Developing new health technologies for neglected diseases: a pipeline portfolio review and cost model

• DOI: 10.12688/gatesopenres.12817.1
• Publication Date: 2018-04-26T13:30:13Z
• Authors: Ruth Young; Tewodros Bekele; Alexander Gunn; Nick Chapman; Vipul Chowdhary; Kelsey Corrigan; Lindsay Dahora; Sebastián Martinez; Sallie Permar; Johan Persson; Bill Rodriguez; Marco Schäferhoff; Kevin Schulman; Tulika Singh; Robert F Terry; Gavin Yamey
• Keywords: 03 medical and health sciences; 0302 clinical medicine; Research Article; 3. Good health

<ns5:p><ns5:bold>Background</ns5:bold>: Funding for product development neglected diseases fell from 2009-2015, other than a short-term injection of Ebola funding. One impediment to mobilizing resources is lack information on candidates, the estimated costs move them through pipeline, and likelihood specific launches. This study aimed help fill these gaps.</ns5:p><ns5:p> <ns5:bold>Methods</ns5:bold>: We conducted pipeline portfolio review identify current candidates 35 diseases. Using an adapted version Portfolio Impact (P2I) financial modelling tool, we over next decade likely Since unlikely yield several critical products, develop set priority “missing” products.</ns5:p><ns5:p> <ns5:bold>Results: </ns5:bold>We found 685 as August 31, 2017; 538 met inclusion criteria input into model. It would cost about $16.3 billion (range $13.4-19.8B) with three-quarters incurred in first 5 years, resulting 128 (89-160) expected Based there be very few launches complex new chemical entities; highly efficacious vaccines HIV, tuberculosis, or malaria unlikely. Estimated additional launch one each 18 key missing products range $13.6B-$21.8B, depending complexity. Over total around $4.5-5.8B/year.</ns5:p><ns5:p> <ns5:bold>Conclusions</ns5:bold>: annual global spending $3B, this suggests funding gap years at least $1.5-2.8B, which probably underestimate. The not balanced across health needs.</ns5:p>