Vaccines for coronavirus 2 SARS and the new norm in vaccination – Griffiths – – Reviews in medical epidemiology

Coronavirus 2 severe respiratory syndrome (SARS – CoV – 2) causes an infectious disease that is controlled by the immune response. The virus has a strong surface protein that is highly immune and can be thought to neutralize antibodies as the immune correlation, aided by central cell immunity.1 So it should be easy to get vaccinated against this novel virus.

This view has been true, but the speed with which the vaccines have been prepared and delivered is astonishing. Imagine that the vaccine made against the 2009 H1N1 pandemic virus was delivered at its peak, but the first wave of cases had been on and off before it could be introduced.2 The particular advantage of the flu vaccine is that its licensing is based on a change from the existing product license and so it can overcome much of the lengthy, detailed regulatory review required for a new vaccine. Credit should be given to the flexibility that experienced regulators are preparing to continually review the licensing process for all SARS – CoV – 2 vaccines rather than waiting for large data files to be delivered to them at one time. time. Great credit should also be given to developers of modern vaccine platforms that accelerated their plans to bring us vaccines to protect against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid – 19) long before the traditional approach, such as vaccination killing, live vaccination or reconstituted glycoprotein was able to deliver adjuvant. One platform is based on RNA technology while the other uses a recurrent adenovirus, and none of them has previously received an approved vaccine result.3-6

By modifying RNA to express the immunogen you want to encode, a chemically defined pathway to vaccines has been made from much smaller and less complex, including self-expanding feature by introducing RNA polymerase encoding option within RNA molecules. .7 Depression after injection is reduced and uptake into target cells is increased by physiological uptake of the modified RNA into lipid nanoparticles.

Using adenovirus as a vector, a recurrent spike protein of SARS – CoV – 2 is donated to the immune system. To avoid the problem of pre-existing immune responses to the vector nesting inoculum, the Oxford group used chimpanzee adenovirus while the Russian Sputnik vaccine used human adenovirus 5 and then human adenovirus 26 in ro. -engagement strategy.5, 6

What does this remarkable advancement tell us about the next steps in vaccination? First, we should consider these two new platforms being at the top of the list when we consider how to develop a new vaccine against the next novel virus. This does not mean that normal routes of vaccine production should be abolished; a killed vaccine may have a place for untreated viruses that thrive well in cell cultures, such as in the successful vaccine for hepatitis A. However, the main idea for get live attenuated vaccine rays – that they should provide better immune responses than uncomplicated. preparation – should no longer be taken abruptly, with the low and middle-cell immune responses generated by the new RNA and recurrent adenovirus vaccines. Second, we cannot return to the old ways of taking decades to develop new vaccines. Not only does this increase the cost of the final product, it also influences cost-effectiveness assessment. Vaccines often offer excellent value for money but are withheld when the net present value of their future medical benefits is measured. The reason is that public bodies making investment decisions reduce the value of future benefits to compensate for the frustration of waiting to be delivered. This process automatically disrupts products with a long lead time, like conventional vaccines. The ‘new normal’ we return after locking will not cover all aspects of the steps taken to get SARS – CoV – 2 vaccines at the time of a pandemic, but some should used again. For example, countries prescribing doses of vaccine if they are found to meet certain safety and efficacy criteria, will support the investment decisions of vaccine manufacturers. We should encourage our individual countries to gather around the list of viral diseases that the World Health Organization would like to see controlled and dealt with one-on-one. I would prefer the next viral infectious disease transmitted by the respiratory tract that causes severe infection with unfulfilled medical use and has a pronounced glycoprotein passing through its lipid envelope as a virus syncytial breath, but readers may prefer other targets.