[Goose]

I believe they are planning another trial (or at least they were):

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-healt...SKBN28620H

The question is whether what they have now is sufficient to get an EUA.  I would guess so, based on the stated goalposts (>50% efficacy and lower bound of the CI > 30%), which they meet.  Given that it offers the best chance to mass vaccinate quickly, I think it is probably worth moving forward with it.  But I would like to see a three arm trial of half-dose versus full-dose versus placebo (or at least the half-dose versus placebo) to verify the ~90%.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/astrazeneca...1607443250

AZ/Oxford will indeed submit the data.

BC

You raise an interesting question. The totality of their existing trials seems to justify an EUA, but for exactly what? From what I read, it would be the full dose both times, because there isn't as much data on the half followed by full? Yet the latter seems more promising (counter intuitive as that may be). A full study including a single dose as a fourth arm might be interesting. As was pointed out, the durability of immunity etc. is unknown for a single dose because everybody got a second.

[Goose]

I believe they are planning another trial (or at least they were):

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-healt...SKBN28620H

The question is whether what they have now is sufficient to get an EUA.  I would guess so, based on the stated goalposts (>50% efficacy and lower bound of the CI > 30%), which they meet.  Given that it offers the best chance to mass vaccinate quickly, I think it is probably worth moving forward with it.  But I would like to see a three arm trial of half-dose versus full-dose versus placebo (or at least the half-dose versus placebo) to verify the ~90%.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/astrazeneca...1607443250

AZ/Oxford will indeed submit the data.

BC

You raise an interesting question. The totality of their existing trials seems to justify an EUA, but for exactly what? From what I read, it would be the full dose both times, because there isn't as much data on the half followed by full? Yet the latter seems more promising (counter intuitive as that may be). A full study including a single dose as a fourth arm might be interesting. As was pointed out, the durability of immunity etc. is unknown for a single dose because everybody got a second.