Evidence of meeting #19 for Canada-China Relations in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was vaccine.
A video is available from Parliament.
7:45 p.m.
Professor of Pediatrics and Microbiology & Immunology, Dalhousie University and Director, Canadian Center for Vaccinology, As an Individual
We have had security briefings, and I've met with a representative from CSIS on multiple occasions. I have his direct line if I ever have a concern or question.
7:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
I'm sorry to interrupt. That's the conclusion of Ms. Zann's time.
We now continue with Mr. Bergeron.
Mr. Bergeron, you have six minutes.
7:45 p.m.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Dr. Halperin, for being with us today.
You have been cut off twice already. So if you would like to take advantage of my first few minutes to complete your thoughts, I will gladly offer them to you, after which I may have a few questions to ask you.
7:45 p.m.
Professor of Pediatrics and Microbiology & Immunology, Dalhousie University and Director, Canadian Center for Vaccinology, As an Individual
Thank you very much.
I was just going to say that I do have a direct access to the experts at CSIS, and they have my number. They also call me on a routine basis to get any updates and discuss both general security issues and my centre's interaction with CanSino Biologics.
7:45 p.m.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
As for your opening speech, would you like to add to your thoughts? Had you covered everything?
7:45 p.m.
Professor of Pediatrics and Microbiology & Immunology, Dalhousie University and Director, Canadian Center for Vaccinology, As an Individual
I think mostly I was just going to complete that timeline and if there are any specific questions about my continued interaction with CanSino, I'd be happy to discuss those further, if there's any interest in that.
7:45 p.m.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
I understand that this partnership with CanSino was negotiated within the framework of a partnership with the National Research Council of Canada and that CanSino, somewhat unexpectedly, decided not to send the samples that would normally have been sent to you.
You told us earlier that you thought it was for political reasons.
Could you tell us more about this issue?
7:50 p.m.
Professor of Pediatrics and Microbiology & Immunology, Dalhousie University and Director, Canadian Center for Vaccinology, As an Individual
Yes, I'd be happy to.
The decision not to ship the vaccine to Canada was not made by CanSino. They were not able to get export agreement and it became clear during the month of August that this had nothing to do with just bureaucratic paperwork, because, as I was mentioning when I was cut off, that vaccine was then cleared to be shipped out of China to Russia, Pakistan and then eventually to Mexico, Chile and Argentina, which were part of the phase three trials that we had designed. It was clear that this was not just that CanSino wasn't able to ship out of the country, but that it was specific to Canada. That's when it became clear that it was political and that this was not something that was going to be solved by more paperwork.
At that time, the NRC decided that the agreement they had in order to manufacture the CanSino vaccine in Canada made no sense because they weren't able to get the vaccine, so they ended that collaboration.
In the meantime, we had designed the phase three study, the efficacy study, that was going to be done globally and we at CCFV continued to participate in the design and then the implementation of that study in other countries. The phase three study was never planned to take place in Canada because, very fortunately, our incidence of disease in Canada was really too low to have supported a phase three study.
7:50 p.m.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
You continue to contribute to the Phase III clinical trial of this vaccine.
What can you tell us about it today?
Do the studies and trials that have been carried out so far seem to be conclusive?
7:50 p.m.
Professor of Pediatrics and Microbiology & Immunology, Dalhousie University and Director, Canadian Center for Vaccinology, As an Individual
Yes, the phase three study was implemented. It began in September in Pakistan and Russia. Pakistan enrolled a large number of participants and then enrolment was started in Mexico, Chile and Argentina. Pakistan and Mexico were the two countries that contributed the most participants, volunteers, to the study. It underwent an interim analysis, the same type of analysis that was done by the Pfizer vaccine that received a lot of press. Pfizer vaccine's interim analysis was in December. CanSino's was at the end of January, and it was reported to have an efficacy of over 70%. Based on those results, it received emergency authorization in Pakistan and Mexico. There are multiple other countries where that emergency authorization is also being reviewed by their regulators. That vaccine is now being used in those countries under emergency authorization.
7:50 p.m.
Liberal
7:50 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Thank you very much.
I have to tell you though, Chair, your voice comes in and out off and on. I don't know why that is. It's not my earphones, I'll guarantee you that.
Thank you, Dr. Halperin, for joining us. It's a pleasure to have you with us. In your work with CanSino, am I right in assuming that your work on the phase three investigation continued in terms of supervision of some of the phase three trials in Pakistan and Mexico, or am I reading too much into the notes I have here?
7:55 p.m.
Professor of Pediatrics and Microbiology & Immunology, Dalhousie University and Director, Canadian Center for Vaccinology, As an Individual
You are absolutely correct.
I am the global principal investigator for that study. There are principal investigators in each of the individual countries, but I'm the overall investigator. My centre has the data team that's doing the data and statistical analyses and providing those results to the regulatory authorities in all of those countries.
7:55 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Would that have been the case with respect to the phase one trials that were expected to be undertaken in Canada as well?
7:55 p.m.
Professor of Pediatrics and Microbiology & Immunology, Dalhousie University and Director, Canadian Center for Vaccinology, As an Individual
That's right. We would have done that for the phase one and phase two studies in Canada. Then we would have gone on to phase three, globally. The reason, of course, is that if we had done those trials and gotten a vaccine here, then we would have had a vaccine that would have been available in Canada.
7:55 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
That vaccine has now been approved in some other countries and is in use.
7:55 p.m.
Professor of Pediatrics and Microbiology & Immunology, Dalhousie University and Director, Canadian Center for Vaccinology, As an Individual
That's correct.
7:55 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
You had told at some length that you are well aware of the security considerations in dealing with research with foreign entities and that you've been regularly in touch with CSIS and representatives. I have to assume there were no concerns raised about working with CanSino in respect of this project of development in Canada, whether it be the trials, the arrangement with NRC or the plans for production in Canada. Is that correct?
7:55 p.m.
Professor of Pediatrics and Microbiology & Immunology, Dalhousie University and Director, Canadian Center for Vaccinology, As an Individual
That's correct.
The concerns would actually more likely be in the opposite direction. In other words, we have their data. They're the sponsor of the clinical trial and they're paying for the clinical trial, but the data is held in Canada. There's no security concern that they may steal those data because they own that data.
I think there was more concern, not from the company's standpoint, but from the Chinese government's standpoint, that the data would be here in Canada and not in China.
7:55 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Beyond that, the question of intellectual property is always raised. The data would be intellectual property, of course. What about the vaccine itself? The vaccine that was being used—or was planned to be used—for the trials within Canada was all manufactured in China, I take it.
7:55 p.m.
Professor of Pediatrics and Microbiology & Immunology, Dalhousie University and Director, Canadian Center for Vaccinology, As an Individual
The plan had been that the initial vaccine we would have received would be from China, but then the NRC would receive the starting material for the production of that. Once the NRC's facility was upgraded and available—remembering that was at the very beginning, before NRC's facility was upgraded—they could start manufacturing it to then supply the latter stages of the vaccine needs to the clinical trials in Canada.
7:55 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
That would have involved a certain amount of technology or intellectual property transfer to Canada for the purpose of being able to manufacture that product and ensure it's quality standards and all of the things that go with that.
There was no difficulty with that either was there?