1
|
Alonso Ruiz A, Bezruki A, Shinabargar E, Large K, Vieira M, Slovenski I, Liu Y, Agarwal S, Becker A, Moon S. Which roads lead to access? A global landscape of six COVID-19 vaccine innovation models. Global Health 2024; 20:25. [PMID: 38532484 DOI: 10.1186/s12992-024-01017-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2023] [Accepted: 01/22/2024] [Indexed: 03/28/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Unequal and inequitable access to Covid-19 vaccines in low- and middle-income countries (L&MICs) was a major political, ethical and public health failure in the pandemic. However, vaccine developers' practices were not monolithic, but rather, took diverse approaches to supplying different countries, with important implications for global access. RESULTS Using data on R&D investments, regulatory approvals, manufacturing and purchase agreements, and vaccine deliveries, we identified six distinct innovation models that apply across the 14 COVID-19 vaccines with more international presence from 2020-2022. "Western Early Arrivers" Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna supplied the largest volumes quickly and prioritized high-income countries (HICs) from registration to vaccine delivery. "Western Latecomers" Janssen and Novavax supplied intermediate volumes later, also prioritizing HICs but with a greater proportion to L&MICs. "Major Chinese Developers" Sinopharm and Sinovac supplied intermediate volumes early, primarily to middle-income countries (MICs). "Russian Developer" Gamaleya completed development early but ultimately supplied small volumes, primarily to middle-income countries (MICs). "Cosmopolitan Developer" Oxford/AstraZeneca supplied large volumes early to HICs and MICs at the lowest prices. Finally, "Small MIC Developers" CanSino, Bharat Biotech, Medigen, Finlay Institute and the Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (CGEB), exported relatively small volumes to a few MICs. Low-income countries (LICs) were not targeted by any developer, and received far fewer doses, later, than any other income group. Almost all developers received public funding and other forms of support, but we found little evidence that such support was leveraged to expand global access. CONCLUSIONS Each of the six innovation models has different implications for which countries get access to which vaccines, how quickly, and at which prices. Each offers different strengths and weaknesses for achieving equitable access. Our findings also suggest that Western firms had the greatest capacity to develop and deliver vaccines quickly during the pandemic, but such capacity is rapidly becoming more globally distributed with MICs playing a significant role, especially in supplying other MICs. Given the critical role of public support in enabling pandemic vaccine development and supply, governments have both the capacity and responsibility to craft international rules that will make responses to future pandemics more equitable and effective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adrián Alonso Ruiz
- Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Chem. Eugène-Rigot 2, Genève, 1202, Switzerland.
| | - Anna Bezruki
- Georgetown University, 3700 O St NW, Washington, DC, 20057, USA
| | - Erika Shinabargar
- Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Chem. Eugène-Rigot 2, Genève, 1202, Switzerland
| | - Kaitlin Large
- Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Chem. Eugène-Rigot 2, Genève, 1202, Switzerland
| | - Marcela Vieira
- Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Chem. Eugène-Rigot 2, Genève, 1202, Switzerland
| | - Iulia Slovenski
- Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Chem. Eugène-Rigot 2, Genève, 1202, Switzerland
| | - Yiqi Liu
- Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Chem. Eugène-Rigot 2, Genève, 1202, Switzerland
| | - Surabhi Agarwal
- Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Chem. Eugène-Rigot 2, Genève, 1202, Switzerland
| | - Anna Becker
- Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Chem. Eugène-Rigot 2, Genève, 1202, Switzerland
| | - Suerie Moon
- Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Chem. Eugène-Rigot 2, Genève, 1202, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Williams BA, Jones CH, Welch V, True JM. Outlook of pandemic preparedness in a post-COVID-19 world. NPJ Vaccines 2023; 8:178. [PMID: 37985781 PMCID: PMC10662147 DOI: 10.1038/s41541-023-00773-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2023] [Accepted: 11/02/2023] [Indexed: 11/22/2023] Open
