The global intellectual property ecosystem for insulin and its public health implications: an observational study

Patent "Evergreening" of Medicine-Device Combination Products: A Global Perspective

Background

Patenting medicine-delivery devices (inhalers and pens) is controversial when it extends market protections beyond that of the underlying therapeutic agent. We evaluated how common device patenting is, internationally.

Method

Using a product sample (n = 88) and an international patent database, we assessed the issue's scope.

Results

When comparing the 88 patent portfolios for each product in each country, Canada was found to be among the most impacted, with 90% of the portfolios containing at least one device patent and 35% of the portfolios containing device patents exclusively.

Conclusion

Patenting of delivery devices impacts major pharmaceutical manufacturing centres worldwide. International consensus among stakeholders (regulators and payors) is needed on which device modifications represent meaningful clinical value.

A global perspective on the issue of access to insulin

The discovery of insulin in 1921 changed the prognosis for people with type 1 diabetes. A century later, availability and affordability of insulin remain a challenge in many parts of the globe. Using the WHO's framework on understanding the life cycle of medicines, this review details the global and national challenges that affect patients' abilities to access and afford insulin. Current research and development in diabetes has seen some innovations, but none of these have truly been game-changing. Currently, three multinational companies control over 95% of global insulin supply. The inclusion of insulin on the WHO's Prequalification Programme is an opportunity to facilitate entry of new companies into the market. Many governments lack policies on the selection, procurement, supply, pricing and reimbursement of insulin. Moreover, mark-ups in the supply chain also affect the final price to the consumer. Whilst expenses related to diabetes are mostly covered by insurance in high-income countries, many patients from low- and middle-income countries have to pay out of their own pockets. The organisation of diabetes management within the healthcare system also affects patient access to insulin. The challenges affecting access to insulin are complex and require a wide range of solutions. Given that 2021 marks the centenary of the discovery of insulin, there is need for global advocacy to ensure that the benefits of insulin and innovations in diabetes care reach all individuals living with diabetes.

Access to insulin: applying the concept of security of supply to medicines

Security of supply of medicines is fundamental to ensure health for all. Furthermore, improving access to medicines is included in sustainable development goal 3. However, the concept of security of supply has mostly been applied to food, water and energy. Diversity of supply, vulnerability to disruption, expenditure, infrastructure, stability of exporting countries, ownership of production, price stability, access and equity, affordability, intellectual property, safety and reliability of supply, and countries' capacity to adapt to market changes are all elements of security of supply. Based on these elements, we assessed security of supply for insulin, since access to insulin is a global problem. We found that three multinational companies, in Denmark, France and Germany, control 99% of the value of the global insulin market. Prices and affordability of insulin and access to it vary considerably between countries. Some countries are vulnerable to insulin shortage because they import insulin from only one source. Many countries spend large amounts of money on insulin and costs are increasing. Some countries lack an adequate infrastructure for procurement, supply chain management and distribution of insulin. Applying the security of supply concept to insulin showed that diversification of suppliers needs to be fostered. Global health actors should adopt a security of supply approach to identify medicines that are susceptible to supply issues and address this concern by strategic promotion of local production, strengthening regulatory harmonization, and adding local products to the World Health Organization's programme on prequalification of medicines.

Availability and affordability of essential medicines for diabetes across high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries: a prospective epidemiological study

BACKGROUND

Data are scarce on the availability and affordability of essential medicines for diabetes. Our aim was to examine the availability and affordability of metformin, sulfonylureas, and insulin across multiple regions of the world and explore the effect of these on medicine use.

METHODS

In the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study, participants aged 35-70 years (n=156 625) were recruited from 110 803 households, in 604 communities and 22 countries; availability (presence of any dose of medication in the pharmacy on the day of audit) and medicine cost data were collected from pharmacies with the Environmental Profile of a Community's Health audit tool. Our primary analysis was to describe the availability and affordability of metformin and insulin and also commonly used and prescribed combinations of two medicines for diabetes management (two oral drugs, metformin plus a sulphonylurea [either glibenclamide (also known as glyburide) or gliclazide] and one oral drug plus insulin [metformin plus insulin]). Medicines were defined as affordable if the cost of medicines was less than 20% of capacity-to-pay (the household income minus food expenditure). Our analyses included data collected in pharmacies and data from representative samples of households. Data on availability were ascertained during the pharmacy audit, as were data on cost of medications. These cost data were used to estimate the cost of a month's supply of essential medicines for diabetes. We estimated affordability of medicines using income data from household surveys.

