Breakthroughs Blog

Interested in more global health innovation news? Every week GHTC scours media reports worldwide to deliver essential global health R&D news and content to your inbox. Sign up now to receive our weekly R&D News Roundup email. As the dengue outbreak in Latin America has continued to grow and the threat of dengue continues to rise globally due to climate change, better and cheaper vaccines are on the horizon but are unlikely to be available soon enough to address the current crises. Currently approved vaccines for dengue include one expensive two-shot regimen and one that can only be given to people who have already been infected. A new, single-dose vaccine designed to target all four strains of the dengue virus, which was created by the US National Institutes of Health and licensed for development by the Brazilian Instituto Butantan, provided strong protection in a Phase 3 trial. The institute plans to submit the vaccine to Brazil’s regulatory agency for approval within the next few months, and if approved, the institute could start producing tens of million doses next year. Merck also licensed the vaccine technology and is developing a related vaccine for the rest of the world but has yet to test it in a clinical trial. In the meantime, the Brazilian government bought global supply of Takeda’s Qdenga vaccine, which, at a steep per-dose price, will provide some protection during the current outbreak. Takeda’s vaccine has also been licensed to an Indian generic drugmaker, but a slow start-up process means that is unlikely to be available before 2030.Pfizer recently announced that its RSV vaccine demonstrated the potential to protect adults between 18 and 50 at high risk of severe illness in a late-stage clinical trial, offering the promise of a tool to protect a far broader population against the virus that not only causes thousands of hospitalizations and deaths among older Americans and hundreds among infants every year but also can also cause severe illness in younger adults with weakened immune systems or underlying chronic conditions. Abrysvo is currently approved in the United States and elsewhere for adults 60 and older and expectant mothers. Pfizer announced plans to submit the final results from the trial for expanded approval of Abrysvo, although a timeline for submission has not yet been disclosed. Last fall, GSK released late-stage trial data demonstrating that its RSV vaccine could protect adults between 50 and 59 years old, and the US Food and Drug Administration is expected to make its decision on that vaccine in June.A research team from the Centre for Clinical Microbiology at University College London has developed a new method for testing tuberculosis (TB) that would allow lower-resourced laboratories in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to process samples safely, with the method primarily aimed at use for monitoring drug treatment response and clinical trials. The World Health Organization recommends monthly treatment monitoring with sputum culture to ensure patients are adhering to treatment to reduce the emergence of multidrug- or rifampicin-resistant TB, but monitoring with culture is often unavailable or incredibly slow in LMICs. The new method cuts out the need for a culture; uses common instrumentation available in most laboratories, even in LMICS; does not have high energy requirements; and takes only three or four hours to return a result. The method is already being used in clinical studies.

Interested in more global health innovation news? Every week GHTC scours media reports worldwide to deliver essential global health R&D news and content to your inbox. Sign up now to receive our weekly R&D News Roundup email. The first participants have been vaccinated in a Phase 2 clinical trial of a vaccine candidate for Lassa fever virus, which is being led by an international collaboration between IAVI, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), and in-country partners in Nigeria. Lassa fever is recognized by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a priority pathogen requiring accelerated research and causes an estimated 5,000 deaths each year, with the disease primarily affecting West Africa. There are no approved vaccines for Lassa currently. The hope is that this trial, which is the most advanced Lassa vaccine trial to date, will lead to the availability of a vaccine candidate for evaluation and use in future Lassa outbreaks and eventually an approved vaccine for routine immunization, as well as foster sustainable in-country research capacity and partnerships through engagement with Nigerian partners.Last week, FIND and LifeArc announced a new project in Kenya aimed at improving the detection and treatment of visceral leishmaniasis, a neglected tropical disease that mainly affects children and is fatal in more than 95 percent of cases if untreated. The project, which will run from 2024 to 2027, aims to increase early diagnosis and treatment to prevent disability and death from the disease in part by accelerating the development of new and improved diagnostic tests that are more sensitive than those currently available. The project will also build on ongoing efforts to improve community awareness, boost local and national testing capacity, and strengthen overall health system capacity.Last week, Cepheid announced that its point-of-care HIV test has received prequalification status from WHO. The decision will lead to the inclusion of the company’s HIV-1 PCR assay with extended coverage on a list of tests that meet WHO’s standards for global use, boosting access in low- and middle-income countries without designated or stringent regulatory authorities. The test can be used to detect HIV infection in infants and people who were recently infected and provides rapid results, enabling improved linkage to further care and treatment initiation.