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic was met with rapid, unprecedented global collaboration and action. Even still, the public health, societal, and economic impact may be felt for years to come. The risk of another pandemic occurring in the next few decades is ever-present and potentially increasing due to trends such as urbanization and climate change. While it is difficult to predict the next pandemic pathogen threat, making reasonable assumptions today and evaluating prior efforts to plan for and respond to disease outbreaks and pandemics may enable a more proactive, effective response in the future. Lessons from the COVID-19 response and pandemic influenza preparedness underscore the importance of strengthening surveillance systems, investing in early-stage research on pandemic pathogens and development of platform technologies, and diversifying response plans across a range of tactics to enable earlier access to safe and effective interventions in the next pandemic. Further, sustaining the robust vaccine manufacturing capacity built because of COVID-19 will keep it ready for rapid response in the future. These actions will not be successful without improved global coordination and collaboration. Everyone, including the biopharmaceutical industry, has a role to play in pandemic preparedness, and working together will ensure that the most lives are saved in the next pandemic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Verna Welch
- Pfizer, 66 Hudson Boulevard East, New York, NY, 10001, USA
| | - Jane M True
- Pfizer, 66 Hudson Boulevard East, New York, NY, 10001, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gleeson D, Scheibner J, Nicol D. Proposals to waive intellectual property rights for pandemic response products in the World Health Organization pandemic accord need Australia's support. Med J Aust 2023; 219:439. [PMID: 37844907 DOI: 10.5694/mja2.52127] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2023] [Accepted: 09/25/2023] [Indexed: 10/18/2023]
|
4
|
der Weid IV, de Souza Mendes CD, Fonseca PC, Viveiros Rosa SG. Patent profile for the approved and in clinical trials Mpox vaccines. Pharm Pat Anal 2023; 12:103-111. [PMID: 37671905 DOI: 10.4155/ppa-2023-0017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/07/2023]
Abstract
Mpox disease was reported in 110 countries since May 2022, with 88,026 cases and 148 deaths by 21 June 2023. Although some drugs were already approved for Mpox treatment, the available smallpox vaccines can provide 85% cross-prevention, but there are no scientific publications describing the patent portfolio for Mpox vaccines. This paper aims to contribute to the identification of the status of the smallpox vaccine patents now applied for Mpox. We retrieved ten vaccines, but only a few had a patent portfolio and one under patent litigation processes in three continents. Also, no specific Mpox vaccine was retrieved and, in this sense, technological monitoring studies should be performed to provide a future vision regarding Mpox prophylaxis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Irene von der Weid
- National Institute of Industrial Property, Division of Studies & Projects, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, 20090-910, Brazil
| | - Cristina d'Urso de Souza Mendes
- National Institute of Industrial Property, Division of Studies & Projects, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, 20090-910, Brazil
| | - Paula C Fonseca
- National Institute of Industrial Property, Patent Division IX, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, 20090-910, Brazil
| | - Sandro G Viveiros Rosa
- National Institute of Indrustrial Property, Patent Division I, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, 20090-910, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Wolynn T, Hermann C, Hoffman BL. Social Media and Vaccine Hesitancy: Help Us Move the Needle. Pediatr Clin North Am 2023; 70:329-341. [PMID: 36841600 DOI: 10.1016/j.pcl.2022.11.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/27/2023]
Abstract
With more than 75% of parents and pediatric caregivers getting their health-related information online, reaching families on social media is a powerful way to leverage the trust built in the examination room to address vaccine hesitancy. This article first reviews the ways the antivaccine movement has leveraged social media to expand its considerable influence, and why social media companies have failed to reduce antivaccine misinformation and disinformation. Next, it reviews the barriers to adoption of social media-based communication by pediatric health-care providers and concludes with action-oriented items to increase the adoption of this powerful tool.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Todd Wolynn
- Kids Plus Pediatrics, 4070 Beechwood Boulevard, Pittsburgh, PA 15217, USA
| | - Chad Hermann
- Kids Plus Pediatrics, 4070 Beechwood Boulevard, Pittsburgh, PA 15217, USA
| | - Beth L Hoffman
