Ethical considerations for protecting the options of subjects in primary epidemic vaccine trials

The recent review by Monrad1 presents several issues about secondary vaccine trials. It lays out the case in which a vaccine has been tested through phases I–III and is being deployed. Subsequently (emphasis added), consideration is being given to conducting ‘trials for another vaccine for the pathogen’.

Monrad states: ‘In summary, we may say that researchers have strong prima facie reasons not to conduct a secondary vaccine trial.’

Monrad discusses several factors meriting careful consideration about the need for developing and testing more than one vaccine: relative efficacy, length of immunity, adverse reactions (reactogenicity), ease of storage and administration, economic and logistical factors.

What is not addressed are the ethical duties that exist when there are competing phase III vaccine candidates for COVID-19. We have serious concerns about potential ethical inadequacies about these ongoing trials and those soon to begin.

Imagine an ongoing double-blind study has randomised volunteers, half will get placebo…

Read the full article ›