Survey returns from survey on research perspectives for drug development targeting vectorborne diseases and environmental impact
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
ORGANISM(S): Homo sapiens (human)
SUBMITTER:
PROVIDER: S-BSST1509 | biostudies-other |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST1447 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10655797 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTropical infectious diseases are called neglected, because they are, inter alia, characterized by an R&D deficit. A similar deficit exists for rare (orphan) diseases which neither promise a sufficient return on R&D investment. To encourage the development of treatments for rare diseases, orphan drug acts were created which contain financial and non-financial incentives for the pharmaceutical industry. Similar instruments aimed exclusively at neglected diseases do not yet exist. Proposals for a regulatory approach to promote R&D for neglected diseases include the application of selected orphan drug incentives, or the implementation of a Medical Research and Development Treaty (MRDT) with national funding obligations for medical R&D. We compiled and analyzed experts' opinions on causes for the treatment deficit for neglected diseases and on desirable and feasible measures to promote neglected disease R&D. Hereby, the focus was on mechanisms contained in orphan drug regulations and in the Medical Research and Development Treaty draft (Discussion draft 4, 2005). Lastly, we solicited experts' opinions on the desirability and feasibility of a regulatory instrument to foster R&D for neglected diseases.MethodsAn international online-Delphi survey was conducted with 117 (first round) and 56 (second round) experts of different professional backgrounds and professional affiliations who formulated and ranked causes and solutions related to the treatment deficit for neglected diseases.ResultsIn both rounds of survey, the majority of the participating experts (88.4% first round, 86.8% second round) advocated the development of a regulatory instrument to promote R&D for neglected diseases. Most experts (77.9% first round, 79.3% second round) also considered this to be a feasible option. With the exception of market exclusivity, which was viewed critically, key provisions contained in orphan drug regulations were judged favorably also for neglected diseases. A majority (87.1% first round, 77.2% second round) supported national funding obligations for neglected diseases which are proposed by the Medical Research and Development Treaty draft.ConclusionsWhile not all features of orphan drug regulations and of the MRDT draft received equal support, the view was expressed that a regulatory instrument would be a desirable and feasible measure to promote R&D for neglected diseases.
| S-EPMC3228726 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Rare diseases affect over 400 million people worldwide and less than 5% of rare diseases have an approved treatment. Fortunately, the number of underlying disease etiologies is far less than the number of diseases, because many rare diseases share a common molecular etiology. Moreover, many of these shared molecular etiologies are therapeutically actionable. Grouping rare disease patients for clinical trials based on the underlying molecular etiology, rather than the traditional, symptom-based definition of disease, has the potential to greatly increase the number of patients gaining access to clinical trials. Basket clinical trials based on a shared molecular drug target have become common in the field of oncology and have been accepted by regulatory agencies as a basis for drug approvals. Implementation of basket clinical trials in the field of rare diseases is seen by multiple stakeholders-patients, researchers, clinicians, industry, regulators, and funders-as a solution to accelerate the identification of new therapies and address patient's unmet needs.
| S-EPMC10331571 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThis study evaluates the association of Biopharma company valuation with the lead drug's development stage, orphan status, number of indications, and disease area. We also estimated annual returns Bioentrepreneurs and investors can expect from founding and investing in drug development ventures.MethodsSDC Thomson Reuter and S&P Capital IQ were screened for majority acquisitions of US and EU Biopharma companies developing new molecular entities for prescription use (SIC code: 2834). Acquisition data were complemented with drug characteristics extracted from clinicaltrials.gov, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and deal announcements. Thereafter, company valuations were combined with previously published clinical development periods alongside orphan-, indication-, and disease-specific success rates to estimate annual returns for investments in drug developing companies.ResultsBased on a sample of 311 Biopharma acquisitions from 2005 to 2020, companies developing orphan, multi-indication, and oncology drugs were valued significantly higher than their peers during later development stages (p < 0.05). We also estimated significantly higher returns for shareholders of companies with orphan relative to non-orphan-designated lead drugs from Phase 1 to FDA approval (46% vs. 12%, p < 0.001). Drugs developed across multiple indications also provided higher returns than single-indication agents from Pre-Clinic to FDA approval (21% vs. 11%, p < 0.001). Returns for oncology drugs exceeded other disease areas (26% vs. 8%, p < 0.001).ConclusionsClinical and economic conditions surrounding orphan-designated drugs translate to a favorable financial risk-return profile for Bioentrepreneurs and investors. Bioentrepreneurs must be aware of the upside real option value their multi-indication drug could offer when negotiating acquisition or licensing agreements.
| S-EPMC8854317 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Following the publication of the final paper in a planned series of four studies estimating the economic returns from biomedical and health research, we reflect on what we have learnt from these types of assessment.
| S-EPMC6144334 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs) are an increasingly represented class of drugs. These small sequences of nucleotides are designed to precisely target other oligonucleotides, usually RNA species, and are modified to protect them from degradation by nucleases. Their specificity is due to their sequence, so it is possible to target any RNA sequence that is already known. These molecules are very versatile and adaptable given that their sequence and chemistry can be custom manufactured. Based on the chemistry being used, their activity may significantly change and their effects on cell function and phenotypes can differ dramatically. While some will cause the target RNA to decay, others will only bind to the target and act as a steric blocker. Their incredible versatility is the key to manipulating several aspects of nucleic acid function as well as their process, and alter the transcriptome profile of a specific cell type or tissue. For example, they can be used to modify splicing or mask specific sites on a target. The entire design rather than just the sequence is essential to ensuring the specificity of the ASO to its target. Thus, it is vitally important to ensure that the complete process of drug design and testing is taken into account. ASOs' adaptability is a considerable advantage, and over the past decades has allowed multiple new drugs to be approved. This, in turn, has had a significant and positive impact on patient lives. Given current challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic, it is necessary to find new therapeutic strategies that would complement the vaccination efforts being used across the globe. ASOs may be a very powerful tool that can be used to target the virus RNA and provide a therapeutic paradigm. The proof of the efficacy of ASOs as an anti-viral agent is long-standing, yet no molecule currently has FDA approval. The emergence and widespread use of RNA vaccines during this health crisis might provide an ideal opportunity to develop the first anti-viral ASOs on the market. In this review, we describe the story of ASOs, the different characteristics of their chemistry, and how their characteristics translate into research and as a clinical tool.
| S-EPMC8781596 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are targeted therapeutics generated by conjugation of cytotoxic small molecules to monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) via chemical linkers. Due to their selective delivery of toxic payloads to antigen-positive cancer cells, ADCs demonstrate wider therapeutic indexes compared with conventional chemotherapy. After decades of intensive research and development, significant advances have been made in the field, leading to a total of 10 U.S. food and drug administration (FDA)-approved ADCs to treat cancer patients. Currently, ~80 ADCs targeting different antigens are under clinical evaluation for treatment of either hematological or solid malignancies. Notably, three ADCs targeting the same oncofetal protein, receptor tyrosine kinase like orphan receptor 1 (ROR1), have attracted considerable attention when they were acquired or licensed successively in the fourth quarter of 2020 by three major pharmaceutical companies. Apparently, ROR1 has emerged as an attractive target for cancer therapy. Since all the components of ADCs, including the antibody, linker and payload, as well as the conjugation method, play critical roles in ADC's efficacy and performance, their choice and combination will determine how far they can be advanced. This review summarizes the design and development of current anti-ROR1 ADCs and highlights an emerging trend to target ROR1 for cancer therapy.
| S-EPMC8597957 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn 2007, the priority review voucher (PRV) was implemented in the US to incentivize research and development (R&D) for tropical diseases. The PRV is issued by the US FDA and grants a quicker review to manufacturers upon successful development of a product for a disease eligible for the program.ObjectiveThe objective of this analysis was to assess whether the PRV has incentivized R&D (measured as clinical trial activity) for the intended tropical diseases.MethodWe used a difference-in-difference-in-differences (DDD) strategy by exploiting variation in its implementation across diseases and registries around the world. Clinical trials were retrieved from the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for the years 2005-2019.ResultsWe found a positive, but not statistically significant, effect of the PRV on stimulating R&D activity. Delayed effects of the policy could not be found.ConclusionOur findings, which were robust across a series of robustness tests, suggest that the PRV program is not associated with a trigger in innovation for neglected diseases and therefore should not be considered as a stand-alone solution. It should be supplemented with other government measures to incentivize R&D activity. To increase the value of the program, we recommend that the PRV only be awarded to novel products and not to products that have already been licensed outside the US. Doing so would restrict the number of vouchers awarded and slow down their ongoing market depreciation. Finally, we propose that product sponsors be required to submit an access plan for PRV-awarded products.
| S-EPMC9217899 | biostudies-literature
Project description:•This study estimates economic returns to investments in rice varietal development in the Philippines and Bangladesh.•The net returns to IRRI and national partners' investments remain strongly positive.•However, the returns are decreasing at a faster rate in the Philippines (24%) than in Bangladesh (6%).•IRRI and national partners should continue investing in rice R&D, especially to develop superior rice varieties.
| S-EPMC9231557 | biostudies-literature