Toward more specific and transparent research and development costs: the case of seasonal influenza vaccines

Inequitable Distribution of Global Economic Benefits from Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccination

Many low- and middle-income countries have been slow to introduce the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) into their routine childhood immunization schedules despite a high burden of disease. We estimated the global economic surplus of PCV, defined as the sum of the net value to 194 countries (i.e., monetized health benefits minus net costs) and to vaccine manufacturers (i.e., profits). We further explored the distribution of global economic surplus across country income groups and manufacturers and the effect of different pricing strategies based on cross-subsidization, pooled procurement, and various tiered pricing mechanisms. We found that current PCV pricing policies disproportionately benefit high-income countries and manufacturers. Based on the 2021 birth cohort, high-income countries and manufacturers combined received 76.5% of the net economic benefits generated by the vaccine. Over the two decades of PCV availability, low- and middle-income countries have not received the full economic benefits of PCV. Cross-subsidization of the vaccine price for low- and middle-income countries and pooled procurement policies that would relate the vaccine price to the value of economic benefits generated for each country could reduce these inequalities. This analysis offers important considerations that may improve the equitable introduction and use of new and under-utilized vaccines.

Towards sustainability and affordability of expensive cell and gene therapies? Applying a cost-based pricing model to estimate prices for Libmeldy and Zolgensma

BACKGROUND AIMS

Drug prices are regarded as one of the most influential factors in determining accessibility and affordability to novel therapies. Cell and gene therapies such as OTL-200 (brand name: Libmeldy) and AVXS-101 (brand name: Zolgensma) with (expected) list prices of 3.0 million EUR and 1.9 million EUR per treatment, respectively, spark a global debate on the affordability of such therapies. The aim of this study was to use a recently published cost-based pricing model to calculate prices for cell and gene therapies, with OTL-200 and AVXS-101 as case study examples.

METHODS

Using the pricing model proposed by Uyl-de Groot and Löwenberg, we estimated a price for both therapies. We searched the literature and online public sources to estimate (i) research and development (R&D) expenses adjusted for risk of failure and cost of capital, (ii) the eligible patient population and (iii) costs of drug manufacturing to calculate a base-case price for OTL-200 and AVXS-101. All model input parameters were varied in a stepwise, deterministic sensitivity analysis and scenario analyses to assess their impact on the calculated prices.

RESULTS

Prices for OTL-200 and AVXS-101 were estimated at 1 048 138 EUR and 380 444 EUR per treatment, respectively. In deterministic sensitivity analyses, varying R&D estimates had the greatest impact on the price for OTL-200, whereas for AVXS-101, changes in the profit margin changed the calculated price substantially. Highest prices in scenario analyses were achieved when assuming the lowest number of patients for OTL-200 and highest R&D expenses for AVXS-101. The lowest R&D expenses scenario resulted in lowest prices for either therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that, using the proposed model, prices for both OTL-200 and AVXS-101 lie substantially below the currently (proposed) list prices for both therapies. Nevertheless, the uncertainty of the used model input parameters is considerable, which translates in a wide range of estimated prices. This is mainly because of a lack of transparency from pharmaceutical companies regarding R&D expenses and the costs of drug manufacturing. Simultaneously, the disease indications for both therapies remain heavily understudied in terms of their epidemiological profile. Despite the considerable variation in the estimated prices, our results may support the public debate on value-based and cost-based pricing models, and on "fair" drug prices in general.

How Much Does It Cost to Research and Develop a New Drug? A Systematic Review and Assessment

BACKGROUND

Debate over the viability of the current commercial research and development (R&D) model is ongoing. A controversial theme is the cost of bringing a new molecular entity (NME) to market.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to evaluate the range and suitability of published R&D cost estimates as to the degree to which they represent the actual costs of industry.