- Department of Behavioral and Community Health Sciences, University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health, 130 De Soto Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA; Center for Social Dynamics and Community Health, University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Lalani HS, Nagar S, Sarpatwari A, Barenie RE, Avorn J, Rome BN, Kesselheim AS. US public investment in development of mRNA covid-19 vaccines: retrospective cohort study. BMJ 2023; 380:e073747. [PMID: 36858453 PMCID: PMC9975718 DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2022-073747] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/03/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To estimate US public investment in the development of mRNA covid-19 vaccines. DESIGN Retrospective cohort study. SETTING Publicly funded science from January 1985 to March 2022. DATA SOURCES National Institutes of Health (NIH) Report Portfolio Online Reporting Tool Expenditures and Results (RePORTER) and other public databases. Government funded grants were scored as directly, indirectly, or not likely related to four key innovations underlying mRNA covid-19 vaccines-lipid nanoparticle, mRNA synthesis or modification, prefusion spike protein structure, and mRNA vaccine biotechnology-on the basis of principal investigator, project title, and abstract. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Direct public investment in research and vaccine development, stratified by the rationale, government funding agency, and pre-pandemic (1985-2019) versus pandemic (1 January 2020 to 31 March 2022). RESULTS 34 NIH funded research grants that were directly related to mRNA covid-19 vaccines were identified. These grants combined with other identified US government grants and contracts totaled $31.9bn (£26.3bn; €29.7bn), of which $337m was invested pre-pandemic. Pre-pandemic, the NIH invested $116m (35%) in basic and translational science related to mRNA vaccine technology, and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) ($148m; 44%) and the Department of Defense ($72m; 21%) invested in vaccine development. After the pandemic started, $29.2bn (92%) of US public funds purchased vaccines, $2.2bn (7%) supported clinical trials, and $108m (<1%) supported manufacturing plus basic and translational science. CONCLUSIONS The US government invested at least $31.9bn to develop, produce, and purchase mRNA covid-19 vaccines, including sizeable investments in the three decades before the pandemic through March 2022. These public investments translated into millions of lives saved and were crucial in developing the mRNA vaccine technology that also has the potential to tackle future pandemics and to treat diseases beyond covid-19. To maximize overall health impact, policy makers should ensure equitable global access to publicly funded health technologies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hussain S Lalani
- Program On Regulation, Therapeutics, And Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Sarosh Nagar
- Program On Regulation, Therapeutics, And Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- Harvard University Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Ameet Sarpatwari
- Program On Regulation, Therapeutics, And Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Rachel E Barenie
- Program On Regulation, Therapeutics, And Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Translational Science, College of Pharmacy, The University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA
| | - Jerry Avorn
- Program On Regulation, Therapeutics, And Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Benjamin N Rome
- Program On Regulation, Therapeutics, And Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Aaron S Kesselheim
- Program On Regulation, Therapeutics, And Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Sachs JD, Karim SSA, Aknin L, Allen J, Brosbøl K, Colombo F, Barron GC, Espinosa MF, Gaspar V, Gaviria A, Haines A, Hotez PJ, Koundouri P, Bascuñán FL, Lee JK, Pate MA, Ramos G, Reddy KS, Serageldin I, Thwaites J, Vike-Freiberga V, Wang C, Were MK, Xue L, Bahadur C, Bottazzi ME, Bullen C, Laryea-Adjei G, Ben Amor Y, Karadag O, Lafortune G, Torres E, Barredo L, Bartels JGE, Joshi N, Hellard M, Huynh UK, Khandelwal S, Lazarus JV, Michie S. The Lancet Commission on lessons for the future from the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet 2022; 400:1224-1280. [PMID: 36115368 PMCID: PMC9539542 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(22)01585-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 239] [Impact Index Per Article: 119.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2022] [Revised: 07/01/2022] [Accepted: 08/11/2022] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Jeffrey D Sachs
- Center for Sustainable Development, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States.
