Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32513202›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2020

From COVID-19 research to vaccine application: why might it take 17 months not 17 years and what are the wider lessons?

Stephen R Hanney, Steven Wooding, Jon Sussex, Jonathan Grant

Open access · goldAbstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
23.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 92 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Vaccine Innovation Meta-Model for Pandemic Contexts.Journal of pharmaceutical innovation · 2023
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Stephen R HanneyHealth Economics Research Group, Brunel University London, Kingston Lane, Uxbridge, UK. stephen.hanney@brunel.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7415-5932
Steven WoodingResearch Strategy Office, University of Cambridge, Old Schools, Cambridge, UK.
Jon SussexRAND Europe, Westbrook Centre, Milton Road, Cambridge, UK.
Jonathan GrantPolicy Institute at King's, King's College London, Virginia Woolf Building, 22 Kingsway, London, UK.
Brunel University of London · GBKing's College London · GBRAND Europe · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is often said that it takes 17 years to move medical research from bench to bedside. In a coronavirus disease (COVID-19) world, such time-lags feel intolerable. In these extraordinary circumstances could years be made into months? If so, could those lessons be used to accelerate medical research when the crisis eases?To measure time-lags in health and biomedical research as well as to identify ways of reducing them, we developed and published (in 2015) a matrix consisting of overlapping tracks (or stages/phases) in the translation from discovery research to developed products, policies and practice. The matrix aids analysis by highlighting the time and actions required to develop research (and its translation) both (1) along each track and (2) from one track to another, e.g. from the discovery track to the research-in-humans track. We noted four main approaches to reducing time-lags, namely increasing resources, working in parallel, starting or working at risk, and improving processes.Examining these approaches alongside the matrix helps interpret the enormous global effort to develop a vaccine for the 2019 novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19. Rapid progress in the discovery/basic and human research tracks is being made through a combination of large-scale funding, work being conducted in parallel (between different teams globally and through working in overlapping tracks), working at greater (but proportionate) risk to safety than usual, and adopting various new processes. The overlapping work of some of the teams involves continuing animal research whilst entering vaccine candidates into Phase I trials alongside planning their Phase II trials. The additional funding available helps to reduce some of the usual financial risks in moving so quickly. Going forward through the increasingly large human trials for safety, dosage and efficacy, it will be vital to overlap work in parallel in the often challenging public policy and clinical tracks. Thus, regulatory and reimbursement bodies are beginning and preparing rapid action to pull vaccines proving to be safe and effective through to extraordinarily rapid application to the general population. Monitoring the development of a COVID-19 vaccine using the matrix (modified as necessary) could help identify which of the approaches speeding development and deployment could be usefully applied more widely in the future.

Indexed as

BetacoronavirusViral VaccinesBiomedical ResearchCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesDrug ApprovalDrug DiscoveryHumansPandemicsPneumonia, ViralRisk AssessmentSARS-CoV-2Time FactorsTranslational Research, BiomedicalCOVID-19 VaccinesViral VaccinesCoronavirus diseaseCOVID-19MatrixPandemicResearch translationSARS-CoV-2Time-lagsTimescalesTrialsVaccineWorld Health Organization

Identifiers

PMID32513202
PMCPMC7276964
OpenAlexW3033469779

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.