Intellectual property rights, market competition and access to affordable antiretrovirals

Negotiating public-health intellectual property licensing agreements to increase access to health technologies: an insider's story

Public health voluntary licensing of intellectual property has successfully been applied to increase access to medicines in certain disease areas, producing health benefits and economic savings, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. There is however limited understanding of the intricacies of the approach, the modalities by which it works in practice, its levers and the trade-offs made. Such knowledge may be critical in deciding what role licensing should have in pandemic preparedness and equitable access to health technologies more broadly. This paper examines the case for licensing, the considerations for balancing public health needs, the challenges of negotiations, and the processes for validating proposed agreements. No access mechanism is perfect, but evidence suggests that public-health licensing has an important role to play, although it remains underused. Understanding some of the realities, strengths, limitations and complexities of applying the model may help calibrate expectations and develop incentives to expand its applications.

Defining and conceptualising the commercial determinants of health

Although commercial entities can contribute positively to health and society there is growing evidence that the products and practices of some commercial actors-notably the largest transnational corporations-are responsible for escalating rates of avoidable ill health, planetary damage, and social and health inequity; these problems are increasingly referred to as the commercial determinants of health. The climate emergency, the non-communicable disease epidemic, and that just four industry sectors (ie, tobacco, ultra-processed food, fossil fuel, and alcohol) already account for at least a third of global deaths illustrate the scale and huge economic cost of the problem. This paper, the first in a Series on the commercial determinants of health, explains how the shift towards market fundamentalism and increasingly powerful transnational corporations has created a pathological system in which commercial actors are increasingly enabled to cause harm and externalise the costs of doing so. Consequently, as harms to human and planetary health increase, commercial sector wealth and power increase, whereas the countervailing forces having to meet these costs (notably individuals, governments, and civil society organisations) become correspondingly impoverished and disempowered or captured by commercial interests. This power imbalance leads to policy inertia; although many policy solutions are available, they are not being implemented. Health harms are escalating, leaving health-care systems increasingly unable to cope. Governments can and must act to improve, rather than continue to threaten, the wellbeing of future generations, development, and economic growth.

Does the political will exist to bring quality-assured and affordable drugs to low- and middle-income countries?

BACKGROUND

Increased coverage with antiretroviral therapy for people living with HIV in low- and middle-income countries has increased their life expectancy associated with non-HIV comorbidities and the need for quality-assured and affordable non-communicable diseases drugs . Funders are leaving many middle-income countries that will have to pay and provide quality-assured and affordable HIV and non-HIV drugs, including for non-communicable diseases.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate costs for originator and generic antiretroviral therapy as the number of people living with HIV are projected to increase between 2016 and 2026, and discuss country, regional and global factors associated with increased access to generic drugs.

METHODS

Based on estimates of annual demand and prices, annual cost estimates were produced for generic and originator antiretroviral drug prices in low- and middle-income countries and projected for 2016-2026.

RESULTS

Drug costs varied between US$1.5 billion and US$4.8 billion for generic drugs and US$ 8.2 billion and US$16.5 billion for originator drugs between 2016 and 2026.

DISCUSSION

The global HIV response increased access to affordable generic drugs in low- and middle-income countries. Cheaper active pharmaceutical ingredients and market competition were responsible for reduced drug costs. The development and implementation of regulatory changes at country, regional and global levels, covering intellectual property rights and public health, and flexibilities in patent laws enabled prices to be reduced. These changes have not yet been applied in many low- and middle-income countries for HIV, nor for other infectious and non-communicable diseases, that lack the profile and political attention of HIV. Licensing backed up with Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights safeguards should become the norm to provide quality-assured and affordable drugs within competitive generic markets.

CONCLUSION

Does the political will exist among policymakers and other stakeholders to develop and implement these country, regional and global frameworks for non-HIV drugs as they did for antiretroviral drugs?

