Pfizer, 21 days or 42 days to carry out the second dose of the vaccine? Here are the latest news and what the experts say, but also the company, on the postponement of the recall with the 6-week interval between administrations, a topic that has been on the agenda for days in Italy engaged in the anti Covid vaccination campaign. Read also Professor Franco Locatelli, president of the Higher Council of Health, is clear about the strategy that provides for a distance of 42 days between the two doses of the drug: “As a doctor, I answer very clearly: the interval between the first and the second prolonged administration of the “mRna anti-Covid vaccine” to the sixth week, therefore to 42 days, does not in any way affect the efficacy of immunization and allows us to be able to administer many more doses of the vaccine “, says Locatelli at Agorà. “I understand that those who work in the industry have very protective attitudes towards the studies conducted and these studies were mainly concerned with a 21-day interval” between the two doses, “but the real life studies that have accumulated have indicated exactly what I was saying. before and statements like the ones we heard yesterday “from Pfizer” are only likely to create confusion and I think they would hopefully be avoidable, “he adds.” It is true that they have made the vaccine but it is also true that it has been certified by the regulatory bodies. ‘a choice that helps us in the vaccination plan but made on scientific assessments “, Andrea Costa, Undersecretary of Health, guest of’ Buongiorno ‘, then explained to Sky TG24. “We are faced not with a political choice but with a choice that politics makes on the basis of medical-scientific evaluations. Pfizer’s words do not help to clarify because if we continue to give messages that are not univocal and clear, we risk generating a feeling of confusion among citizens. The choice to postpone the second dose to 42 days was made on the basis of the opinions of the CTS which in turn followed the opinions of the EMA. We continue on this choice because it is supported by scientific opinions and by the EMA “.
Even the councilor for Health of the Lazio Region, Alessio D’Amato, defends the regional strategy regarding the vaccination plan and in particular on the possibility of extending the time of the second recall. Speaking on the 24 Mattino program on Radio 24, he also indirectly replied to Pfizer who had pronounced negatively regarding this possibility: “The words of Pfizer’s health director do not surprise me, it is normal for the innkeeper to say that his wine is good. The problem here is a public health order to have a double objective: to increase the number of vaccinated subjects where the effectiveness of the protection does not substantially change, because we now have field trials conducted on thousands of users in which already after the first dose the protection is already over 80%. I believe that in a situation like the current one, still transitional like this month of May, in which we do not yet have all the doses, because despite the commendable efforts of General Figliuolo we will only have them available. in June, I think that the strategy of increasing the audience is an important strategy. I can only say that yesterday as regards Lazio after seven me yes we had the lowest rate of number of positive cases per day so it means that the direction is the right one ”, he explains.
But what did Pfizer say? “The vaccine was studied for a second administration at 21 days. Data on a longer range of administration at the moment we do not have any except in real life observations, as has been done in the UK. It is an evaluation of the Cts that has its bases, we will observe what happens. Like Pfizer, however, I say to stick to what has emerged from scientific studies, then the administration at 21 days, because this guarantees the results that allowed the authorization “, yesterday’s words to Sky Tg24 Valeria Marino, medical director of Pfizer Italia on the lengthening of the window for the administration of the second dose. “We must also study the need for the third dose – added Marino -. We have data that demonstrate immune coverage at six months. , we must observe the next six months. A third dose may be possible but perhaps not necessary, unless there are any variations, in which case a ‘buster’ dose it might be useful. On the annual vaccine – he concluded – we must be very cautious, it may be necessary within the year or maybe within two “.