Cargando…

A Game Theoretic Analysis of Competition Between Vaccine and Drug Companies during Disease Contraction and Recovery

BACKGROUND: Infectious diseases such as COVID-19 and HIV/AIDS are behaviorally challenging for persons, vaccine and drug companies, and donors. METHODS: In 3 linked games in which a disease may or may not be contracted, [Formula: see text] persons choose risky or safe behavior (game 1). Two vaccine...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hausken, Kjell, Ncube, Mthuli
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9189729/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34738510
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X211053563
_version_ 1784725652215169024
author Hausken, Kjell
Ncube, Mthuli
author_facet Hausken, Kjell
Ncube, Mthuli
author_sort Hausken, Kjell
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Infectious diseases such as COVID-19 and HIV/AIDS are behaviorally challenging for persons, vaccine and drug companies, and donors. METHODS: In 3 linked games in which a disease may or may not be contracted, [Formula: see text] persons choose risky or safe behavior (game 1). Two vaccine companies (game 2) and 2 drug companies (game 3) choose whether to develop vaccines and drugs. Each person chooses whether to buy 1 vaccine (if no disease contraction) or 1 drug (if disease contraction). A donor subsidizes vaccine and drug developments and purchases. Nature probabilistically chooses disease contraction, recovery versus death with and without each drug, and whether vaccines and drugs are developed successfully. COVID-19 data are used for parameter estimation. RESULTS: Each person chooses risky behavior if its utility outweighs safe behavior, accounting for nature’s probability of disease contraction which depends on how many are vaccinated. Each person buys a vaccine or drug if the companies produce them and if their utilities (accounting for side effects and virus mutation) outweigh the costs, which may be subsidized by a sponsor. DISCUSSION: Drug purchases depend on nature’s recovery probability exceeding the probability in the absence of a drug. Each company develops and produces a vaccine or drug if nature’s probability of successful development is high, if sufficiently many persons buy the vaccine or drug at a sales price that sufficiently exceeds the production price, and if the donor sponsors. CONCLUSION: Accounting for all players’ interlinked decisions allowing 14 outcomes, which is challenging without a game theoretic analysis, the donor maximizes all persons’ expected utilities at the societal level to adjust how persons’ purchases and the companies’ development and production are subsidized. HIGHLIGHTS: A game theoretic approach can help explain the production decisions of vaccine and drug companies, and the decisions of persons and a donor, impacted by Nature. In 3 linked games, N persons choose risky behavior if its utility outweighs safe behavior. Vaccine and drug companies develop vaccines and drugs sponsored by a donor if profitable, allowing 14 outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9189729
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91897292022-06-14 A Game Theoretic Analysis of Competition Between Vaccine and Drug Companies during Disease Contraction and Recovery Hausken, Kjell Ncube, Mthuli Med Decis Making Original Research Articles BACKGROUND: Infectious diseases such as COVID-19 and HIV/AIDS are behaviorally challenging for persons, vaccine and drug companies, and donors. METHODS: In 3 linked games in which a disease may or may not be contracted, [Formula: see text] persons choose risky or safe behavior (game 1). Two vaccine companies (game 2) and 2 drug companies (game 3) choose whether to develop vaccines and drugs. Each person chooses whether to buy 1 vaccine (if no disease contraction) or 1 drug (if disease contraction). A donor subsidizes vaccine and drug developments and purchases. Nature probabilistically chooses disease contraction, recovery versus death with and without each drug, and whether vaccines and drugs are developed successfully. COVID-19 data are used for parameter estimation. RESULTS: Each person chooses risky behavior if its utility outweighs safe behavior, accounting for nature’s probability of disease contraction which depends on how many are vaccinated. Each person buys a vaccine or drug if the companies produce them and if their utilities (accounting for side effects and virus mutation) outweigh the costs, which may be subsidized by a sponsor. DISCUSSION: Drug purchases depend on nature’s recovery probability exceeding the probability in the absence of a drug. Each company develops and produces a vaccine or drug if nature’s probability of successful development is high, if sufficiently many persons buy the vaccine or drug at a sales price that sufficiently exceeds the production price, and if the donor sponsors. CONCLUSION: Accounting for all players’ interlinked decisions allowing 14 outcomes, which is challenging without a game theoretic analysis, the donor maximizes all persons’ expected utilities at the societal level to adjust how persons’ purchases and the companies’ development and production are subsidized. HIGHLIGHTS: A game theoretic approach can help explain the production decisions of vaccine and drug companies, and the decisions of persons and a donor, impacted by Nature. In 3 linked games, N persons choose risky behavior if its utility outweighs safe behavior. Vaccine and drug companies develop vaccines and drugs sponsored by a donor if profitable, allowing 14 outcomes. SAGE Publications 2021-11-05 2022-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9189729/ /pubmed/34738510 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X211053563 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Research Articles
Hausken, Kjell
Ncube, Mthuli
A Game Theoretic Analysis of Competition Between Vaccine and Drug Companies during Disease Contraction and Recovery
title A Game Theoretic Analysis of Competition Between Vaccine and Drug Companies during Disease Contraction and Recovery
title_full A Game Theoretic Analysis of Competition Between Vaccine and Drug Companies during Disease Contraction and Recovery
title_fullStr A Game Theoretic Analysis of Competition Between Vaccine and Drug Companies during Disease Contraction and Recovery
title_full_unstemmed A Game Theoretic Analysis of Competition Between Vaccine and Drug Companies during Disease Contraction and Recovery
title_short A Game Theoretic Analysis of Competition Between Vaccine and Drug Companies during Disease Contraction and Recovery
title_sort game theoretic analysis of competition between vaccine and drug companies during disease contraction and recovery
topic Original Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9189729/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34738510
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X211053563
work_keys_str_mv AT hauskenkjell agametheoreticanalysisofcompetitionbetweenvaccineanddrugcompaniesduringdiseasecontractionandrecovery
AT ncubemthuli agametheoreticanalysisofcompetitionbetweenvaccineanddrugcompaniesduringdiseasecontractionandrecovery
AT hauskenkjell gametheoreticanalysisofcompetitionbetweenvaccineanddrugcompaniesduringdiseasecontractionandrecovery
AT ncubemthuli gametheoreticanalysisofcompetitionbetweenvaccineanddrugcompaniesduringdiseasecontractionandrecovery