Investing in a global pooled-funding mechanism for late-stage clinical trials of poverty-related and neglected diseases
An economic evaluation
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21881653 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Armand Zimmerman (0000-0002-1216-581X, Duke University), Mohamed Mustafa Diab (0000-0003-2741-349X, Duke University), Marco Schäferhoff (0000-0002-5216-9890, Open Consultants, Berlin, Germany), Kaci Kennedy Mcdade (0000-0002-0469-229X, Duke University), Gavin Yamey (0000-0002-8390-7382, Duke University), Osondu Ogbuoji (0000-0003-2472-6861, Duke University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | e011842 |
| Publication date | 2023-05-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | BMJ Global Health (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2059-7908 • E-ISSN: 2059-7908 |
| Publisher | BMJ (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1136/bmjgh-2023-011842 |
| PMID | 37247874 |
| OpenAlex | W4378716666 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 18 |
INTRODUCTION: Poverty-related and neglected diseases (PRNDs) cause over three million deaths annually. Despite this burden, there is a large gap between actual funding for PRND research and development (R&D) and the funding needed to launch PRND products from the R&D pipeline. This study provides an economic evaluation of a theoretical global pooled-funding mechanism to finance late-stage clinical trials of PRND products. METHODS: We modelled three pooled-funding design options, each based on a different level of coverage of candidate products for WHO's list of PRNDs: (1) vaccines covering 4 PRNDs, (2) vaccines and therapeutics covering 9 PRNDs and (3) vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics covering 30 PRNDs. For each option, we constructed a discrete event simulation of the 2019 PRND R&D pipeline to estimate required funding for phase III trials and expected product launches through 2035. For each launch, we estimated global PRND treatment costs averted, deaths averted and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted. For each design option, we calculated the cost per death averted, cost per DALY averted, the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: Option 1 averts 18.4 million deaths and 516 million DALYs, has a cost per DALY averted of US$84 and yields a BCR of 5.53. Option 2 averts 22.9 million deaths and 674 million DALYs, has a cost per DALY averted of US$75, an ICER over option 1 of US$49 and yields a BCR of 3.88. Option 3 averts 26.9 million deaths and 1 billion DALYs, has a cost per DALY averted of US$114, an ICER over option 2 of US$186 and yields a BCR of 2.52. CONCLUSIONS: All 3 options for a pooled-funding mechanism-vaccines for 4 PRNDs, vaccines and therapeutics for 9 PRNDs, and vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics for 30 PRNDs-would generate a large return on investment, avert a substantial proportion of the global burden of morbidity and mortality for diseases of poverty and be cost-effective
Cost–benefit analysis · Economic growth · Economics · Neglected tropical diseases · Political science · Poverty · Public health · Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life · Medicine · Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy · Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
| Citations per year | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2024 - 2024 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |