Dataset Information

Disease X: accelerating the development of medical countermeasures for the next pandemic.

ABSTRACT: WHO has listed several priority diseases with epidemic potential for which there are no, or insufficient, medical countermeasures. In response, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (with support from PricewaterhouseCoopers) coordinated subject matter experts to create a preparedness plan for Disease X. Disease X is caused by Pathogen X, an infectious agent that is not currently known to cause human disease, but an aetiologic agent of a future outbreak with epidemic or pandemic potential. We have identified crucial areas for acceleration in medical countermeasure product development and international coordination. We have also reviewed novel platforms and process improvements related to manufacturing, which could revolutionise the response to the next pandemic. Finally, we created several coordination and engagement guides. These guides range from the rational design of an intervention target product profile, to the key facets of vaccine and therapeutic development, to accelerated manufacturing and regulatory mechanisms. In this Personal View, we provide a high-level summary of the outcomes of the medical countermeasure development workstream, intended for a broad audience including academia, medical countermeasure developers, and multilateral coordinating bodies. We hope that they might find this piece useful in prioritising strategic investments and efforts to accelerate medical countermeasure development. We observed that in-depth analyses of clinical trial design, chemistry, manufacturing and control activities, and accelerated regulatory pathways are necessary for shortening the timelines for the product development of medical countermeasures. We intend to cover these topics in future publications.

SUBMITTER: Simpson S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7158580 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAnalysing the Canadian government's efforts to support the development of COVID-19 "medical countermeasures" (MCMs), this article seeks insights into political economy as a driver of pandemic response. We explore whether Canadian public funding policy during the pandemic involved departures from established practices of financialisation in biopharmaceutical research and development (R&D), including the dominance of private sector involvement in an intellectual property (IP) intensive approach to innovation underscoring profit, and governance opacity.MethodsWe interrogate public funding for MCMs by analyzing how much the Government of Canada (GoC) spent, how those funds were allocated, on what terms, and to whom. We identify the funding institutions, and the funds awarded between February 10, 2020, and March 31, 2021, to support the research, development, and manufacturing of MCMs, including diagnostics, vaccines, therapeutics, and information about clinical management and virus transmission. To collect these data, we conducted searches on the Internet, public data repositories, and filed several requests under the Access to Information Act (1985). Subsequently, we carried out a document-based analysis of electronically accessible research contracts, proposals, grant calls, and policy announcements.ResultsThe GoC announced CAD$ 1.4 billion for research, development and manufacturing of COVID-19 MCMs. Fully 68% (CAD$ 959 million) of the announced public funding was channelled to investment in private sector firms. Canadian public funding showed a consistent focus on early and late stage development of COVID-19 MCMs and the expansion of biopharmaceutical manufacturing capacity. Assessing whether Canada's investments into developing COVID-19 MCMs safeguard affordable and transparent access to the products of publicly funded research, we found that access policies on IP management, sharing of clinical data, affordability and availability were not systematic, consistent, or transparent, and few, if any, mechanisms ensured long-term sustainability.ConclusionBeyond incremental change in policy goals, such as public investment in domestic biomanufacturing, the features of Canadian public policies endorsing financialization in the biopharmaceutical sector remained largely unchanged during the pandemic.

Project description:Background:The 2013-2016 outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD) in West Africa led to unprecedented morbidity and mortality. Although different classes of putative antiviral agents with supportive preclinical data were available for testing, and although several attempts to perform meaningful evaluation of these agents were undertaken during the epidemic, different research methods, a lack of appropriate controls in most studies, and formidable logistical challenges to completion of studies under field conditions hampered the success of these efforts. Ultimately only 1 randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial (PREVAIL II) was performed in this setting, and, owing to a decrease in the number of new cases available for study, it, too, ended prior to reaching definitive results. Retrospective review of the lessons learned from this outbreak argues strongly for the need for much better preparedness in terms of selecting the trial design and drug(s) for use during the next outbreak. Methods:Using recent data provided by representatives from the pharmaceutical industry, clinical and laboratory subject matter experts from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, other US government agencies, and academic partners were consulted regarding the current state of knowledge about several lead compounds with putative activity against EVD. Consensus was sought on recommendations concerning the most promising treatment strategies against EVD that should be studied in the context of a randomized clinical trial during the next outbreak. Results:Four compounds from 2 different classes (monoclonal antibody [mAb] cocktails and direct-acting antiviral agents [DAAs]) were highlighted as lead candidates, limitations in the current knowledge base about these drug classes were reviewed, and recommendations about the optimal clinical research design for studying combinations of these different agents were made. Conclusions:Although achieving the desired sample size could be challenging, a randomized, controlled clinical trial based on a combination strategy of a mAb with a DAA was recommended as the most appropriate clinical trial design to be undertaken during the next outbreak of EVD.

Dataset Information

Disease X: accelerating the development of medical countermeasures for the next pandemic.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets