News: Announcement

As global leaders are set to adopt the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) later this month, a new report calls for the United Nations (UN) and its Member States to strengthen the SDG health targets by including indicators to measure global health research and development (R&D) progress in the SDG monitoring framework. The report—Measuring global health R&D for the post-2015 development agenda—which was prepared by the think tank Policy Cures and commissioned by a group of leading global health nonprofits, includes a short list of recommended global health R&D indicators for inclusion in the global and national SDG monitoring frameworks. The report underscores the critical link between global health R&D and achieving the SDGs. It notes that the SDGs include ambitious targets for reducing child and maternal deaths and ending the epidemics of HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and neglected tropical diseases, but existing global strategies that align with these targets clearly acknowledge they cannot be achieved without the development and delivery of new and improved drugs, vaccines, diagnostics, and other health tools. While the SDGs include a means of implementation target (target 3.b) to support R&D for vaccines and medicines for diseases primarily impacting developing countries, none of the official UN indicator proposals include any indicators to measure progress on the global health R&D needed to meet this and other health targets. To fill this gap and ensure the SDGs generate the innovations needed to reach the health targets, the report proposes three indicators to measure global health R&D for inclusion in the SDG global monitoring framework, as well as five additional indicators countries are encouraged to include in their national monitoring frameworks if appropriate for their circumstances. These indicators were recommended based on an extensive landscaping and consultative process to identify health R&D indicators and further analysis to refine this list based on feasibility, level of community endorsement, appropriateness, and cross-cutting potential. “Despite the importance of global health R&D to achieving the SDGs, it’s been largely ignored as part of the agenda,” said Erin Will Morton, director of the Global Health Technologies Coalition—one of the organizations that commissioned the paper. “If we want the SDGs to be successful, it is vital that Member States include robust global health R&D indicators in the monitoring framework. Without these indicators in place as we move toward 2030, we won’t be able to gauge whether we are on track to develop and deliver the next generation of health technologies needed to reach the SDGs.” In the interest of balancing the importance of advancing global health R&D with the need to achieve a manageable global monitoring framework, the report recommends three indicators for inclusion in the global framework—the first two of which can be monitored by specialized agencies through existing mechanisms at the global level, while the third can be monitored by national statistical offices: Public, private, and not-for-profit investment in R&D for the health needs that disproportionately affect people living in LMICs Number of new registered health technologies targeting the health needs that disproportionately affect people living in LMICs R&D expenditure as a percentage of gross domestic product To more comprehensively monitor global health R&D progress, the report recommends countries also adopt the following five complementary national indicators if appropriate for their circumstances: Number of new health technologies registered by the National Regulatory Authority and/or recommended by national guidelines National Regulatory Authorities participating in harmonized registration initiatives based on internationally recognized policies and standards; and sharing regulatory policies, legislation, guidelines, and information on registered products Number of formal coordination and collaboration initiatives aimed at increasing and facilitating transfer of health-related technology, including between public and private entities Number of registered clinical trials that meet international quality and safety standards Number of clinical trial sites that meet international quality and safety standards “While it is important to keep the list of global indicators manageable, it’s equally important to make sure we have the right indicators in place to effectively measure our progress toward the SDGs,” said Nick Chapman, Policy Cures’ director of research and the report’s lead author. “Inclusion of the indicators proposed in this paper would help us monitor progress in global health R&D and mobilize increased resources and political commitment to advance the health innovations needed to reach the SDGs, while creating very little or no additional burden on statistical offices.” The report was prepared by Policy Cures and commissioned by the Council on Health Research for Development (COHRED), the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND), the GHTC, the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI), the Medicines for Malaria Venture (MMV), PATH, and the TB Alliance to inform stakeholders of the importance of including robust indicators for global health R&D and advise on the most suitable indicators for inclusion.

The Global Health Technologies Coalition (GHTC) is pleased to announce that HarvestPlus has joined the coalition as a member. HarvestPlus is an international program that seeks to improve nutrition and public health by developing and promoting biofortified, staple food crops that are rich in vitamins and minerals, and providing global leadership on biofortification evidence and technology. “Micronutrient deficiency is a problem that adversely affects at least 2 billion people in the developing world,” said Dr. Howarth Bouis, director of HarvestPlus. “We believe that biofortification can be a cost-effective approach to tackle this problem on a large scale—making the everyday food staples that people rely on in poor regions more nutritious. To make this mission a reality, HarvestPlus works with diverse partners around the world to breed and promote micronutrient-rich staple food crops in poor countries and build a body of research that support their effectiveness. We look forwarding to partnering with GHTC and its members to educate policymakers about the benefits of biofortification and the important role science and innovation play more broadly in advancing global health.” HarvestPlus was officially launched in 2003 when it became the first recipient of grant funding for biofortification research from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. HarvestPlus is part of the CGIAR Research Program on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health. CGIAR is a global agriculture research partnership for a food secure future. Its science is carried out by its 15 research centers in collaboration with hundreds of partner organizations. The HarvestPlus program is coordinated by two of these centers, the International Center for Tropical Agriculture and the International Food Policy Research Institute. “Biofortification is a novel and promising approach to improve global nutrition and health, and HarvestPlus is the global leader in refining and deploying it globally,” said Erin Will Morton, GHTC’s Coalition Director. “GHTC is committed to advancing groundbreaking research and innovation across global health areas and technology platforms, so we are excited to welcome HarvestPlus’s unique voice to our growing membership.” For more information about HarvestPlus, visit www.harvestplus.org.

