The chief executive of AstraZeneca rejected suggestions that the UK is being unfairly prioritized for doses of the Covid-19 vaccine, in a wide-ranging interview that revealed “flaws” that restricted production.
Pascal Soriot offered the deepest view of a scientific process that was dragged into the political sphere, while leaders in Brussels and in several EU capitals expressed anger that Europe did not receive the vaccine as quickly as it hoped.
He also spoke about the “single dose” strategy and the vaccine’s effectiveness against new variants. Here’s what we learned from Soriot’s comments to the Italian newspaper La Repubblica.
Why are EU leaders angry?
The EU ordered 80 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine by the end of March, but the Anglo-Swedish company said it could only deliver 31 million doses, with deliveries in the next quarter likely 50% lower.
The escalation of the line, which precedes a decision by the European Medicines Agency on Friday to approve the vaccine, even led to suggestions from Brussels that exports of doses from the EU could be banned.
On Wednesday, the European commission said that AstraZeneca had given up on the negotiations scheduled for the night, only for the company to deny it minutes later, insisting that the summit was still taking place.
What does the company say?
AstraZeneca’s contract with the EU is based on “best effort,” said Soriot, which means that the company is required to produce as much vaccine as possible, but is not legally committed to fulfilling the order in the volumes the EU wants.
However, on Wednesday, European leaders said Soriot misrepresented the contract and insisted that the company had signed an “advance purchase agreement”, promising to have sufficient capacity to deliver the order.
Why were there delays?
AstraZeneca has suffered production problems at the factories that produce the vaccine for Europe, especially at a location in Belgium.
“We are basically two months behind where we wanted to be,” said Soriot.
“The sites that have the lowest network productivity are the sites that supply Europe,” he added.
The vaccine is made in two distinct phases. The first is the “drug substance” – the vaccine itself – made for distribution in Europe in factories in the Netherlands and Belgium. The second is the “medicine”, in which the vaccine is taken to factories in Italy and Germany and placed in bottles for distribution to several countries and, ultimately, to doctors.
The production problem, said Soriot, is in the first phase of the “drug”, the manufacture of the vaccine itself. AstraZeneca uses vast “cell cultures” in batches of up to 2,000 liters. The virus is injected into cell cultures and the cells produce the vaccine.
However, some plants produce much more vaccine than others, up to three times as much.
Why was the UK not affected?
It is, or at least it was.
“We also had initial problems like that in the UK supply chain,” said Soriot.
The difference, he said, is that the UK signed its contract for doses of 100 million much earlier. As a result, there was more time for production problems to be resolved, which means that vaccine yields are higher.
“So with the UK, we had an extra three months to fix all the flaws we experienced,” he said.
Why did the UK change faster?
Soriot declined to comment on the timing of the EU. But he said that when AstraZeneca started developing the vaccine together with the University of Oxford, Oxford had already started working with the UK government on plans to distribute the vaccine.
AstraZeneca was able to take the Oxford processes and increase them. This advance was what allowed production failures to be corrected in the UK in time for the vaccine to be launched.
Where the flaws persist on European websites, the subsequent signing of the contract means that there has not yet been time to correct them.
Can UK doses be diverted to Europe?
In a word, no.
“The UK agreement was reached in June, three months ahead of the European,” said Soriot.
“As you can imagine, the UK government has said that the supply that leaves the UK supply chain will go to the UK first. Basically, this is how it is. “
AstraZeneca’s contract with the EU raises the possibility that part of the UK-made vaccine could be supplied to the EU, he said, but only after the UK government contract has been fulfilled.
This, said Soriot, is “quite fair”.
Is the “single dose” strategy sensible?
There has been disagreement over whether the UK was right to adopt a strategy to ensure that as many people as possible get their first dose and wait longer for a second dose, rather than administering both in a short time.
Soriot said he could not speak for the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines, but said the “one dose” strategy was “absolutely the right way to go” for AstraZeneca.
The company believes that one dose is 100% effective in preventing serious illness and hospitalization and up to 73% efficient overall. A second dose, he said, would be needed for long-term immunity.
What about the new variants?
Soriot was asked about the first signs that some vaccines are not as effective in new variants. The South African variant has been of particular concern. Soriot pointed out that the “neutralizing effect” of Moderna’s vaccine proved to be six times less. Tests are still being done with the AstraZeneca vaccine, but he said it was “logical” to expect reduced effectiveness.
However, he said that existing vaccines would probably still be able to control the virus enough to prevent serious diseases, while the company will continue to adapt vaccines to respond to new mutations.