Astra with increased efficacy… Why is it not Pfizer?

AstraZeneca vaccine [사진=로이터 연합뉴스]

As AstraZeneca, a British global pharmaceutical company, announced that it has succeeded in significantly increasing the efficacy of the Corona 19 (new coronavirus infection) vaccine, the government’s choice to sign a contract with this company is being re-examined.

It is noteworthy how the domestic public opinion will change as there have been many negative evaluations that the government has been lukewarm about securing a vaccine with Pfizer and modder, an American pharmaceutical company known to have higher efficacy.

According to AFP news agency on the 27th (local time), Pascal Sorio AstraZeneca, CEO, said, “We have found the winning formula for the Corona 19 vaccine jointly developed with Oxford University” and “We are confident of 100% prevention of severe infections.” said.

CEO Sorio said, “As a result of the clinical trial, two injections showed similar efficacy of the vaccine to other competitors. This data will be released at some point in the future.”

Among the pharmaceutical companies that previously announced the results of phase 3 clinical trials, Pfizer’s vaccine is known to be 95% effective and Modena’s vaccine is 94.5% effective. On the other hand, AstraZeneca vaccine showed an average of 70% efficacy as a result of the initial phase 3 clinical analysis, but it was criticized for being less reliable as it showed 90% efficacy if the dosage was changed to half level.

It is known that the 100% prevention rate of severe infection, which CEO Sorio is confident about, showed similar effects to both Pfizer and Moder and vaccines. On the 20th (local time), the US Assistant Secretary of Health, Brett Girore, appeared on ABC’s magazine program’This Week’ and said, “Pfizer vaccine has 95% COVID-19 prevention effect and 100% effect to avoid severe disease. Because of this, I recommend it widely to everyone.”

An FDA official also told CNN that “(Mode or vaccine) is approximately 95% effective in preventing infectious diseases and 100% effective in preventing severe infectious diseases.”

Over the course of the coronavirus 3 pandemic, domestic public opinion has been critical of the government that has not secured Pfizer, modders or vaccines in the early stages. Along with rumors that the government had negotiated with AstraZeneca, which is less effective in preventing vaccine purchase costs, it was pointed out that it had missed the timing of the vaccine purchase by confident in’K-quarantine’.

However, with the announcement of CEO Sorio that day, the Korean government’s choice, which had negotiated with AstraZeneca earlier than Pfizer and Modena, is also being revised.

As the vaccine preventive effect, which was considered a weakness of the AstraZeneca vaccine, is improved, it is expected to be relatively competitive. First of all, the AstraZeneca vaccine costs 3-5 dollars (about 3300-5500 won), which is cheaper than Pfizer and Modena.

In addition, compared to Pfizer, which must be distributed through a’cold chain’ at a cryogenic temperature below -70 degrees Celsius, it has the advantage of being able to distribute at 2 to 8 degrees Celsius, which has advantages in transportation and storage. Another advantage is that it can be manufactured in Korea by signing a vaccine consignment production contract with SK Bioscience in July this year.

Seth Berkeley, chairman of the Global Vaccine Immunity Association (GAVI), commented, “The AstraZeneca vaccine can be stored for up to 6 months in a general refrigerator, so it is an ideal vaccine that can be distributed without difficulty in poor developing countries.” Received.

An official in the bio industry said, “Another strength of the AstraZeneca vaccine is that it was manufactured in the traditional way.” “Since the cryogenic method has the potential to cause various variables in the distribution process, the AstraZeneca vaccine can be more free from side effects.” He explained.

British Prime Minister Johnson visits AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine production site [사진=로이터 연합뉴스]

Reporter Kang Kyung-joo [email protected]