Dataset Information

Monoclonal antibodies and Fc-fusion protein biologic medicines: A multinational cross-sectional investigation of accessibility and affordability in Asia Pacific regions between 2010 and 2020.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Monoclonal antibody (mAb) and Fc-fusion protein (FcP) are highly effective therapeutic biologics. We aimed to analyse consumption and expenditure trends in 14 Asia-Pacific countries/regions (APAC) and three benchmark countries (the UK, Canada, and the US).

Methods

We analysed 440 mAb and FcP biological products using the IQVIA-MIDAS global sales database. For each year between 2010 and 2020 inclusive, we used standard units (SU) sold per 1000 population and manufacture level price (standardised in 2019 US dollars) to evaluate consumption (accessibility) and expenditure (affordability). Changes of consumption and expenditure were estimated using compound annual growth rate (CAGR). Correlations between consumption, country's economic and health performance indicators were measured using Spearman correlation coefficient.

Findings

Between 2010 and 2020, CAGRs of consumption in each region ranged from 7% to 34% and the CAGRs of expenditure ranged from 9% to 31%. The median consumption of biologics was extremely low in lower-middle-income economies (0·29 SU/1000 population) compared with upper-middle-income economies (1·20), high-income economies (40·94) and benchmark countries (109·55), although the median CAGRs of biologics consumption in lower-middle-income economies (31%) was greater than upper-middle-income (14%), high-income economies (13%) and benchmark countries (9%). Consumption was correlated with GDP per capita [Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (r) = 0·75, p < 0·001], health expenditure as a percentage of total (r = 0·83, p < 0·001) and medical doctors' density (r = 0·85, p < 0·001).

Interpretation

There have been significant increases in mAb and FcP biologics consumption and expenditure, however accessibility of biological medicines remains unequal and is largely correlated with country's income level.

Funding

This research was funded by NHMRC Project Grant GNT1157506 and GNT1196900; Enhanced Start-up Fund for new academic staff and Internal Research Fund, Department of Medicine, LKS Faculty of Medicine, University of Hong Kong.

SUBMITTER: Tong X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9249810 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Monoclonal antibodies and Fc-fusion protein biologic medicines: A multinational cross-sectional investigation of accessibility and affordability in Asia Pacific regions between 2010 and 2020.

Tong Xinning X Li Xue X Pratt Nicole L NL Hillen Jodie B JB Stanford Tyman T Ward Michael M Roughead Elizabeth E EE Lai Edward Chia-Cheng EC Shin Ju-Young JY Cheng Franco W T FWT Peng Kuan K Lau Chak Sing CS Leung Wai Keung WK Wong Ian C K ICK

The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific 20220624

<h4>Background</h4>Monoclonal antibody (mAb) and Fc-fusion protein (FcP) are highly effective therapeutic biologics. We aimed to analyse consumption and expenditure trends in 14 Asia-Pacific countries/regions (APAC) and three benchmark countries (the UK, Canada, and the US).<h4>Methods</h4>We analysed 440 mAb and FcP biological products using the IQVIA-MIDAS global sales database. For each year between 2010 and 2020 inclusive, we used standard units (SU) sold per 1000 population and manufacture ...[more]

PMID: 35789824

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesPrime focus of this study was to evaluate the availability and affordability of originator brands (OBs) and lowest price generics (LPGs) of prescribed biologic and non-biologic anticancer medicines.Design, settings and participantsA descriptive, cross-sectional survey was conducted in 22 cancer-care hospitals (18 public hospitals and 4 private hospitals) and 44 private pharmacies in Punjab, Pakistan. Sampling population consisted of 4483 patients with cancer aged ≥18 years. The availability was determined by classifying anticancer medicines in four categories: absent/unavailability (medicines not present in any surveyed facility), low availability (medicines present in <50% of surveyed facilities), fairly high availability (medicines present in 50%-74% of surveyed facilities) and high availability (medicines present in >75% of surveyed facilities). Medicines were affordable if overall cost of all the prescribed anticancer medicines were 20% of the household capacity to pay. Data were analysed by using Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, V.21.0).ResultsA total of 5060 patients with cancer were approached out of which 4483 patients were included in the survey. Overall, 10 103 anticancer drugs were prescribed. Among them, 96.3% were non-biologics and 3.7% were biologics. Oncologists were reluctant to prescribe biologics due to high prices. 58.1% of non-biologics were affordable; whereas, the affordability of biologics was 3.3%. A total of 43.9% of both biologic and non-biologic OBs were available; whereas, their affordability was 44.2%. On the other hand, the availability of LPGs was 21.3%, and their affordability was 66.1%. For low-income patients, the affordability of non-biologics was 31.6% and the affordability of biologics was 1.1%.ConclusionsMost of the patients with cancer were prescribed non-biologics due to their low price and better affordability. In contrast to OBs, LPGs of both biologics and non-biologics had less availability but more affordability.