The Global Health Technologies Coalition (GHTC) is excited to announce that the UPMC Center for Health Security has joined the coalition as its 26th member. The Center is an independent nonprofit organization that works to protect people’s health from the consequences of epidemics and disasters and to ensure that communities are resilient to major challenges. “At the UPMC Center for Health Security, we examine how scientific and technological innovation can strengthen health security,” said Anita Cicero, chief operating officer and deputy director at the Center. “Our goal is to contribute independent research and analysis that will impact both policy and practice over a range of health challenges, including emerging infectious diseases, pandemic flu, and the potential for biological accidents or threats. An important part of our mission is connecting diverse communities of health and science experts, industry representatives, and government officials to strengthen collective efforts to improve health security. Therefore, we are thrilled to join the Global Health Technologies Coalition and look forward to working with GHTC and its members to advance innovations and policies that strengthen our ability to prevent and respond to existing and emerging health challenges.” Based in Baltimore, Maryland, the Center was originally founded in 1998 as an organization dedicated to diminishing the public health consequences of biological threats. In 2003, the Center was recruited to join the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) and became the Center for Biosecurity of UPMC. Over the next decade, the Center expanded its work to address a broader range of issues in the health security field, including the global rise in emerging infectious diseases, a continued risk of pandemic flu, major natural disasters, dependence on vulnerable infrastructure, outbreaks of foodborne illness, and the potential for biological, chemical, or nuclear accidents or intentional threats. In 2013, the Center changed its name to the UPMC Center for Health Security to reflect these expanded priorities. “GHTC welcomes the UPMC Center for Health Security to our community of nonprofit product developers, think tanks, academic institutions, and advocacy organizations working to advance innovations that save lives,” said Erin Will Morton, Coalition Director of GHTC. “The Center’s independent research, analysis, and policy recommendations are highly valued by decision makers in the health and security fields, and the Center’s perspective will add tremendous value as GHTC educates policymakers and advocates for research and development of new tools to prevent, diagnose, and treat global diseases. For more information about the UPMC Center for Health Security, visit www.upmchealthsecurity.org.

As the world looks to American innovation to fight Ebola, malaria, tuberculosis, and a host of other health threats, a new report released today on Capitol Hill warns budget battles in Washington are eroding preparedness at home and abroad at a time when scientific advances are poised to deliver new lifesaving drugs, vaccines, and diagnostics. “Since 2009, we’ve seen declining, or at best stagnating, support for global health research and development, with politics trumping prudent investments that could protect the US and the world from an array of threats,” said Erin Will Morton, director of the Global Health Technologies Coalition (GHTC), an influential alliance of 25 nonprofit organizations seeking new tools to address existing challenges, including HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis; emerging problems, such as drug-resistant superbugs and dengue; and neglected diseases, like sleeping sickness and river blindness. The prospect of additional cuts is alarming disease experts, who warn that the next global health crisis could already be brewing in places like war-ravaged Syria and ISIS-occupied Iraq, where there has been an alarming rise in polio, measles, leishmaniasis, typhoid fever, hepatitis A, and meningitis. Meanwhile, Chagas, dengue, and chikungunya are gaining a foothold in the US. And the degraded health systems that abetted the spread of Ebola are not peculiar to West Africa: a recent report from Save the Children warns 28 countries are “highly vulnerable” to a deadly disease outbreak. Morton noted that while the Ebola crisis exposed the dangers of ignoring neglected diseases, one bright spot was the ability of US agencies to collaborate and quickly roll out desperately needed diagnostic tests and launch clinical trials for new drugs and vaccines. “But these innovations are the product of past investments that provided consistent, long-term support to researchers who steadily generated incremental advances,” she said. “So by failing to provide sufficient support today, we are systematically degrading our ability to respond to the next global health crisis.” The GHTC analysis notes that in the first decade of the 21st century, the United States doubled support for global health research and development (R&D). And it was rewarded with dozens of health innovations that have contributed significantly to major milestones in global health: since 1990, there has been a 50 percent drop in childhood deaths, a 45 percent decrease in maternal deaths, and a 25 percent reduction in deaths from infectious diseases. But since 2009, a succession of budget battles that culminated in the across-the-board “sequestration” cuts of 2013 reduced total US government spending for global health R&D by US$185 