| | - Salim S Abdool Karim
- Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States
| | - Lara Aknin
- Department of Psychology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
| | - Joseph Allen
- Department of Environmental Health, Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States
| | | | - Francesca Colombo
- Health Division, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France
| | | | | | - Vitor Gaspar
- Fiscal Affairs Department, International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC, United States
| | | | - Andy Haines
- Department of Public Health, Environments and Society, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK; Department of Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Peter J Hotez
- National School of Tropical Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Phoebe Koundouri
- Department of International and European Economic Studies, Athens University of Economics and Business, Athens, Greece; Department of Technology, Management and Economics, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark; European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, Athens, Greece
| | - Felipe Larraín Bascuñán
- Department of Economics and Administration, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Jong-Koo Lee
- National Academy of Medicine of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Muhammad Ali Pate
- Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States
| | | | | | | | - John Thwaites
- Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia
| | | | - Chen Wang
- National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China; National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Diseases, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China
| | | | - Lan Xue
- Schwarzman College, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
| | - Chandrika Bahadur
- The Lancet COVID-19 Commission Regional Task Force: India, New Delhi, India
| | - Maria Elena Bottazzi
- National School of Tropical Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Chris Bullen
- National Institute for Health Innovation, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | | | - Yanis Ben Amor
- Center for Sustainable Development, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States
| | - Ozge Karadag
- Center for Sustainable Development, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States
| | | | - Emma Torres
- United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network, New York, NY, United States
| | - Lauren Barredo
- United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network, New York, NY, United States
| | - Juliana G E Bartels
- Center for Sustainable Development, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States
| | - Neena Joshi
- United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network, New York, NY, United States
| | | | | | | | - Jeffrey V Lazarus
- Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal), Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Susan Michie
- Centre for Behaviour Change, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Keestra S, Rodgers F, Osborne R, Wimmer S. University patenting and licensing practices in the United Kingdom during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Glob Public Health 2022; 17:641-651. [PMID: 35298347 DOI: 10.1080/17441692.2022.2049842] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
Universities' decisions during technology transfer may affect affordability, accessibility, and availability of COVID-19 health technologies downstream. We investigated measures taken by the top 35 publicly funded UK universities to ensure global equitable access to COVID-19 health technologies between January and end of October 2020. We sent Freedom Of Information (FOI) requests and analysed universities' websites, to (i) assess institutional strategies on the patenting and licensing of COVID-19-related health technologies, (ii) identify all COVID-19-related health technologies licensed or patented and (iii) record whether universities engaged with the Open COVID pledge, COVID-19 Technology Access Pool (C-TAP), or Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) COVID-19 licensing guidelines during the time period assessed. Except for the Universities of Oxford and Edinburgh, UK universities did not update their institutional strategies during the first year of the pandemic. Nine universities licensed 22 COVID-19 health technologies. Imperial College London disclosed ten patents relevant to COVID-19. No UK universities participated in the Open COVID Pledge or C-TAP, but discussions were ongoing in autumn 2020. The University of Bristol endorsed the AUTM guidelines. Despite important COVID-19 health technologies being developed by UK universities, our findings suggest minimal engagement with measures that may promote equitable access downstream. We suggest universities review their technology transfer policies and implement global equitable access strategies for COVID-19 health technologies. We furthermore propose that public and charitable funders can play a larger role in encouraging universities to adopt such practices by making access and transparency clauses a mandatory condition for receiving public funds for research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarai Keestra
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Florence Rodgers
- Royal Cornwall Hospital, Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, Truro, UK
| | - Rhiannon Osborne
- School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Sabrina Wimmer
- Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Pilkington V, Keestra SM, Hill A. Global COVID-19 Vaccine Inequity: Failures in the First Year of Distribution and Potential Solutions for the Future. Front Public Health 2022; 10:821117. [PMID: 35321196 PMCID: PMC8936388 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.821117] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2021] [Accepted: 01/31/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Within the first year of distribution of vaccines against COVID-19, high-income countries (HICs) have achieved vaccination rates of 75-80%, whilst low-income countries (LICs) vaccinated <10%. This disparity in access has been one of the greatest failures of international cooperation during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Global COVID-19 vaccine inequity affects us all, with ongoing risk of new variants emerging until global herd immunity is strengthened. The current model of global vaccine distribution is based on financial competition for limited vaccine supplies, resulting in HICs getting first access to vaccines, with LICs being forced to rely on voluntary donations through schemes like COVAX. Pharmaceutical companies own the intellectual property (IP) rights for COVID-19 vaccines, allowing them to control manufacturing, distribution, and pricing. However, the pharmaceutical industry did not develop these vaccines alone, with billions of dollars of public funding being instrumental in their discovery and development. Solutions to enable global equitable access already exist. The next step in scale up of manufacture and distribution worldwide is equitable knowledge sharing and technology transfer. The World Health Organization centralized technology transfer hub would facilitate international cooperation. Investments made into developing this infrastructure benefit the COVID-19 response whilst promoting future pandemic preparedness. Whilst globally there is majority support for waivers of IP to facilitate this next step, key opponents blocking this move include the UK and other European countries which host large domestic pharmaceutical industries. A nationalistic approach is not effective during a global pandemic. International cooperation is essential to achieve global goals against COVID-19.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victoria Pilkington
- Oxford University Clinical Academic Graduate School, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
- MetaVirology Ltd., London, United Kingdom
- *Correspondence: Victoria Pilkington
| | - Sarai Mirjam Keestra
- Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Andrew Hill
- MetaVirology Ltd., London, United Kingdom
- Department for Translational Medicine, Liverpool University, Liverpool, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Dass SA, Balakrishnan V, Arifin N, Lim CSY, Nordin F, Tye GJ. The COVID-19/Tuberculosis Syndemic and Potential Antibody Therapy for TB Based on the Lessons Learnt From the Pandemic. Front Immunol 2022; 13:833715. [PMID: 35242137 PMCID: PMC8886238 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.833715] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2021] [Accepted: 01/25/2022] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
2020 will be marked in history for the dreadful implications of the COVID-19 pandemic that shook the world globally. The pandemic has reshaped the normality of life and affected mankind in the aspects of mental and physical health, financial, economy, growth, and development. The focus shift to COVID-19 has indirectly impacted an existing air-borne disease, Tuberculosis. In addition to the decrease in TB diagnosis, the emergence of the TB/COVID-19 syndemic and its serious implications (possible reactivation of latent TB post-COVID-19, aggravation of an existing active TB condition, or escalation of the severity of a COVID-19 during TB-COVID-19 coinfection), serve as primary reasons to equally prioritize TB. On a different note, the valuable lessons learnt for the COVID-19 pandemic provide useful knowledge for enhancing TB diagnostics and therapeutics. In this review, the crucial need to focus on TB amid the COVID-19 pandemic has been discussed. Besides, a general comparison between COVID-19 and TB in the aspects of pathogenesis, diagnostics, symptoms, and treatment options with importance given to antibody therapy were presented. Lastly, the lessons learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic and how it is applicable to enhance the antibody-based immunotherapy for TB have been presented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sylvia Annabel Dass
- Institute for Research in Molecular Medicine (INFORMM), Universiti Sains Malaysia, Minden, Malaysia
| | - Venugopal Balakrishnan
- Institute for Research in Molecular Medicine (INFORMM), Universiti Sains Malaysia, Minden, Malaysia
| | - Norsyahida Arifin
- Institute for Research in Molecular Medicine (INFORMM), Universiti Sains Malaysia, Minden, Malaysia
| | - Crystale Siew Ying Lim
- Department of Biotechnology, Faculty of Applied Sciences, UCSI University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
| | - Fazlina Nordin
- Tissue Engineering Centre (TEC), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre (UKMMC), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
| | - Gee Jun Tye
- Institute for Research in Molecular Medicine (INFORMM), Universiti Sains Malaysia, Minden, Malaysia
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Ballano VO. Analyzing the Morality of Owning and Suspending Patent Rights for COVID-19 Vaccines in the Light of Catholic Social Teaching. Linacre Q 2021; 89:47-63. [PMID: 35321490 PMCID: PMC8935135 DOI: 10.1177/00243639211050494] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Using the Roman Catholic Church’s set of moral principles on social concerns called Catholic social teaching (CST) and utilizing some secondary data and scientific research literature, this article examines the morality of India and South Africa’s request to the World Trade Organization (WTO) to temporarily suspend the property rights and patents of top pharmaceutical companies to their vaccines to allow low-income countries to locally manufacture them to save the lives of the poor during this COVID-19 pandemic. Applying the theological method of “See-Judge-and-Act,” this article argues that the suspension of patents for COVID vaccines is morally justifiable in the light of CST’s principles on the universal destination of earth’s goods, the common good, and preferential option for the poor. The top pharmaceutical companies cannot claim absolute ownership to their vaccines as they do not totally own and fund the entire development and production process. Furthermore, the right to private ownership and patents has a social dimension and must serve the common good and welfare of the poor, especially in times of global emergency such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Patent