METHODS

We provided a systematic literature review based on articles found in the Pubmed, Embase and EconLit electronic databases, and in a previously published review. Articles published before March 2020 that estimated the total R&D costs were included (22 articles with 45 unique cost estimates). We included only literature in which the methods used to collect the information and to estimate the R&D costs were clearly described; therefore, three reports were excluded. We extracted average pre-launch R&D costs per NME and converted the values to 2019 US dollars (US$) using the gross domestic product (GDP) price deflator. We appraised the suitability of the R&D estimated costs by using a scoring system that captures three domains: (1) how success rates and development time used for cost estimation were obtained; (2) whether the study considered potential sources contributing to the variation in R&D costs; and (3) what the components of the cost estimation were.

RESULTS

Estimates of total average capitalized pre-launch R&D costs varied widely, ranging from $161 million to $4.54 billion (2019 US$). Therapeutic area-specific estimates were highest for anticancer drugs (between $944 million and $4.54 billion). Our analysis identified a trend of increasing R&D costs per NME over time but did not reveal a relation between cost estimates and study ranking when the suitability scores were assessed. We found no evidence of an increase in suitability scores over time.

CONCLUSION

There is no universally correct answer regarding how much it costs, on average, to research and develop an NME. Future studies should explicitly address previously neglected variables, which likely explain some variability in estimates, and consider the trade-off between the transparency and public accessibility of data and their specificity. Use of our proposed suitability scoring system may assist in addressing such issues.

Multi-country collaboration in responding to global infectious disease threats: lessons for Europe from the COVID-19 pandemic

Since 2005, the world has faced several public health emergencies of international concern arising from infectious disease outbreaks. Of these, the COVID-19 pandemic has had by far the greatest health and economic consequences. During these emergencies, responses taken by one country often have an impact on other countries. The implication is that coordination between countries is likely to achieve better outcomes, individually and collectively, than each country independently pursuing its own self-interest. During the COVID-19 pandemic, gaps in multilateral cooperation on research and information sharing, vaccine development and deployment, and travel policies have hampered the speed and equity of global recovery. In this Health Policy article, we explore how multilateral collaboration between countries is crucial to successful responses to public health emergencies linked to infectious disease outbreaks. Responding to future global infectious disease threats and other health emergencies will require the creation of stronger mechanisms for multilateral collaboration before they arise. A change to the governance of multilateral institutions is a logical next step, with a focus on providing equal ownership and leadership opportunities to all member countries. Europe can be an example and advocate for stronger and better governed multilateral institutions.

New Computational Approach for Peptide Vaccine Design Against SARS-COV-2

The design for vaccines using in silico analysis of genomic data of different viruses has taken many different paths, but lack of any precise computational approach has constrained them to alignment methods and some alignment-free techniques. In this work, a precise computational approach has been established wherein two new mathematical parameters have been suggested to identify the highly conserved and surface-exposed regions which are spread over a large region of the surface protein of the virus so that one can determine possible peptide vaccine candidates from those regions. The first parameter, w, is the sum of the normalized values of the measure of surface accessibility and the normalized measure of conservativeness, and the second parameter is the area of a triangle formed by a mathematical model named 2D Polygon Representation. This method has been, therefore, used to determine possible vaccine targets against SARS-CoV-2 by considering its surface-situated spike glycoprotein. The results of this model have been verified by a parallel analysis using the older approach of manually estimating the graphs describing the variation of conservativeness and surface-exposure across the protein sequence. Furthermore, the working of the method has been tested by applying it to find out peptide vaccine candidates for Zika and Hendra viruses respectively. A satisfactory consistency of the model results with pre-established results for both the test cases shows that this in silico alignment-free analysis proposed by the model is suitable not only to determine vaccine targets against SARS-CoV-2 but also ready to extend against other viruses.

Economic Evaluations of Internet-Based Psychological Interventions for Anxiety Disorders and Depression: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Internet-based interventions show clinical effectiveness for treating anxiety disorders and depression and could make mental healthcare more affordable.

METHODS

We searched databases including PubMed; EMBASE; Cochrane Central; PsychINFO; CINAHL; EconLit; and Web of Science from January 1, 2000 to August 21, 2020. Inclusion criteria were: 1) pertained to the treatment or prevention of anxiety disorders or depression; 2) evaluated the use of an internet-delivered psychological intervention; 3) recruited participants; and 4) reported costs or cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

Of the 6,069 articles identified, 33 targeted anxiety (N=13) and depression (n=20) and met final inclusion criteria. All studies were from high-income countries. The control conditions and cost components included were heterogeneous. Only eight studies reported costs of developing the intervention. Of 27 studies that made a conclusion about cost-effectiveness, 81% of interventions were cost-effective. The quality of studies included was high based on a quality assessment checklist of economic evaluations, although many studies did not include definitions of cost components or differentiate between patient-side and system-level costs.

LIMITATIONS

Studies varied in methodology, making conclusions about cost-effectiveness difficult. The generalizability of these results is unclear as studies were clustered in a small number of high-income countries and costs vary over time and between regions.

CONCLUSIONS

Internet-delivered interventions appeared to be cost-effective although control conditions and cost component reporting were variable. We propose a checklist of cost components for future cost analyses to better compare intervention costs. More research is needed to describe development costs, cost-effectiveness in low-resource settings, and cost-effectiveness of newer technologies.

Probability of Success and Timelines for the Development of Vaccines for Emerging and Reemerged Viral Infectious Diseases

BACKGROUND

Anticipated success rates and timelines for COVID-19 vaccine development vary. Recent experience with developing and testing viral vaccine candidates can inform expectations regarding the development of safe and effective vaccines.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate timelines and probabilities of success for recent vaccine candidates.

DESIGN

ClinicalTrials.gov was searched to identify trials testing viral vaccines that had not advanced to phase 2 before 2005, and the progress of each vaccine from phase 1 through to U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) licensure was tracked. Trial characteristics were double-coded. (Registration: Open Science Framework [https://osf.io/dmuzx/]).

SETTING

Trials launched between January 2005 and March 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

Preventive viral vaccine candidates for 23 emerging or reemerged viral infectious diseases.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary end point was the probability of vaccines advancing from launch of phase 2 to FDA licensure within 10 years.

RESULTS

In total, 606 clinical trials forming 220 distinct development trajectories (267 343 enrolled participants) were identified. The probability of vaccines progressing from phase 2 to licensure within 10 years was 10.0% (95% CI, 2.6% to 16.9%), with most approvals representing H1N1 or H5N1 vaccines. The average timeline from phase 2 to approval was 4.4 years (range, 6.4 weeks to 13.9 years). The probabilities of advancing from phase 1 to 2, phase 2 to 3, and phase 3 to licensure within the total available follow-up time were 38.2% (CI, 30.7% to 45.0%), 38.3% (CI, 23.1% to 50.5%), and 61.1% (CI, 3.7% to 84.3%), respectively.

LIMITATIONS

The study did not account for preclinical development and relied primarily on ClinicalTrials.gov and FDA resources. Success probabilities do not capture the varied reasons why vaccines fail to advance to regulatory approval.

CONCLUSION

Success probabilities and timelines varied widely across different vaccine types and diseases. If a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine is licensed within 18 months of the start of the pandemic, it will mark an unprecedented achievement for noninfluenza viral vaccine development.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

McGill Interdisciplinary Initiative in Infection and Immunity (MI4) Emergency COVID-19 Research Funding program.

Estimating the Cost of Industry Investment in Drug Research and Development: A Review of Methods and Results

Research and development (R&D) costs factor into considerations of the tradeoffs between prices, intellectual property protection, and incentivizing innovation, all of which can have implications for policy development. Yet, there is little consensus on the actual cost of R&D for new drugs. We review and synthesize papers estimating drug R&D costs incurred by industry. We find a substantial range of per-drug costs, from $113 million to just over $6 billion in 2018 dollars. This range includes estimates covering all new drugs, new molecular entities, and drugs in specific therapeutic classes. The range is narrower—$318 million to $2.8 billion—for estimates of the per-drug cost for new molecular entities. We discuss the data sources, methods, and assumptions used in each study to provide context for the wide range in existing estimates. Differences in definitions, methods, and assumptions lead to large divergences in the main estimates, and the combination of fragmented data sources and different assumptions across studies means that the resulting estimates that can rarely be directly compared. We suggest areas for future research and data collection that would result in more comparable and robust estimates to inform ongoing policy discussion.