million, or 11 percent below 2009 levels. (Overall, global investments in neglected diseases fell by 6.2 percent in this period, placing more importance on the US—where economic conditions are improving faster than in other wealthy regions—to lead the fight.) The GHTC report acknowledges budget agreements in 2014 and 2015 have provided a respite from the sequester cuts. But it points out that, aside from the $5.4 billion in FY 2015 in emergency funding for Ebola, investments have remained largely stagnant for global health R&D activities across the government, which includes work at the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Department of State, the US Agency for International Development (USAID), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Department of Defense (DoD). And global health budgets could face another round of automatic spending cuts this fall if President Obama and Congress fail to strike a new budget agreement. “Governments were in many ways caught unaware by Ebola—despite decades of warnings from disease experts—yet instead of learning the lesson, we could end up heading in the opposite direction with investment decisions that would actually make the world even more vulnerable,” said Daniel G. Bausch, MD, MPH&TM, a consultant to the Office of Pandemic and Epidemic Diseases at the World Health Organization, who has worked on the front lines of the Ebola outbreak. “That’s unfortunate, because global health challenges present not only an opportunity for leaders in the field, such as the United States, to assert humanitarian leadership and do what’s right, but also an opportunity to ensure that those leaders remain global hubs for biomedical innovation." For example, the GHTC analysis notes that about “sixty-four cents of every dollar spent by the US government on global health R&D goes directly to US-based researchers and product developers, creating jobs, spurring business activity, and strengthening US competitiveness in research and technology.” And the report asserts these innovations directly contribute to economic progress in the global economy. The Lancet Commission on Investing in Health found that between 2000 and 2011, health improvements accounted for at least 11 percent of the economic growth in the world’s low- and middle-income countries. Dropping Our Guard at a Time of Peril and Promise The GHTC report reels off a long list of critically important innovations now under development that could be slowed or even derailed by anemic funding for global health R&D. They include new treatments to counter the disturbing rise of drug-resistant tuberculosis, malaria parasites, and bacterial superbugs; new diagnostic tools to help fight outbreaks like Ebola, where health professionals struggle to distinguish between conditions that have frustratingly similar symptoms; and new drugs and vaccines for neglected diseases like leishmaniasis, which threatens 350 million people around the world, and Chagas, which in Latin America kills more people than malaria. The GHTC is particularly concerned about how the budget cuts could affect work at the NIH, widely recognized as the powerhouse behind global health R&D and where a greater focus on translational research is placing more emphasis on product development. For example, in addition to its leadership in developing Ebola drugs and vaccines, NIH is supporting development of AIDS vaccines that could prevent infections, along with microbicides that could reduce sexual transmission of HIV. NIH also is supporting a new universal influenza vaccine candidate that could provide a major breakthrough for fighting both seasonal and pandemic flu and a new class of antibiotics that could be a potential game changer in the fight against drug-resistant superbugs. GHTC members noted that all of this work would be disrupted by across-the-board cuts. In addition, the GHTC warns that further cuts could hamstring the USAID’s new Global Development Lab, which includes a focus on innovations to advance maternal and child health, as well as the Grand Challenges competition for Ebola. Meanwhile, consistent funding is seen as crucial to CDC’s effort to develop better diagnostics and protective gear for fighting infectious diseases, the DoD’s role as a crucial player in the push for Ebola and AIDS vaccines, and the FDA’s initiatives to encourage product developers to coordinate early to tackle global health problems. In addition to providing strong and stable funding for global health R&D, the GHTC report also urges policymakers to make better use of existing investments and accelerate product development by taking concrete steps to better coordinate the global health work taking place across the government. Key activities include passage of legislation to support R&D efforts at USAID, incorporation of R&D into the Global Health Security Agenda, and creation of an overarching government-wide strategy for global health R&D. The GHTC also believes the US can leverage its leadership and influence in world affairs to ensure global health R&D assumes a prominent place in the United Nations’ new agenda for global development that will be finalized in September. “At a time when entrenched political divisions are causing many to search for areas of consensus, support for global health R&D stands out as important issue that can attract bipartisan support,” said Morton. “American-led innovation is also a great antidote to the fear that can surround threats like Ebola and AIDS and a way to encourage a more stable, prosperous and secure world.”