holders have a moral obligation to promote the common good and save the lives of the poor which must prevail over their capitalist quest for profit. This article recommends that Catholics and Christians must join this crusade for the suspension of patents as part of their spirituality of social transformation. Summary: Applying the Roman Catholic Church’s set of moral principles on social concerns called CST and utilizing some secondary data and scientific research literature, this article examines the morality of India and South Africa’s request to the World Trade Organization to temporarily suspend the property rights and patents of top pharmaceutical companies to their vaccines to allow low-income countries to locally manufacture them to save the lives of the poor during the current pandemic. Applying the theological method of “See-Judge-and-Act,” this article argues that the suspension of patents for COVID vaccines is morally justifiable in the light of CST’s principles on the universal destination of earth goods, the common good, and preferential option for the poor. It recommends that Catholics and Christians must join this crusade for the suspension of patents as part of their spirituality of social transformation. Short Summary: This article argues that patents of the top pharmaceutical companies to their COVID-19 vaccines must be suspended as requested by India and South Africa in the WTO in the light of CST’s moral principles on the universal destination of earth’s goods, the common good, and preferential option for the poor.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vivencio O. Ballano
- Faculty Researcher, Research Institute for Human and Social Development, Polytechnic University of the Philippines, Manila, Philippines
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Cross S, Rho Y, Reddy H, Pepperrell T, Rodgers F, Osborne R, Eni-Olotu A, Banerjee R, Wimmer S, Keestra S. Who funded the research behind the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine? BMJ Glob Health 2021; 6:e007321. [PMID: 34937701 PMCID: PMC8704023 DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-007321] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2021] [Accepted: 11/17/2021] [Indexed: 11/03/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, Vaxzevira or Covishield) builds on two decades of research and development (R&D) into chimpanzee adenovirus-vectored vaccine (ChAdOx) technology at the University of Oxford. This study aimed to approximate the funding for the R&D of ChAdOx and the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine and to assess the transparency of funding reporting mechanisms. METHODS We conducted a scoping review and publication history analysis of the principal investigators to reconstruct R&D funding the ChAdOx technology. We matched award numbers with publicly accessible grant databases. We filed freedom of information (FOI) requests to the University of Oxford for the disclosure of all grants for ChAdOx R&D. RESULTS We identified 100 peer-reviewed articles relevant to ChAdOx technology published between January 2002 and October 2020, extracting 577 mentions of funding bodies from acknowledgements. Government funders from overseas (including the European Union) were mentioned 158 times (27.4%), the UK government 147 (25.5%) and charitable funders 138 (23.9%). Grant award numbers were identified for 215 (37.3%) mentions; amounts were publicly available for 121 (21.0%). Based on the FOIs, until December 2019, the biggest funders of ChAdOx R&D were the European Commission (34.0%), Wellcome Trust (20.4%) and Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (17.5%). Since January 2020, the UK government contributed 95.5% of funding identified. The total identified R&D funding was £104 226 076 reported in the FOIs and £228 466 771 reconstructed from the literature search. CONCLUSION Our study approximates that public and charitable financing accounted for 97%-99% of identifiable funding for the ChAdOx vaccine technology research at the University of Oxford underlying the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine until autumn 2020. We encountered a lack of transparency in research funding reporting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel Cross
- Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | - Henna Reddy
- Medical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Toby Pepperrell
- School of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Florence Rodgers
- Royal Cornwall Hospital, Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, Truro, UK
| | - Rhiannon Osborne
- University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Rishi Banerjee
- Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Sabrina Wimmer
- Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
- Department of Management, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - Sarai Keestra
- Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Vanderbeek AM, Bliss JM, Yin Z, Yap C. Implementation of platform trials in the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid review. Contemp Clin Trials 2021; 112:106625. [PMID: 34793985 PMCID: PMC8591985 DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2021.106625] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2021] [Revised: 10/17/2021] [Accepted: 11/11/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
Motivation Platform designs - master protocols that allow for new treatment arms to be added over time - have gained considerable attention in recent years. Between 2001 and 2019, 16 platform trials were initiated globally. The COVID-19 pandemic seems to have provided a new motivation for these designs. We conducted a rapid review to quantify and describe platform trials used in COVID-19. Methods We cross-referenced PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cytel COVID-19 Clinical Trials Tracker to identify platform trials, defined by their stated ability to add future arms. Results We identified 58 COVID-19 platform trials globally registered between January 2020 and May 2021. According to trial registries, 16 trials have added new therapies (median 3, IQR 4) and 11 have dropped arms (median 3, IQR 2.5). About 50% of trials publicly share their protocol, and 31 trials (53%) intend to share trial data. Forty-nine trials (84%) explicitly report adaptive features, and 21 trials (36%) state Bayesian methods. Conclusions During the pandemic, there has been a surge in the number of platform trials compared to historical use. While transparency in statistical methods and clarity of data sharing policies needs improvement, platform trials appear particularly well-suited for rapid evidence generation. Trials secured funding quickly and many succeeded in adding new therapies in a short time period, thus demonstrating the potential for these trial designs to be implemented beyond the pandemic. The evidence gathered here may provide ample insight to further inform operational, statistical, and regulatory aspects of future platform trial conduct.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alyssa M Vanderbeek