Computational Methodology for Peptide Vaccine Design for Zika Virus: A Bioinformatics Approach

With the increasing frequency of viral epidemics, vaccines to augment the human immune response system have been the medium of choice to combat viral infections. The tragic consequences of the Zika virus pandemic in South and Central America a few years ago brought the issues into sharper focus. While traditional vaccine development is time-consuming and expensive, recent advances in information technology, immunoinformatics, genetics, bioinformatics, and related sciences have opened the doors to new paradigms in vaccine design and applications.Peptide vaccines are one group of the new approaches to vaccine formulation. In this chapter, we discuss the various issues involved in the design of peptide vaccines and their advantages and shortcomings, with special reference to the Zika virus for which no drugs or vaccines are as yet available. In the process, we outline our work in this field giving a detailed step-by-step description of the protocol we follow for such vaccine design so that interested researchers can easily follow them and do their own designing. Several flowcharts and figures are included to provide a background of the software to be used and results to be anticipated.

Future epidemiological and economic impacts of universal influenza vaccines

The efficacy of influenza vaccines, currently at 44%, is limited by the rapid antigenic evolution of the virus and a manufacturing process that can lead to vaccine mismatch. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) recently identified the development of a universal influenza vaccine with an efficacy of at least 75% as a high scientific priority. The US Congress approved $130 million funding for the 2019 fiscal year to support the development of a universal vaccine, and another $1 billion over 5 y has been proposed in the Flu Vaccine Act. Using a model of influenza transmission, we evaluated the population-level impacts of universal influenza vaccines distributed according to empirical age-specific coverage at multiple scales in the United States. We estimate that replacing just 10% of typical seasonal vaccines with 75% efficacious universal vaccines would avert ∼5.3 million cases, 81,000 hospitalizations, and 6,300 influenza-related deaths per year. This would prevent over $1.1 billion in direct health care costs compared to a typical season, based on average data from the 2010-11 to 2018-19 seasons. A complete replacement of seasonal vaccines with universal vaccines is projected to prevent 17 million cases, 251,000 hospitalizations, 19,500 deaths, and $3.5 billion in direct health care costs. States with high per-hospitalization medical expenses along with a large proportion of elderly residents are expected to receive the maximum economic benefit. Replacing even a fraction of seasonal vaccines with universal vaccines justifies the substantial cost of vaccine development.

Estimating the cost of vaccine development against epidemic infectious diseases: a cost minimisation study

BACKGROUND

The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations was established in 2016, to develop vaccines that can contribute to preparedness for outbreaks of epidemic infectious diseases. Evidence on vaccine development costs for such diseases is scarce. Our goal was to estimate the minimum cost for achieving vaccine research and development preparedness targets in a portfolio of 11 epidemic infectious diseases, accounting for vaccine pipeline constraints and uncertainty in research and development preparedness outcomes.

METHODS

We assembled a pipeline of 224 vaccine candidates from preclinical through to phase 2 for 11 priority epidemic infectious diseases. We used a linear regression model to identify drivers of development costs from preclinical through to end of phase 2a. Drawing from published estimates of vaccine research and development probabilities of success, we simulated costs for advancing these 224 vaccine candidates through to the end of phase 2a. We combined these findings to determine minimum costs for progressing at least one vaccine through to the end of phase 2a per epidemic infectious disease by means of a stochastic optimisation model.

FINDINGS

The cost of developing a single epidemic infectious disease vaccine from preclinical trials through to end of phase 2a is US$31-68 million (US$14-159 million range), assuming no risk of failure. We found that previous licensure experience and indirect costs are upward drivers of research and development costs. Accounting for probability of success, the average cost of successfully advancing at least one epidemic infectious disease vaccine through to the end of phase 2a can vary from US$84-112 million ($23 million-$295 million range) starting from phase 2 to $319-469 million ($137 million-$1·1 billion range) starting from preclinical. This cost includes the cumulative cost of failed vaccine candidates through the research and development process. Assuming these candidates and funding were made available, progressing at least one vaccine through to the end of phase 2a for each of the 11 epidemic infectious diseases would cost a minimum of $2·8-3·7 billion ($1·2 billion-$8·4 billion range).

