak data — leaving Cytokinetics to soldier on alone.

Omecamtiv mecarbil technically worked, meeting the primary composite endpoint in the Phase III GALACTIC-HF study. But it missed a key secondary endpoint, which analysts had been following as a key marker for success — reduction of cardiovascular (CV) death. While Cytokinetics celebrated the results, its stock tanked 43% upon the news, and analysts warned of an uncertain path ahead. Now, Amgen wants out.