Journal Article > CommentaryFull Text
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2019 August 1; DOI:10.1016/S2213-8587(19)30197-4.
Kehlenbrink S, Jaacks LM, Perone SA, Ansbro É, Ashbourne E, et al.
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2019 August 1; DOI:10.1016/S2213-8587(19)30197-4.
Journal Article > ReviewFull Text
Lancet. 2003 May 1; Volume 361 (Issue 9370); 1723-1729.; DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13375-2
Laing R, Waning B, Gray A, Ford NP, 't Hoen E
Lancet. 2003 May 1; Volume 361 (Issue 9370); 1723-1729.; DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13375-2
The first WHO essential drugs list, published in 1977, was described as a peaceful revolution in international public health. The list helped to establish the principle that some medicines were more useful than others and that essential medicines were often inaccessible to many populations. Since then, the essential medicines list (EML) has increased in size; defining an essential medicine has moved from an experience to an evidence-based process, including criteria such as public-health relevance, efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness. High priced medicines such as antiretrovirals are now included. Differences exist between the WHO model EML and national EMLs since countries face varying challenges relating to costs, drug effectiveness, morbidity patterns, and rationality of prescribing. Ensuring equitable access to and rational use of essential medicines has been promoted through WHO's revised drug strategy. This approach has required an engagement by WHO on issues such as the effect of international trade agreements on access to essential medicines and research and development to ensure availability of new essential medicines.
Journal Article > ResearchFull Text
Lancet. 2002 June 22; Volume 359 (Issue 9324); DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)09096-7
Trouiller P, Olliaro PL, Torreele E, Orbinski J, Laing R, et al.
Lancet. 2002 June 22; Volume 359 (Issue 9324); DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)09096-7
There is a lack of effective, safe, and affordable pharmaceuticals to control infectious diseases that cause high mortality and morbidity among poor people in the developing world. We analysed outcomes of pharmaceutical research and development over the past 25 years, and reviewed current public and private initiatives aimed at correcting the imbalance in research and development that leaves diseases that occur predominantly in the developing world largely unaddressed. We compiled data by searches of Medline and databases of the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, and reviewed current public and private initiatives through an analysis of recently published studies. We found that, of 1393 new chemical entities marketed between 1975 and 1999, only 16 were for tropical diseases and tuberculosis. There is a 13-fold greater chance of a drug being brought to market for central-nervous-system disorders or cancer than for a neglected disease. The pharmaceutical industry argues that research and development is too costly and risky to invest in low-return neglected diseases, and public and private initiatives have tried to overcome this market limitation through incentive packages and public-private partnerships. The lack of drug research and development for "non-profitable" infectious diseases will require new strategies. No sustainable solution will result for diseases that predominantly affect poor people in the South without the establishment of an international pharmaceutical policy for all neglected diseases. Private-sector research obligations should be explored, and a public-sector not-for-profit research and development capacity promoted.