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Judith M Bliss
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Zhulin Yin
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Christina Yap
- Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Nör JE. A Member-Centric Association. J Dent Res 2021; 100:1427-1428. [PMID: 34666561 DOI: 10.1177/00220345211048482] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- J E Nör
- Department of Cariology, Restorative Sciences and Endodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
- Department of Otolaryngology, School of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
- Rogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Moon S, Agarwal S, Becker A, Alonso Ruiz A. Embedding global access in development of future pandemic vaccines. BMJ 2021; 374:n2256. [PMID: 34544796 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n2256] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Suerie Moon
- Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Surabhi Agarwal
- Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Anna Becker
- Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Adrian Alonso Ruiz
- Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Jecker NS, Atuire CA. What's yours is ours: waiving intellectual property protections for COVID-19 vaccines. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2021; 47:595-598. [PMID: 34233956 PMCID: PMC8266425 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2021-107555] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2021] [Accepted: 06/22/2021] [Indexed: 05/06/2023]
Abstract
This paper gives an ethical argument for temporarily waiving intellectual property (IP) protections for COVID-19 vaccines. It examines two proposals under discussion at the World Trade Organization (WTO): the India/South Africa proposal and the WTO Director General proposal. Section I explains the background leading up to the WTO debate. Section II rebuts ethical arguments for retaining current IP protections, which appeal to benefiting society by spurring innovation and protecting rightful ownership. It sets forth positive ethical arguments for a temporary waiver that appeal to standing in solidarity and holding companies accountable. After examining built-in exceptions to existing agreements and finding them inadequate, the paper replies to objections to a temporary waiver and concludes, in section III, that the ethical argument for temporarily waiving IP protection for COVID-19 vaccines is strong.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nancy S Jecker
- Department of Bioethics & Humanities, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Department of Philosophy, University of Johannesburg, Auckland Park, Gauteng, South Africa
| | - Caesar A Atuire
- Department of Philosophy and Classics, University of Ghana, Accra, Accra, Ghana
- All Souls College, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Vasan K, West JD. The hidden influence of communities in collaborative funding of clinical science. ROYAL SOCIETY OPEN SCIENCE 2021; 8:210072. [PMID: 34457332 PMCID: PMC8385381 DOI: 10.1098/rsos.210072] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2021] [Accepted: 07/19/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
Every year the National Institutes of Health allocates $10.7 billion (one-third of its funds) for clinical science research while the pharmaceutical companies spend $52.9 billion (90% of its annual budget). However, we know little about funder collaborations and the impact of collaboratively funded projects. As an initial effort towards this, we examine the co-funding network, where a funder represents a node and an edge signifies collaboration. Our core data include all papers that cite and receive citations by the Cochrane Database of Systemic Reviews, a prominent clinical review journal. We find that 65% of clinical papers have multiple funders and discover communities of funders that are formed by national boundaries and funding objectives. To quantify success in funding, we use a g-index metric that indicates efficiency of funders in supporting clinically relevant research. After controlling for authorship, we find that funders generally achieve higher success when collaborating than when solo-funding. We also find that as a funder, seeking multiple, direct connections with various disconnected funders may be more beneficial than being part of a densely interconnected network of co-funders. The results of this paper indicate that collaborations can potentially accelerate innovation, not only among authors but also funders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kishore Vasan
- Network Science Institute, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jevin D. West
- Information School, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Affiliation(s)
- Suerie Moon
- From the Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva (S.M., A.A.R., M.V.); and the Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston (S.M.)
| | - Adrián Alonso Ruiz
- From the Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva (S.M., A.A.R., M.V.); and the Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston (S.M.)
| | - Marcela Vieira
- From the Global Health Centre, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva (S.M., A.A.R., M.V.); and the Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston (S.M.)
| |
Collapse
|