FINDINGS

Metformin was available in 113 (100%) of 113 pharmacies from high-income countries, 112 (88·2%) of 127 pharmacies in upper-middle-income countries, 179 (86·1%) of 208 pharmacies in lower-middle-income countries, 44 (64·7%) of 68 pharmacies in low-income countries (excluding India), and 88 (100%) of 88 pharmacies in India. Insulin was available in 106 (93·8%) pharmacies in high-income countries, 51 (40·2%) pharmacies in upper-middle-income countries, 61 (29·3%) pharmacies in lower-middle-income countries, seven (10·3%) pharmacies in lower-income countries, and 67 (76·1%) of 88 pharmacies in India. We estimated 0·7% of households in high-income countries and 26·9% of households in low-income countries could not afford metformin and 2·8% of households in high-income countries and 63·0% of households in low-income countries could not afford insulin. Among the 13 569 (8·6% of PURE participants) that reported a diagnosis of diabetes, 1222 (74·0%) participants reported diabetes medicine use in high-income countries compared with 143 (29·6%) participants in low-income countries. In multilevel models, availability and affordability were significantly associated with use of diabetes medicines.

INTERPRETATION

Availability and affordability of essential diabetes medicines are poor in low-income and middle-income countries. Awareness of these global differences might importantly drive change in access for patients with diabetes.

FUNDING

Full funding sources listed at the end of the paper (see Acknowledgments).

Production costs and potential prices for biosimilars of human insulin and insulin analogues

Introduction

High prices for insulin pose a barrier to treatment for people living with diabetes, with an estimated 50% of 100 million patients needing insulin lacking reliable access. As insulin analogues replace regular human insulin (RHI) globally, their relative prices will become increasingly important. Three originator companies control 96% of the global insulin market, and few biosimilar insulins are available. We estimated the price reductions that could be achieved if numerous biosimilar manufacturers entered the insulin market.

Methods

Data on the price of active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) exported from India were retrieved from an online customs database. Manufacturers of insulins were contacted for price quotes. Where market API prices could not be identified, prices were estimated based on comparison of similarity, in terms of manufacturing process, with APIs for which prices were available. Potential biosimilar prices were estimated by adding costs of excipients, formulation, transport, development and regulatory costs, and a profit margin.

Results

The manufacturing processes for RHI and insulin analogues are similar. API prices were US$24 750/kg for RHI, US$68 757/kg for insulin glargine and an estimated US$100 000/kg for other analogues. Estimated biosimilar prices were US$48-71 per patient per year for RHI, US$49-72 for neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin and US$78-133 for analogues (except detemir: US$283-365).

Conclusion

Treatment with biosimilar RHI and insulin NPH could cost ≤US$72 per year and with insulin analogues ≤US$133 per year. Estimated biosimilar prices were markedly lower than the current prices for insulin analogues. Widespread availability at estimated prices may allow substantial savings globally.

The Open Insulin Project: A Case Study for 'Biohacked' Medicines

New innovation ecosystems are emerging that challenge the complex intellectual property and regulatory landscape surrounding drug development in the United States (US). A prime example is an initiative known as the Open Insulin Project. The goal of the project is to sidestep patents and enable generic manufacturers to produce cheaper insulin. However, the US regulatory environment, not patent exclusivity, is the main barrier to insulin affordability. If the Open Insulin Project succeeds in releasing an open protocol for insulin manufacturing, follow-on work could enable a number of new insulin production ecosystems, including 'home-brewed' insulin. Regulators will need to consider how to proceed in a future where commercial pharmaceuticals remain unaffordable, but patients are empowered to produce drugs for their personal use.