Cost of treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain with pregabalin or gabapentin in routine clinical practice: impact of their loss of exclusivity

To analyze the effect of loss of exclusivity of data on the cost of treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) with pregabalin or gabapentin in routine clinical practice. A retrospective observational study, with electronic medical records for patients enrolled at primary care centers managed by the health care provider Badalona Serveis Assistencials, who initiated treatment of PNP with pregabalin or gabapentin. The analysis used drugs and resources prices for year 2015. The 1163 electronic medical records (pregabalin; N = 764, gabapentin; N = 399) for patients (62.2% women) with a mean (standard deviation) age of 59.2 (14.7) years were analyzed. Treatment duration was slightly shorter with pregabalin than with gabapentin (5.2 vs 5.5 months; P = 0.124), with mean doses of 227.4 (178.6) mg and 900.0 (443.4) mg, respectively. The average study drug cost per patient was higher for pregabalin than for gabapentin; €214.6 (206.3) vs €157.4 (181.9), P < 0.001, although the cost of concomitant analgesic medication was lower; €176.5 (271.8) vs €306.7 (529.2), P < 0.001. The adjusted average total cost per patient was lower in those treated with pregabalin than in those treated with gabapentin; €2,413 (2119-2708) vs €3201 (2806-3.597); P = 0.002, owing to significantly lower health care costs; €1307 (1247-1367) vs €1538 (1458-1618), P < 0.001, and also non-health care costs; €1106 (819-1393) vs €1663 (1279-2048), P = 0.023, that was caused by a significantly lower use of concomitant medication, fewer medical visits to primary care, and fewer days of sick leave. After loss of exclusivity of both drugs, pregabalin continued to show lower health care and non-health care costs than gabapentin in the treatment of PNP in routine clinical practice.

Scaling-up the use of generic antiretrovirals in resource-limited countries: generic drugs for health

The number of people living with HIV (PLHIV) continues to increase around the world because of the increasing number on antiretroviral therapy (ART) and their associated increase of life expectancy, in addition to the number of people newly infected with HIV each year. Unless a 'cure' can be found for HIV infection, PLHIV can anticipate the need to take antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) for the rest of their lives. Because ARVs are now being used for HIV prevention, as well as for therapeutic purposes, the need for effective, affordable ARVs with few adverse effects will continue to rise. It is important to note that the dramatic growth in treatment coverage of PLHIV seen during the past decade has been primarily due to the increased use of generic ARVs. Thus, there will be a need to scale-up the research and development, production, distribution and access to generic ARVs and ART regimens. However, these processes must occur within national and international regulated free-market economic systems and must deal with increasingly multifaceted patent issues affecting the price while ensuring the quality of the ARVs. National and international regulatory mechanisms will have to evolve, which will affect broader national and international economic and trade issues. Because of the complexity of these issues, the Editors of this Supplement conceived of asking experts in their fields to describe the various steps from relevant research and development, to production of generic ARVs, their delivery to countries and subsequently to PLHIV in low- and middle-income countries. A main objective was to highlight how these steps are interrelated, how the production and delivery of these drugs to PLHIV in resource-limited countries can be made more effective and efficient, and what the lessons are for the production and delivery of a broader set of drugs to people in low- and middle-income countries.

Antiretroviral procurement and supply chain management

Procurement, the country-level process of ordering antiretrovirals (ARVs), and supply chain management, the mechanism by which they are delivered to health-care facilities, are critical processes required to move ARVs from manufacturers to patients. To provide a glimpse into the ARV procurement and supply chain, the following pages provide an overview of the primary stakeholders, principal operating models, and policies and regulations involved in ARV procurement. Also presented are key challenges that need to be addressed to ensure that the supply chain is not a barrier to the goal of universal coverage. This article will cover the steps necessary to order and distribute ARVs, including different models of delivery, key stakeholders involved, strategic considerations that vary depending on context and policies affecting them. The single drug examples given illustrate the complications inherent in fragmented supply and demand-driven models of procurement and supply chain management, and suggest tools for navigating these hurdles that will ultimately result in more secure and reliable ARV provision. Understanding the dynamics of ARV supply chain is important for the global health community, both to ensure full and efficient treatment of persons living with HIV as well as to inform the supply chain decisions for other public health products.