Interested in more global health innovation news? Every week GHTC scours media reports worldwide to deliver essential global health R&D news and content to your inbox. Sign up now to receive our weekly R&D News Roundup email. Last Tuesday, Valneva announced the launch of a Phase 1 clinical trial to investigate the safety and immunogenicity of a vaccine against the Zika virus, for which there are currently no available preventable vaccines or treatments. The second-generation adjuvanted inactivated vaccine candidate, VLA1601, will be tested in 150 adult participants in the United States, with the first topline data from the trial expected as soon as early next year.  Numerous outbreaks of Zika have occurred around the world, but the virus is currently circulating in Mexico, Central and South America, the Caribbean region, and some areas of the continental United States.Moderna’s next-generation mRNA vaccine for COVID-19 elicited a higher immune response against most strains of omicron BA.4/BA.5 and the original virus than the company’s currently licensed vaccine and has a similar safety profile in Phase 3 trial. The vaccine candidate, mRNA-1283, demonstrated the highest benefits in patients over 65, who are at risk of more severe disease. The trial included over 11,000 patients from across the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada. These results also point to the future promise of the company’s combination mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 and influenza, which are also currently in development and previously demonstrated a similar immune response to the company’s vaccines for COVID-19.The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently announced the approval of Roche’s Cobas malaria test for screening blood, organ, and tissue donors, which could help reduce the risk of transfusion-transmitted malaria. The test is designed to qualitatively detect in whole-blood samples Plasmodium DNA and RNA from the five main species of Plasmodium parasite species known to cause human infection: P. falciparum, P. malariae, P. vivax, P. ovale, and P. knowlesi. Roche’s technology is now the first FDA-licensed test for screening blood donors for malaria.

Nearly six months into fiscal year 2024 (FY24), the US government has finally agreed upon a budget for the remaining six months. Nevertheless, March brings with it a new appropriations cycle forcibly run in parallel with the last. With the release of the President’s Budget Request (PBR) for fiscal year 2025 (FY25) and ongoing meetings with appropriations staff, the prospects for future US spending on global health research and development (R&D) are coming into focus, with both good and bad on the horizon.FY24 spending package: A mixed bag for global health R&D This year’s appropriations process was certainly one for the history books in that it was historically difficult—largely due to partisan divisions and threats to the House speakership. But on March 22, moments before a partial government shutdown was set to go into effect, a six-bill “minibus” was voted through by the House of Representatives and the Senate and later signed into law, which will keep the government operational until September 30. This second spending package included funding bills for Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies (LHHS); State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs (SFOPS); and Defense, which are a mixed bag for funding for global health R&D.LHHSThe LHHS bill, which covers funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), included some welcome increases to agencies and programs that support global health research alongside overall stagnant funding.Out of the three agencies, BARDA, which focuses on the R&D of countermeasures against emerging health threats, received the largest increase in funding with a $65 million (6.8 percent) boost over fiscal year 2023 (FY23) levels, bringing its total budget to $1.015 billion. The CDC, America’s lead public health agency, and NIH, the primary agency responsible for biomedical health research, witnessed marginal adjustments, with their budget lines most relevant to global health R&D remaining largely static. Notably, CDC's National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID) received a $9.5 million (1.27 percent) boost, which will help bolster crucial surveillance initiatives such as the Advanced Molecular Detection program.  Additionally, the minibus also included complimentary directives, known as report language, which were championed by GHTC, that reinforce the importance of global health and neglected disease research taking place at CDC and NIH. It also included important language encouraging BARDA to consider the needs of people living in low-resource settings in its R&D funding decisions and directing the agency to provide more transparent and regular reporting on its investments and allocate at least $10 million of its budget to create a new Disease X medical countermeasures program to develop tools against viral families with pandemic potential.SFOPSThe SFOPS bill covers global health work undertaken by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and the US Department of State (State). Unfortunately, the FY24 spending package included a significant cut of $530.95 million (5.3 percent) to State and USAID global health programs.Much of this reduction is due to a decrease in funding by $350 million for the US contribution to The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, which fell from $2 billion in FY23 to $1.65 billion in FY24. While this is a large cut, it was both expected and supported by advocates, given that US law caps the maximum contribution that the United States can make to the fund relative to the contributions of other donors. Thus, the “cut” was implemented in line with the cap to avoid a harsh drop-off in US funding in the coming years. Accordingly, many advocates are not viewing it as an actual cut. The remaining decrease in funding comes from a significant $200 million (22 percent) cut to USAID Global Health Security (GHS). The FY24 funding for GHS of $700 million retains a $100 million carve-out for a US contribution to the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, or CEPI, but advocates are still piecing together what the $200 million slash could mean for other GHS programming. This picture is further complicated by the opaque nature of how the US government intends to fund a contribution to the World Bank Pandemic Fund, which is neither specified in the bill in terms of a funding number nor in the programmatic budget line. The Biden Administration announced last year its intent to contribute $250 million to the fund, but this contribution is not actually detailed in the spending package, so it remains unclear how this commitment will be realized. Slightly cushioning the overall cut to State and USAID global health programs are some modest increases to the budget lines for the maternal and child health (through an increase in funding to GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance), nutrition, and other public health threats programs.In a key win for global health research advocates, Congress also included accompanying report language for SFOPS directing USAID to increase its spending for health R&D over the prior fiscal year and to publish an annual report on its health R&D activities and investments. Notably, the reauthorization of the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR, was also included in the SFOPS bill but only for one year, so authorization will expire next March. This one-year reauthorization tees up another battle, which will certainly be shaped by the political climate and controlling parties following the presidential and congressional elections this fall.DefenseWhile few may think of the US Department of Defense (DoD) as a key global health player, the agency’s spending supports R&D against epidemic-prone diseases and other health issues that pose a risk to US national security and service members stationed abroad—so its investments contribute to combating diseases endemic in many of the world’s poorest places. Encouragingly, language supporting DoD's research on infectious diseases and the development of medical countermeasures was included in the accompanying Defense bill report.Unfortunately, however, Congress did not include tuberculosis among the diseases eligible to be funded via the DoD-led Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program’s (CDMRP’s) Peer Reviewed Medical Research Program (PRMRP), as has been the case in years past. This is a point of future advocacy since the CDMRP PRMRP funds other neglected and emerging diseases in line with the list of eligible diseases defined in the Senate’s Defense bill each year.FY25 President’s Budget: A story of lowered ambitionOn March 11, President Joe Biden released his FY25 budget request, outlining his administration's recommendations to Congress for spending for the next fiscal year. The FY25 PBR is more moderate than Biden’s FY24 proposal, which can be largely attributed to the administration upholding their end of the debt ceiling bargain to keep overall spending levels capped at roughly FY23 levels. But even still, the lack of boldness for global health activities across the board was felt by advocates.With respect to global health programs at State and USAID, the budget proposes an overall decrease of approximately $733 million (7 percent) compared to FY23 enacted levels. This includes a $175 million (4.2 percent) cut to USAID and a $558 million (8.9 percent) cut to State global health programs. Concerning the latter, the cut comes from the PBR proposing a $1.19 billion contribution to the Global Fund, which would be an $810 million reduction from FY23 levels. As previously noted, this drastic cut is due in large part to the cap imposed on maximum US contributions; however, advocates are still pushing for $1.65 billion in FY25, citing projections that the US contribution can be set higher without violating the cap. The proposed USAID cut is more nuanced and comes from an accounting choice by the administration to transfer funding for the US contribution to the Pandemic Fund ($250 million) from under the Global Health Security line at USAID to the budget for State’s new Bureau of Global Health Security and Diplomacy, which will now manage US engagement with the fund. In conversations with the agency, the movement of this funding is not being perceived as a cut—leaving USAID’s global health programs largely untouched in the PBR. Most programs are flat funded, though the budget proposes a modest $30 million (3.3 percent) boost to USAID’s maternal and child health programs and a reduction of $26 million (4.5 percent) to USAID’s family planning account.On the LHHS side, the budget proposal is slightly rosier, though far from ambitious. The PBR proposes increases of $20 million (2.1 percent) for BARDA and $1.4 billion (2.3 percent) for NIH overall, with the latter including a modest boost of $18.72 million (0.3 percent) for NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases but flat funding for NIH’s Fogarty International Center, which supports global health research and training. CDC received a proposed increase of $465.4 million (5 percent) in the PBR, with NCEZID receiving a $30 million (4 percent) increase and the Center for Global Health flat funded.Notably, CDC’s congressional budget justification proposes that $20 million of this funding for NCEZID be put towards wastewater surveillance, which is programming that is currently being supported unsustainably via emergency funding for the COVID-19 response. Additionally, in the BARDA congressional budget justification, the administration suggests a $20 million boost “to increase BARDA’s Broad Spectrum Antimicrobials and Combatting Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria portfolio" through engagement with the Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria Biopharmaceutical Accelerator, or CARB-X, an international partnership focused on accelerating the development of new antibacterial innovations.While GHTC understands the administration’s fiscal situation and negotiating position with Congress, the discrepancy between the administration’s ambitions from the FY24 PBR to the FY25 PBR are stark, with some agencies seeing decreases of over $1 billion between the two presidential requests.FY25 outlook: Not great, but not badWhile it may feel cruel for advocates, there is no breathing room between the FY24 and FY25 appropriations processes. Additionally, the constraints the global health community felt in 2024 in the wake of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023—also known as the Biden-McCarthy Debt Ceiling Deal that capped spending growth—are still with us. Even though the outcomes of the FY24 spending package were discouraging for global health advocates—it went better than many expected. For FY25, while a robust and bold global and public health budget is the goal—holding off any cuts and returning to FY23 topline budgets for global health programs will be critical. GHTC will be working to communicate that message clearly while keeping in mind the uphill battle caused by the parameters forced upon appropriators by last June’s debt ceiling deal.Other obstacles like election-year politicking and a remarkable loss in global health champions in Congress will make future negotiations harder and will require advocates to go more on the offense. Pushing for stronger toplines and no cuts will be vital in FY25 to get the gains the community needs to get the world back on track toward eradicating neglected diseases and better preparing for emerging threats.