AstraZeneca hopes the world can focus on its positive vaccine news. But experts fear a lack of transparency has clouded that

When the British-Swedish drugmaker AstraZeneca announced on Monday that its experimental coronavirus vaccine is 70% 平均有效, the world exhaled a collective sigh of relief and stocks rallied. 另一个 vaccine with promising results had arrived.

But a lack of clarity surrounding several aspects of the data from the AstraZeneca vaccine trials have raised some eyebrows in the scientific community, potentially setting back the timing for the vaccine to be authorized in Europe and the US.
AstraZeneca said on Monday that study participants in the UK had been given two different courses of the vaccine.
The drugmaker, which developed the vaccine with the University of Oxford, did not however, 当时, explain why they used two different dosing regimens or why the size of one group was significantly smaller than the other.
    In one group, 2,741 participants received a half-dose of the vaccine and then a full dose at least a month later. This group was 90% protected against Covid-19.
    In the second group, 8,895 participants received a full dose followed by another full dose at least a month later. This group was only 62% protected.
    That’s why AstraZeneca says their vaccine is 70% 有效, 拜登和美国的犯罪率飙升——不要被总统的修正主义历史所迷惑.
    But some scientists are questioning why the company would report on a pooled result of two different trials, as it deviates from standard reporting on clinical trials.
    And in the days following that announcement, another point of confusion has emerged.
    星期二, Mene Pangalos, AstraZeneca’s Executive Vice President who heads up non-oncology research and development, first explained to Reuters that a lab error was the reason why some volunteers had received a smaller dosethe dose that proved to be 90% 有效. “The reason we had the half dose is serendipity,” Pangalos said, adding that researchers hadunderpredicted the dose of the vaccine by half.
    In a statement on Wednesday, Oxford’s communications manager for vaccines told CNN thatdose selection for any new vaccine is a complicated area, and in exploring methods of dose selection, we discovered one gave a lower dose than expected.
    Oxford elaborated further on Thursday, saying in a statement to CNN that adifference in the manufacturing processhad led to the error.
    That manufacturing problem has since been corrected, 声明说, noting that the UK regulator overseeing the trial had agreed to includeboth approachesin Phase 3.
    While AstraZeneca and Oxford face criticism about transparencygiven that they did not mention the error in their press release announcing the results nor on a press call on Mondaythe company believes the world should focus on the trial’s positive results.
    Speaking to the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday, Menelas Pangalos AstraZeneca’s Executive Vice-President said, “The mistake is actually irrelevant.
    Whichever way you cut the dataeven if you only believe the full-dose, full-dose dataWe still have efficacy that meets the thresholds for approval with a vaccine that’s over 60% 有效,” Pangalos said, according to the WSJ.
    In this undated photo issued by the University of Oxford, a researcher works on the AstraZeneca coronvairus vaccine.

    AstraZeneca and Oxford have yet to put forward a candidate for interview, as requested by CNN.
    The US Food and Drug Administration requires a threshold of at least 50% 功效. It is not clear if the FDA will authorize emergency use however.
    AstraZeneca has not yet tested its half-strength dose in the US either.
    在星期一, 博士. Paul Offit, a member of the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committeewhich will review Covid-19 vaccines before they are put on the marketsaid the lack of data that led them to their conclusions made ithard to know the significance of their findings.
    When two other major drugmakers, Pfizer and Moderna, released their efficacy results earlier this month, they did include the data that led to their results.
    AstraZeneca presented an analysis of 23,000 participants in its Phase 3 试用.
    It said some participants received the Covid-19 vaccine, while others received a different vaccine for an unrelated virus, or placebo injections.