Vir Biotechnology’s biggest Covid-19 effort has been their monoclonal antibody, a bid they say has since proven
effective
, but it isn’t their only effort.
Last year, the infectious disease biotech signed a deal with Alnylam to co-develop an inhalable siRNA drug that would slice up the viruses inside a patient’s lungs. It would be in the clinic around January, the partners said.
That never happened. The calendar turned without word, and at some point in the past few weeks, Vir removed the candidate from their pipeline online. A spokesperson for Alnylam said that they had seen “some evidence of efficacy” in the lab, but not enough to bring it into the clinic. They offered no timeline for starting a trial.
“We now have preclinical data showing some evidence of efficacy, however, we plan to collect some additional preclinical data relative to current and emerging therapies,” they said. “We will guide on timelines to an IND at a future date after making more progress with our animal studies.”
A spokesperson for Vir said they would continue to develop the drug, but that it was not their main focus.
“It is not as front and center the way [monoclonal antibodies] are, but we continue to explore alternative modalities for COVID, including siRNA,” they said.
The candidate, called ALN-CoV or Vir-2703, joins a raft of early-stage or clinical efforts, from the pandemic’s early months to face setbacks after initial optimism.
Vir has also explored small molecules for Covid-19, although they’ve yet to announce any candidates. Their Covid-19 neutralizing antibody, the centerpiece of their pandemic program, recently
failed
in hospitalized patients but proved effective in moderate patients, reducing the risk of hospitalization or death by 85%.
The siRNA candidate was part of a broader collaboration between the two companies that dates back to Vir’s launch in 2017. That effort is centered on one part of a potential cure for hepatitis B, now in Phase II. —
Jason Mast
Last month, South Africa
halted the rollout
of AstraZeneca and Oxford University’s Covid-19 vaccine after a study showed it didn’t protect against mild-to-moderate cases caused by the B.1.351 variant, which is now widespread in the country. Now we’re getting a look at the data.
While the vaccine was showing an efficacy of around 75% prior to the spread of B.1.351, a new analysis suggested the vaccine is only 10.4% effective against the variant, according to data
published
in the
New England Journal of Medicine.
The study enrolled 2,026 HIV-negative adults, about half of whom were randomized to receive the vaccine. A total of 42 came down with Covid-19, and 39 of those cases were caused by the B.1.351 variant. Overall efficacy in this group, which consisted mostly of cases linked to the variant, was just under 22%.
“What this data don’t tell us is whether or not this vaccine might still protect at least against severe Covid-19,” Shabir Madhi, chief investigator of the study, said during a briefing last month.
Two days after halting the country’s rollout of AstraZeneca and Oxford University’s Covid-19 vaccine, South Africa’s government said it was
considering
selling or exchanging the doses it had already received.
Work is underway to produce a second-generation version of the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine to target new variants, according to a news release.
The only serious adverse event to occur was a body temp over 104 degrees Fahrenheit (40 degrees Celsius) after the first dose, according to the researchers. The fever subsided within 24 hours, and all other events were deemed unrelated or unlikely to be related to the vaccine.
The news comes as a growing list of countries pause distribution of the vaccine due to reports of blood clots. Austria
pulled
one batch of the shots last week after a 49-year-old woman died of “severe coagulation disorders,” and another 35-year-old woman suffered a pulmonary embolism. Other countries, including Germany, Italy, Spain, France, Norway, Austria and Thailand, have since followed suit.
The EMA is currently reviewing the cases, and said in a statement that there’s currently no indication that the vaccines caused the events.
The
New York Times
reported
that the pauses could have more to do with politics than they do with scientific concerns. Nicola Magrini, director general of Italy’s medicines authority AIFA, told the
La Repubblica
newspaper
that the choice to suspend the vaccine was “a political one,” made because other European countries decided to do so, per the Times.
For a look at all
Endpoints News
coronavirus stories, check out our
special news channel
.