ON December 2, the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) authorised the first Covid-19 vaccine. After so much suffering and so many deaths from the disease, alongside the harms caused by lockdowns, this was the good news. But there were still many questions. Would this vaccine and others be effective outside of clinical trials? Would they be safe when administered in the general population? Was Scotland ready for vaccine roll out? Would uptake be good enough? Would vaccines prevent transmission of the virus?
Three months on, we have some answers. None of them are definitive and questions remain, particularly about the longer term. But the answers give us hope.
There are three vaccines that have received temporary authorisation from the MHRA so far. Temporary authorisation means approval for a year while further information is provided by scientists and the pharmaceutical companies, leading to what’s called a standard marketing authorisation that usually lasts for five years and can be extended after that. Temporary authorisation is only granted on the basis of robust results from late stage trials.
READ MORE: Budget day's odd customs
The three vaccines authorised so far in the UK are from Pfizer-BioNTech, Oxford-Astra Zeneca and Moderna. All were tested in trials involving tens of thousands of participants with very promising results for preventing disease. The first two vaccines are now being rolled out in Scotland and it is expected that supply of the Moderna vaccine, already being used in other countries, will be available later this Spring.
Trial results and review of these by the MHRA and the Committee on Human Medicines show that the vaccines are safe and effective. But efficacy shown in carefully controlled clinical trials does not always result in effectiveness in the real world. We now have studies comparing outcomes between people who have received their first dose and those who haven’t.
In Scotland, EAVE II is an ongoing project that uses patient data to track vaccine roll out in real time. Last week the research team published a paper looking at vaccine effect since the programme started and up to February 15. They compared outcomes for people who had received their first dose and those who had not.
The study found that by four weeks after the first dose the Pfizer vaccine reduced the risk of being admitted to hospital by 85% and the Oxford-Astra Zeneca vaccine by 94%. For those aged over 80 there was an 81% reduction in hospitalisation.
In England, a further study from Public Health England found a similar 80% reduction in hospitalisation for over-80s from either vaccine. The same study found that the vaccines provided protection against developing symptomatic disease and, for the Pfizer vaccine (which was rolled out first), an 83% reduction in deaths. These are hugely encouraging results. But research is needed that looks at the durability of this impact, and effect of two doses of the vaccine. These studies have only been published as pre-prints, which means their findings still need to be peer-reviewed by independent experts.
Examining the safety of the vaccines was a key part of the MHRA approval process. They are now publishing regular Covid-19 safety reports. These are based on the Yellow Card system which is a medicines safety monitoring mechanism. The most recent report covers the period from December 9 up to February 14. It shows that only very few side effects are emerging – between 3 and 5 reports per 1,000 doses of vaccine. Almost all of these reported side effects are mild and are not dissimilar to those from the seasonal flu vaccine. This monitoring will continue and the people who took part in the original trials are being carefully followed up to look at any long term effects.
Another question was how well the vaccine programme would be rolled out in Scotland. Delivering a programme of this scale is a huge undertaking. There have been a few bumps in the road so far, with unfavourable comparisons between Scotland and England in the early weeks when the pace was slower here.
Scotland focused initially on residents in care homes and there are early signs that the first dose may already be making a difference in these settings, alongside staff testing and public health measures. Covid-19 deaths in care homes have declined by over 60% in recent weeks.
Current concerns have been about the supply of the Pfizer vaccine, with a decline in daily doses in mid to late February. Supply is expected to increase in future. Uptake has been excellent so far and better than the 80% expected by the Scottish Government in their delivery plan. In fact more than 95% of people over the age of 65 have now received their first dose. Whether this high uptake can be maintained in younger groups, and whether there are inequalities in access or uptake between different ethnic communities or in more deprived areas, is something we need to watch and address.
One of the big remaining questions is whether vaccines will help prevent transmission. If vaccines only stop illness, then everyone needs vaccinated to be protected. But if they also stop transmission, everyone vaccinated can protect other people as well, which will help us ease restrictions with more confidence.
READ MORE: Coronavirus: Scotland's exit from lockdown hinges on vaccines, variants, and supplies
There are encouraging signs, including from a Cambridge study which found a significant fall in infections 12 days after the first dose in research that tested health care staff. More evidence is needed but many studies are underway that will tell us more in future. The need for other public health measures alongside vaccines will continue for some time to come, but we can now see a cautious route out of this pandemic.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel