Cargando…
The Impact of the Priority Review Voucher on Research and Development for Tropical Diseases
BACKGROUND: In 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 t...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9217899/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35588350 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40290-022-00427-x |
_version_ | 1784731760275226624 |
---|---|
author | Aerts, Celine Barrenho, Eliana Miraldo, Marisa Sicuri, Elisa |
author_facet | Aerts, Celine Barrenho, Eliana Miraldo, Marisa Sicuri, Elisa |
author_sort | Aerts, Celine |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In 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. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this analysis was to assess whether the PRV has incentivized R&D (measured as clinical trial activity) for the intended tropical diseases. METHOD: We 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. RESULTS: We 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. CONCLUSION: Our 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40290-022-00427-x. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9217899 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92178992022-06-24 The Impact of the Priority Review Voucher on Research and Development for Tropical Diseases Aerts, Celine Barrenho, Eliana Miraldo, Marisa Sicuri, Elisa Pharmaceut Med Original Research Article BACKGROUND: In 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. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this analysis was to assess whether the PRV has incentivized R&D (measured as clinical trial activity) for the intended tropical diseases. METHOD: We 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. RESULTS: We 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. CONCLUSION: Our 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40290-022-00427-x. Springer International Publishing 2022-05-19 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9217899/ /pubmed/35588350 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40290-022-00427-x Text en © The Author(s) 2022, corrected publication 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Research Article Aerts, Celine Barrenho, Eliana Miraldo, Marisa Sicuri, Elisa The Impact of the Priority Review Voucher on Research and Development for Tropical Diseases |
title | The Impact of the Priority Review Voucher on Research and Development for Tropical Diseases |
title_full | The Impact of the Priority Review Voucher on Research and Development for Tropical Diseases |
title_fullStr | The Impact of the Priority Review Voucher on Research and Development for Tropical Diseases |
title_full_unstemmed | The Impact of the Priority Review Voucher on Research and Development for Tropical Diseases |
title_short | The Impact of the Priority Review Voucher on Research and Development for Tropical Diseases |
title_sort | impact of the priority review voucher on research and development for tropical diseases |
topic | Original Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9217899/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35588350 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40290-022-00427-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT aertsceline theimpactofthepriorityreviewvoucheronresearchanddevelopmentfortropicaldiseases AT barrenhoeliana theimpactofthepriorityreviewvoucheronresearchanddevelopmentfortropicaldiseases AT miraldomarisa theimpactofthepriorityreviewvoucheronresearchanddevelopmentfortropicaldiseases AT sicurielisa theimpactofthepriorityreviewvoucheronresearchanddevelopmentfortropicaldiseases AT aertsceline impactofthepriorityreviewvoucheronresearchanddevelopmentfortropicaldiseases AT barrenhoeliana impactofthepriorityreviewvoucheronresearchanddevelopmentfortropicaldiseases AT miraldomarisa impactofthepriorityreviewvoucheronresearchanddevelopmentfortropicaldiseases AT sicurielisa impactofthepriorityreviewvoucheronresearchanddevelopmentfortropicaldiseases |