11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Decision Analysis of the COVID-19 Vaccines

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The entire globe is struggling with the COVID-19 pandemic since March 11, 2020. There is still a large number of infected patients and death, and there is no proven treatment for the infection yet. This has led to the race in vaccine development to protect people from COVID-19 infection. As of February 3, 2021, there were 289 experimental COVID -19 vaccines in development, 66 of which were in clinical trials with different phases, and 20 of them were in phase 3.

          This study aims to evaluate 15 important vaccines based on criteria such as the dose number, dosing schedule, storage advantages, efficacy, and side effect. In this evaluation, we use the fuzzy PROMETHEE approach, which is an important Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) technique. The importance level of the criteria is determined based on expert opinion. The result shows that the EpiVacCorona vaccine is the most effective vaccine to prevent COVID-19 infections based on the selected criteria and the importance level of each criterion.

          The result obtained may change based on individual or expert’s priorities. Due to the use of different criteria for the ranking and different weightings of the criteria, the ranking result may differ. This study also shows the strengths and weaknesses of the selected vaccines and the applicability of the MCDM technique for the evaluation of COVID -19 vaccines.

          Related collections

          Most cited references18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The species Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus : classifying 2019-nCoV and naming it SARS-CoV-2

          The present outbreak of a coronavirus-associated acute respiratory disease called coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is the third documented spillover of an animal coronavirus to humans in only two decades that has resulted in a major epidemic. The Coronaviridae Study Group (CSG) of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses, which is responsible for developing the classification of viruses and taxon nomenclature of the family Coronaviridae, has assessed the placement of the human pathogen, tentatively named 2019-nCoV, within the Coronaviridae. Based on phylogeny, taxonomy and established practice, the CSG recognizes this virus as forming a sister clade to the prototype human and bat severe acute respiratory syndrome coronaviruses (SARS-CoVs) of the species Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus, and designates it as SARS-CoV-2. In order to facilitate communication, the CSG proposes to use the following naming convention for individual isolates: SARS-CoV-2/host/location/isolate/date. While the full spectrum of clinical manifestations associated with SARS-CoV-2 infections in humans remains to be determined, the independent zoonotic transmission of SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 highlights the need for studying viruses at the species level to complement research focused on individual pathogenic viruses of immediate significance. This will improve our understanding of virus–host interactions in an ever-changing environment and enhance our preparedness for future outbreaks.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Challenges in ensuring global access to COVID-19 vaccines: production, affordability, allocation, and deployment

            The COVID-19 pandemic is unlikely to end until there is global roll-out of vaccines that protect against severe disease and preferably drive herd immunity. Regulators in numerous countries have authorised or approved COVID-19 vaccines for human use, with more expected to be licensed in 2021. Yet having licensed vaccines is not enough to achieve global control of COVID-19: they also need to be produced at scale, priced affordably, allocated globally so that they are available where needed, and widely deployed in local communities. In this Health Policy paper, we review potential challenges to success in each of these dimensions and discuss policy implications. To guide our review, we developed a dashboard to highlight key characteristics of 26 leading vaccine candidates, including efficacy levels, dosing regimens, storage requirements, prices, production capacities in 2021, and stocks reserved for low-income and middle-income countries. We use a traffic-light system to signal the potential contributions of each candidate to achieving global vaccine immunity, highlighting important trade-offs that policy makers need to consider when developing and implementing vaccination programmes. Although specific datapoints are subject to change as the pandemic response progresses, the dashboard will continue to provide a useful lens through which to analyse the key issues affecting the use of COVID-19 vaccines. We also present original data from a 32-country survey (n=26 758) on potential acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines, conducted from October to December, 2020. Vaccine acceptance was highest in Vietnam (98%), India (91%), China (91%), Denmark (87%), and South Korea (87%), and lowest in Serbia (38%), Croatia (41%), France (44%), Lebanon (44%), and Paraguay (51%).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, BBIBP-CorV: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1/2 trial

