A Breakthrough in R&amp;D for Neglected Diseases: New Ways to Get the Drugs We Need

Moran, Mary

doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020302

Cited by 149 publications

(92 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Leading donors for PDPs include the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), USAID, the United Kingdom Department for International Development and the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs [32]. For example, MMV uses ''push'' funding from the BMGF and other donors to fund clinical development of malaria drugs by companies in exchange for contractual guarantees that drugs will be made available to key populations at affordable prices [33].…”

Section: Better Definition Of Research Prioritiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orphan drugs policies: a suitable case for treatment

Drummond

Towse

2014

Eur J Health Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Current orphan drug policies are unsatisfactory when viewed from almost all perspectives. Patients find that, although therapies are available for many rare conditions, access to care is sometimes restricted. Pharmaceutical manufacturers have responded to the incentives for research embodied in orphan drug legislation, only to find that funds are not made available to pay for therapies once developed. Those funding health care find that most orphan drugs do not justify funding based on standard value for money criteria, yet that they face political problems if they fail to provide funding for therapy. Methods A literature review was conducted in order to determine the precise nature of the problems and to suggest potential solutions. Results Current orphan drug policies are not fit for the purpose and initiatives need to be taken in the areas of (1) clarifying society's views about the priority to be given to orphan drugs, (2) revising the arrangements for pricing and reimbursement of orphan drugs, (3) defining the priorities for research into rare diseases and (4) developing 'joined up' policies to deal with these issues. Conclusions Without changes in the current policies, pharmaceutical companies will eventually cease responding to the incentives to develop orphan drugs, because they will increasingly be uncertain whether the drugs, if developed, will be reimbursed.

show abstract

Section: Better Definition Of Research Prioritiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orphan drugs policies: a suitable case for treatment

Drummond

Towse

2014

Eur J Health Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…30 35 Of the more than 60 existing drug projects for neglected diseases, three-quarters are being performed under public-private partnerships. 36 In 2007, 23% (US$ 469 million) of funding for neglected disease research granted to external research organizations was done under this model. If funding from the National Institutes of Health is excluded from the analysis, they account for 42% of global research funding for neglected diseases.…”

Section: A New Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health research systems: promoting health equity or economic competitiveness?

Pratt

Loff

2011

Bull. World Health Organ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Technology development continues to rely on inputs from the industrially advanced economies and is often inappropriate to the needs of low income consumers and operating environments with poor infrastructure. The shortfall of these innovation processes with respect to meeting the health problems concentrated in developing economies (Malaria, HIV-positivity, TB) is increasingly widely-recognised, and being confronted (with varying degrees of success) within the context of the Global Fund, the Gates Foundation and other initiatives , Moran, 2005. In agriculture there are still too many examples of local agribusiness bypassing local S&T systems and relying on foreign sources of technology to provide up-to-date innovation responses (Keskin et al, 2008).…”

Section: Running On Tram-lines: Best Practice In Development-centmentioning

confidence: 99%

Below the radar: what does innovation in emerging economies have to offer other low-income economies?

Kaplinsky

Chataway

Clark

et al. 2009

International Journal of Technology Management &Amp; Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Between 1970 and 2000 the proportion of global R&D occurring in low income economies rose from two percent to more than 20 percent. However, this rising commitment to R&D does not easily translate into the emergence of a family of innovations meeting the needs of low income consumers "at the bottom of the pyramid", since much of these technological resources are invested in outdated structures of innovation. A number of transnational corporations are targeting these markets but it is our contention that much of the previously dominant innovation value chains are either ignorant of the needs of consumers at the bottom of the pyramid, or lack the technologies and organisational structures to meet these needs effectively. Instead, the firms and value chains that are likely to be most successful in these dynamic new markets are those that are emerging in China and India and other developing countries, disrupting global corporate and locational hierarchies of innovation.

show abstract

A Breakthrough in R&D for Neglected Diseases: New Ways to Get the Drugs We Need

Abstract: New research suggests that long-held beliefs on neglected disease drug development activity are no longer accurate.

Cited by 149 publications

References 4 publications

Orphan drugs policies: a suitable case for treatment

Orphan drugs policies: a suitable case for treatment

Health research systems: promoting health equity or economic competitiveness?

Below the radar: what does innovation in emerging economies have to offer other low-income economies?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About