INTERPRETATION

Our analysis provides new evidence on vaccine research and development pipelines and associated costs for 11 epidemic infectious diseases, highlighting both funding needs and research and development gaps for achieving vaccine research and development preparedness targets.

FUNDING

This work was partly supported by the Research Council of Norway through the Global Health and Vaccination Programme GLOBVAC.

Systematic review on costs and resource use of randomized clinical trials shows a lack of transparent and comprehensive data

OBJECTIVES

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are costly. We aimed to provide a systematic overview of the available evidence on resource use and costs for RCTs to support budget planning.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and HealthSTAR from inception until November 30, 2016 without language restrictions. We included any publication reporting empirical data on resource use and costs of RCTs and categorized them depending on whether they reported (i) resource and costs of all aspects at all study stages of an RCT (including conception, planning, preparation, conduct, and all tasks after the last patient has completed the RCT); (ii) on several aspects, (iii) on a single aspect (e.g., recruitment); or (iv) on overall costs for RCTs. Median costs of different recruitment strategies were calculated. Other results (e.g., overall costs) were listed descriptively. All cost data were converted into USD 2017.

RESULTS

A total of 56 articles that reported on cost or resource use of RCTs were included. None of the articles provided empirical resource use and cost data for all aspects of an entire RCT. Eight articles presented resource use and cost data on several aspects (e.g., aggregated cost data of different drug development phases, site-specific costs, selected cost components). Thirty-five articles assessed costs of one specific aspect of an RCT (i.e., 30 on recruitment; five others). The median costs per recruited patient were USD 409 (range: USD 41-6,990). Overall costs of an RCT, as provided in 16 articles, ranged from USD 43-103,254 per patient, and USD 0.2-611.5 Mio per RCT but the methodology of gathering these overall estimates remained unclear in 12 out of 16 articles (75%).

CONCLUSION

The usefulness of the available empirical evidence on resource use and costs of RCTs is limited. Transparent and comprehensive resource use and cost data are urgently needed to support budget planning for RCTs and help improve sustainability.

A Brief Review of Computer-Assisted Approaches to Rational Design of Peptide Vaccines

The growing incidences of new viral diseases and increasingly frequent viral epidemics have strained therapeutic and preventive measures; the high mutability of viral genes puts additional strains on developmental efforts. Given the high cost and time requirements for new drugs development, vaccines remain as a viable alternative, but there too traditional techniques of live-attenuated or inactivated vaccines have the danger of allergenic reactions and others. Peptide vaccines have, over the last several years, begun to be looked on as more appropriate alternatives, which are economically affordable, require less time for development and hold the promise of multi-valent dosages. The developments in bioinformatics, proteomics, immunogenomics, structural biology and other sciences have spurred the growth of vaccinomics where computer assisted approaches serve to identify suitable peptide targets for eventual development of vaccines. In this mini-review we give a brief overview of some of the recent trends in computer assisted vaccine development with emphasis on the primary selection procedures of probable peptide candidates for vaccine development.

Report on the second WHO integrated meeting on development and clinical trials of influenza vaccines that induce broadly protective and long-lasting immune responses: Geneva, Switzerland, 5-7 May 2014

On 5-7 May 2014, the World Health Organization (WHO) convened the second integrated meeting on "influenza vaccines that induce broadly protective and long-lasting immune responses". Around 100 invited experts from academia, the vaccine industry, research and development funders, and regulatory and public health agencies attended the meeting. Areas covered included mechanisms of protection in natural influenza-virus infection and vaccine-induced immunity, new approaches to influenza-vaccine design and production, and novel routes of vaccine administration. A timely focus was on how this knowledge could be applied to both seasonal influenza and emerging viruses with pandemic potential such as influenza A (H7N9), currently circulating in China. Special attention was given to the development of possible universal influenza vaccines, given that the Global Vaccine Action Plan calls for at least one licensed universal influenza vaccine by 2020. This report highlights some of the topics discussed and provides an update on studies published since the report of the previous meeting.