Omicron-Specific Vaccine Shows No Significant Difference from Booster Shots [Reading Science]

Australian Research Team: "Infection and Severe Disease Prevention Effect, Slight Advantage"
Slightly Higher Than Additional Doses of Existing Vaccines but No Significant Difference
Could Become a Variable Ahead of US FDA Approval

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Bong-su] A study has found that the effectiveness of a new vaccine, developed specifically for the COVID-19 Omicron variant and nearing approval and large-scale distribution in major countries, is not significantly different from additional doses of existing vaccines.

A research team from the University of New South Wales in Australia published this study on the medical preprint site medRxiv on the 26th of last month.

The Omicron variant has spread worldwide since the end of last year, becoming the dominant strain and demonstrating tremendous transmissibility, causing a large-scale resurgence. In particular, vaccines developed against previous variants such as Delta have been shown to be ineffective in preventing infection, prompting global health authorities and pharmaceutical companies to accelerate the development and distribution of Omicron-specific vaccines that upgrade existing vaccines.

Already, the United Kingdom approved and began distributing the Omicron-specific vaccine on the 15th of last month, and the U.S. government is reportedly reviewing approval within this week. Pharmaceutical companies claim that the Omicron-specific vaccine offers better preventive effects than additional doses of existing vaccines. In June, Moderna CEO Stephen Hoge stated that their developed specific vaccine "definitely shows superior efficacy."

However, the research team's conclusion was somewhat different. They confirmed that the specific vaccine increases protection rates up to 90% when administered to a population where half have already developed immunity through previous vaccination or infection. However, they also found that additional doses of existing vaccines raise protection rates up to 86%. The difference in preventing severe illness was minimal. The specific vaccine reduced severe cases (hospitalizations) by about 8 per 1,000 people compared to additional doses of existing vaccines.

Accordingly, opinions in the medical community are divided regarding the specific vaccine. Dean Polman, a researcher at the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said, "That degree of difference is sufficient grounds to distribute the specific vaccine," adding, "The most important message of this study is that it is good to get vaccinated with any vaccine."

However, John Moore, a vaccine researcher at Weill Cornell Medicine, expressed concern, stating, "The specific vaccine has not been confirmed to provide significantly stronger protection compared to additional doses of existing vaccines," and warned, "Believing that the specific vaccine is much more effective could put many people at risk of infection."

Whether these research results will influence the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s approval decision is also being closely watched. Paul Offit, a vaccine researcher at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia who advises the FDA on specific vaccine approval, pointed out, "If the specific vaccine is not particularly better than existing vaccines, why distribute it?" and added, "It will hardly affect the rate of severe illness."