Encouraging the development of new vaccines

Pregnant women & vaccines against emerging epidemic threats: Ethics guidance for preparedness, research, and response

Zika virus, influenza, and Ebola have called attention to the ways in which infectious disease outbreaks can severely - and at times uniquely - affect the health interests of pregnant women and their offspring. These examples also highlight the critical need to proactively consider pregnant women and their offspring in vaccine research and response efforts to combat emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases. Historically, pregnant women and their offspring have been largely excluded from research agendas and investment strategies for vaccines against epidemic threats, which in turn can lead to exclusion from future vaccine campaigns amidst outbreaks. This state of affairs is profoundly unjust to pregnant women and their offspring, and deeply problematic from the standpoint of public health. To ensure that the needs of pregnant women and their offspring are fairly addressed, new approaches to public health preparedness, vaccine research and development, and vaccine delivery are required. This Guidance offers 22 concrete recommendations that provide a roadmap for the ethically responsible, socially just, and respectful inclusion of the interests of pregnant women in the development and deployment of vaccines against emerging pathogens. The Guidance was developed by the Pregnancy Research Ethics for Vaccines, Epidemics, and New Technologies (PREVENT) Working Group - a multidisciplinary, international team of 17 experts specializing in bioethics, maternal immunization, maternal-fetal medicine, obstetrics, pediatrics, philosophy, public health, and vaccine research and policy - in consultation with a variety of external experts and stakeholders.

Valuing vaccination

Vaccination has led to remarkable health gains over the last century. However, large coverage gaps remain, which will require significant financial resources and political will to address. In recent years, a compelling line of inquiry has established the economic benefits of health, at both the individual and aggregate levels. Most existing economic evaluations of particular health interventions fail to account for this new research, leading to potentially sizable undervaluation of those interventions. In line with this new research, we set forth a framework for conceptualizing the full benefits of vaccination, including avoided medical care costs, outcome-related productivity gains, behavior-related productivity gains, community health externalities, community economic externalities, and the value of risk reduction and pure health gains. We also review literature highlighting the magnitude of these sources of benefit for different vaccinations. Finally, we outline the steps that need to be taken to implement a broad-approach economic evaluation and discuss the implications of this work for research, policy, and resource allocation for vaccine development and delivery.

Pricing of new vaccines

New vaccine pricing is a complicated process that could have substantial long-standing scientific, medical, and public health ramifications. Pricing can have a considerable impact on new vaccine adoption and, thereby, either culminate or thwart years of research and development and public health efforts. Typically, pricing strategy consists of the following ten components: 1. Conduct a target population analysis; 2. Map potential competitors and alternatives; 3. Construct a vaccine target product profile (TPP) and compare it to projected or actual TPPs of competing vaccines; 4. Quantify the incremental value of the new vaccine's characteristics; 5. Determine vaccine positioning in the marketplace; 6. Estimate the vaccine price-demand curve; 7. Calculate vaccine costs (including those of manufacturing, distribution, and research and development); 8. Account for various legal, regulatory, third party payer, and competitor factors; 9. Consider the overall product portfolio; 10. Set pricing objectives; 11. Select pricing and pricing structure. While the biomedical literature contains some studies that have addressed these components, there is still considerable room for more extensive evaluation of this important area.

Should financial incentives be used to differentially reward 'me-too' and innovative drugs?

Strategies to change the existing mix of innovative and 'me-too' drugs are intended to increase societal value of a given investment in R&D by providing an incentive for firms to invest in drugs that are more likely to be clinically innovative. How can financial incentives be used to change this mix? Will a strategy have its intended consequence or will it have the unintended outcome of reducing the rate at which the population burden of disease is reduced? The perspective of this review is a country such as Australia, Canada or the UK that has universal health insurance and a drug reimbursement process that is informed by economic evidence. A review of the literature was performed and the views of both the proponents and the opponents of such strategies and the mechanisms by which they could be implemented were summarized. The debate is based largely on hypothesized responses by firms to changes in incentives rather than empirical evidence. The main point of contention is whether a changed mix of new molecular entities (NMEs) increases or decreases the total amount of clinical innovation launched each year. The argument presented in this article is that, despite the limited empirical evidence, it is possible to improve our assessment of the likely costs and consequences of a proposed strategy by appealing to economic theory and observations about the reimbursement process. First, the empirical evidence supporting the view that changing a mix of drugs will improve clinical innovation is based on the average launched drug, not the marginal innovative drug otherwise not developed, and therefore could be misleading. Second, the dynamic and complex nature of evidence of clinical innovation will reduce the feasibility of using contractually based mechanisms to implement such a strategy. Also, a single country is unlikely to have an impact on R&D decisions, and variation in the per capita economic value of new drugs would make multi-jurisdiction contracts with one firm difficult to implement. Third, the quality of evidence of the clinical innovation of the lead drug could be reduced if there are fewer or no follow-on drugs. Finally, the existing inefficiencies in the process of displacement to finance new technologies from a capped budget reduces the efficiency with which any additional potential clinical innovation from NMEs will be translated to reduced population burden of disease. The article concludes that it is possible that such a strategy could be costly to implement, and the impact on global burden of disease uncertain in both direction and magnitude. This is likely to be the case even if the average clinical innovation content of innovative NMEs is higher than for me-too NMEs and the mechanisms designed to change the mix of NMEs are effective. Other options to improve the effectiveness with which pharmaceutical clinical innovation reduces burden of disease should be explored, including improved efficiency of both firm R&D and the process of disinvestment to finance new technologies.