              Background The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic warrants accelerated efforts to test vaccine candidates. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine candidate, BBIBP-CorV, in humans. Methods We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1/2 trial at Shangqiu City Liangyuan District Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Henan Province, China. In phase 1, healthy people aged 18–80 years, who were negative for serum-specific IgM/IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 at the time of screening, were separated into two age groups (18–59 years and ≥60 years) and randomly assigned to receive vaccine or placebo in a two-dose schedule of 2 μg, 4 μg, or 8 μg on days 0 and 28. In phase 2, healthy adults (aged 18–59 years) were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive vaccine or placebo on a single-dose schedule of 8 μg on day 0 or on a two-dose schedule of 4 μg on days 0 and 14, 0 and 21, or 0 and 28. Participants within each cohort were randomly assigned by stratified block randomisation (block size eight) and allocated (3:1) to receive vaccine or placebo. Group allocation was concealed from participants, investigators, and outcome assessors. The primary outcomes were safety and tolerability. The secondary outcome was immunogenicity, assessed as the neutralising antibody responses against infectious SARS-CoV-2. This study is registered with www.chictr.org.cn, ChiCTR2000032459. Findings In phase 1, 192 participants were enrolled (mean age 53·7 years [SD 15·6]) and were randomly assigned to receive vaccine (2 μg [n=24], 4 μg [n=24], or 8 μg [n=24] for both age groups [18–59 years and ≥60 years]) or placebo (n=24). At least one adverse reaction was reported within the first 7 days of inoculation in 42 (29%) of 144 vaccine recipients. The most common systematic adverse reaction was fever (18–59 years, one [4%] in the 2 μg group, one [4%] in the 4 μg group, and two [8%] in the 8 μg group; ≥60 years, one [4%] in the 8 μg group). All adverse reactions were mild or moderate in severity. No serious adverse event was reported within 28 days post vaccination. Neutralising antibody geometric mean titres were higher at day 42 in the group aged 18–59 years (87·7 [95% CI 64·9–118·6], 2 μg group; 211·2 [158·9–280·6], 4 μg group; and 228·7 [186·1–281·1], 8 μg group) and the group aged 60 years and older (80·7 [65·4–99·6], 2 μg group; 131·5 [108·2–159·7], 4 μg group; and 170·87 [133·0–219·5], 8 μg group) compared with the placebo group (2·0 [2·0–2·0]). In phase 2, 448 participants were enrolled (mean age 41·7 years [SD 9·9]) and were randomly assigned to receive the vaccine (8 μg on day 0 [n=84] or 4 μg on days 0 and 14 [n=84], days 0 and 21 [n=84], or days 0 and 28 [n=84]) or placebo on the same schedules (n=112). At least one adverse reaction within the first 7 days was reported in 76 (23%) of 336 vaccine recipients (33 [39%], 8 μg day 0; 18 [21%], 4 μg days 0 and 14; 15 [18%], 4 μg days 0 and 21; and ten [12%], 4 μg days 0 and 28). One placebo recipient in the 4 μg days 0 and 21 group reported grade 3 fever, but was self-limited and recovered. All other adverse reactions were mild or moderate in severity. The most common systematic adverse reaction was fever (one [1%], 8 μg day 0; one [1%], 4 μg days 0 and 14; three [4%], 4 μg days 0 and 21; two [2%], 4 μg days 0 and 28). The vaccine-elicited neutralising antibody titres on day 28 were significantly greater in the 4 μg days 0 and 14 (169·5, 95% CI 132·2–217·1), days 0 and 21 (282·7, 221·2–361·4), and days 0 and 28 (218·0, 181·8–261·3) schedules than the 8 μg day 0 schedule (14·7, 11·6–18·8; all p<0·001). Interpretation The inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, BBIBP-CorV, is safe and well tolerated at all tested doses in two age groups. Humoral responses against SARS-CoV-2 were induced in all vaccine recipients on day 42. Two-dose immunisation with 4 μg vaccine on days 0 and 21 or days 0 and 28 achieved higher neutralising antibody titres than the single 8 μg dose or 4 μg dose on days 0 and 14. Funding National Program on Key Research Project of China, National Mega projects of China for Major Infectious Diseases, National Mega Projects of China for New Drug Creation, and Beijing Science and Technology Plan.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                The EuroBiotech Journal
                Walter de Gruyter GmbH
                2564-615X
                June 17 2021
                June 17 2021
                June 01 2021
                June 17 2021
                June 17 2021
                June 01 2021
                : 5
                : s1
                : 20-25
                Affiliations
                [1 ]DESAM Institute, Near East University , Nicosia , TRNC, Mersin 10 , Turkey
                [2 ]Department of Biomedical Engineering, Near East University , Nicosia , TRNC, Mersin 10 , Turkey
                [3 ]Medical Diagnostic Imaging Department, College of Health Science, University of Sharjah , Sharjah , United Arab Emirates
                [4 ]Common Course Coordination, Near East University , Nicosia , TRNC, Mersin 10 , Turkey
                [5 ]Faculty of Pharmacy, Near East University , Nicosia , TRNC, Mersin 10 , Turkey
                [6 ]Faculty of Dentistry, Near East University , Nicosia , TRNC, Mersin 10 , Turkey
                [7 ]Department of Mathematics, Near East University , Nicosia , TRNC, Mersin 10 , Turkey
                Article
                10.2478/ebtj-2021-0017
                eb16765f-51ef-43a4-951b-98da92f76e17
                © 2021

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article