Emerging markets & emerging needs: developing countries vaccine manufacturers' perspective & its current status

The success of vaccination has remained an important contribution towards public health in both industrialised and developing countries. However, there are still unmet public health needs in vaccine preventable diseases owing to issues related to affordability, supply, public awareness, research and development, intellectual property, skilled human resource, etc. Various global initiatives are being taken to tackle such issues. DCVMN, Developing Country Vaccine Manufacturers' Network, is one of such novel initiatives by developing countries, and is playing an important role in facilitating cheaper and quality vaccines to children of the world. DCVMN has become an international body for emerging vaccine manufacturers from the developing world. This manuscript provides an overview of DCVMN with respect to its origin, objectives, achievements, limitations and expectations.

Market incentives and pharmaceutical innovation

I study the impact of the Orphan Drug Act (ODA), which established tax incentives for rare disease drug development. I examine the flow of new clinical drug trials for a large set of rare diseases. Among more prevalent rare diseases, the ODA led to a significant and sustained increase in new trials. The impact for less prevalent rare diseases was limited to an increase in the stock of drugs. Tax credits can stimulate R & D; yet because they leave revenue margins unaffected, tax credits appear to have a more limited impact on private innovation in markets with smaller revenue potential.

Impact of economic, regulatory, and patent policies on innovation in cancer chemoprevention

Chemoprevention agents are an emerging new scientific area that holds out the promise of delaying or avoiding a number of common cancers. These new agents face significant scientific, regulatory, and economic barriers, however, which have limited investment in their research and development (R&D). These barriers include above-average clinical trial scales, lengthy time frames between discovery and Food and Drug Administration approval, liability risks (because they are given to healthy individuals), and a growing funding gap for early-stage candidates. The longer time frames and risks associated with chemoprevention also cause exclusivity time on core patents to be limited or subject to significant uncertainties. We conclude that chemoprevention uniquely challenges the structure of incentives embodied in the economic, regulatory, and patent policies for the biopharmaceutical industry. Many of these policy issues are illustrated by the recently Food and Drug Administration-approved preventive agents Gardasil and raloxifene. Our recommendations to increase R&D investment in chemoprevention agents include (a) increased data exclusivity times on new biological and chemical drugs to compensate for longer gestation periods and increasing R&D costs; chemoprevention is at the far end of the distribution in this regard; (b) policies such as early-stage research grants and clinical development tax credits targeted specifically to chemoprevention agents (these are policies that have been very successful in increasing R&D investment for orphan drugs); and (c) a no-fault liability insurance program like that currently in place for children's vaccines.

Developing drugs for developing countries

Infectious and parasitic diseases create enormous health burdens, but because most of the people suffering from these diseases are poor, little is invested in developing treatments. We propose that developers of treatments for neglected diseases receive a "priority review voucher." The voucher could save an average of one year of U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) review and be sold by the developer to the manufacturer of a blockbuster drug. In a well-functioning market, the voucher would speed access to highly valued treatments. Thus, the voucher could benefit consumers in both developing and developed countries at relatively low cost to the taxpayer.

Translation of an experimental oral vaccine formulation into a commercial product

An effective experimental vaccine may fail to become a therapeutic reality for a number of scientific, regulatory or commercial reasons. In this review, we share some of our personal experiences as University-based researchers and provide an account of some of the problems that we have encountered during preliminary scale-up and assessment of an oral influenza vaccine formulation. Many of the problems we have faced have been non-scientific and related to identifying project-funding sources, finding suitable contract manufacturing companies that are GMP compliant, and protecting intellectual property generated from the scientific studies. The review is intended as a practical guide that will allow other researchers to adopt effective strategies to permit the translation of an effective experimental formulation to a viable commercial product.