Project description:BackgroundMedications and their prices are key issues for healthcare. Although access to medicines at affordable prices had been specified as a key objective of the European Health Policy, it seems that these goals have not been achieved. Therefore, we attempted an evaluation of affordability of selected medicines at full prices.MethodsThe analysis concerned 2012 and was conducted between 2013 and 2015 in all the European Union (EU) countries divided into 3 groups depending on the date of their accession to the EU. Finally, we considered 9 originators used in the treatment of schizophrenia and multiple sclerosis. Information on drug prices were collected from pharmacies. Participation in the study was voluntary and anonymous in order to avoid accusations of advertising. To evaluate affordability, several factors were used (e.g. minimum earnings and Gini coefficient). Due to unavailability in some countries, the exact number of analyzed medicines varies.ResultsDrug prices vary significantly between EU Member States. Almost eleven fold difference was observed between Germany (EUR 1451.17) and Croatia (EUR 132.77) in relation to Interferone beta-1a 22 μg. Generally, prices were the highest in Germany. The cheapest drugs were found in various countries but never in the poorest ones like Bulgaria or Romania. Discrepancies in wages were observed too (the smallest minimum wage was EUR 138.00 in Bulgaria and the highest EUR 1801.00 in Luxembourg). Full price of olanzapine 5mg, however, was higher in Bulgaria (EUR 64.53) than, for instance, in Belgium (EUR 37.26).ConclusionsAnalyzed medications are still unaffordable for many citizens of the EU. Besides, access to medicines is also impaired e.g. due to parallel trade. Unaffordability of medications may lead to the patients' non-compliance and therefore to increased direct and indirect costs of treatment. Common European solutions are needed to achieve a real affordability and accessibility of medications.

Project description:BackgroundAccess to affordable and good quality medicines is a key to meeting Sustainable Development Goal No. 3 by the year 2030. Prices, availability and affordability of essential medicines have been studied in many developing countries, but no such information has been published about Rwanda yet. This study aimed at providing data on prices, availability and affordability of medicines in different health facilities of Rwanda.MethodsA survey was carried out on availability, prices and affordability of 18 medicines in Kigali City and five districts of Rwanda. 44 health facilities were surveyed, including public and faith-based hospitals, public and faith-based health centers and private pharmacies. The standardized methodology developed by WHO and Health Action International (HAI) was used to collect and analyze the data.FindingsPrices for generic medicines in public and faith-based health facilities were remarkably low, with median price ratios (MPRs) of 1.0 in comparison to the international procurement prices published by Management Sciences for Health. In private pharmacies, prices were twice as high (MPR = 1.99 for generics). Availability of medicines fell short of the of 80% target set by WHO, but was better than reported from many other developing countries. Availability of medicines was highest in the private sector (71.3%) and slightly lower in the faith-based (62.8%) and public (59.6%) sectors. The government procurement agency was found to work efficiently, achieving prices 30% below the international procurement price given in the International Medical Product Price Guide. Affordability of medicines was better in the public and faith-based sectors than in the private sector.ConclusionIn Rwanda, medicines are affordable but poorly available in both the public and the faith-based sectors. Further improvements of the availability of medicines in the public and the faith-based health facilities represent the most important key to increase accessibility and affordability of medicines in Rwanda.

Project description:BackgroundHaiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere and faces numerous challenges, including inadequate medication access for its residents. The objective of this study was to determine the availability, prices, and affordability of essential medicines in Haiti and compare these findings to other countries.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional nationwide survey in 2011 of availability and consumer prices of 60 essential medicines in Haiti using a standardized methodology developed by the World Health Organization and Health Action International. The survey was conducted in 163 medicine outlets in four health care sectors (public, retail, nonprofit and mixed sectors). Medicine prices were expressed as ratios relative to the International Reference Price. Affordability was calculated by comparing the costs of treatment for common conditions with the salary of the lowest paid government worker and was compared to available data from four Latin American countries.ResultsFor generic medicines, the availability in public, retail, nonprofit and mixed sectors was 20%, 37%, 24% and 23% of medications, respectively. Most of the available medicines were priced higher than the International Reference Price. The lowest paid government worker would need 2.5 days' wages to treat an adult respiratory infection with generic medicines from the public sector. For treatment of common conditions with originator brands (OB) purchased from a retail pharmacy, costs were between 1.4 (anaerobic bacterial infection) and 13.7 (hyperlipidemia) days' wages, respectively. Treatment of pediatric bacterial infections with the OB of ceftriaxone from a retail pharmacy would cost 24.6 days' wages. Prices in Bolivia, Colombia, Mexico and Nicaragua were frequently lower for comparable medications.ConclusionsThe availability of essential medicines was low and prices varied widely across all four sectors. Over 75% of Haitians live on less than US$ 2.00 /day; therefore, most medication regimens are largely unaffordable. Inclusion of essential medications on the national formulary and working with organizations responsible for importing medications into Haiti, particularly drug donation agencies, are important first steps to increasing medication access.

Project description:BackgroundThere has been a surge in coronavirus disease 2019 admissions to intensive care units (ICUs) in Asia-Pacific countries. Because ICU healthcare workers are exposed to aerosol-generating procedures, ensuring optimal personal protective equipment (PPE) preparedness is important.ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to evaluate PPE preparedness across ICUs in six Asia-Pacific countries during the initial phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, which is defined by the World Health Organization as guideline adherence, training healthcare workers, procuring stocks, and responding appropriately to suspected cases.MethodsA cross-sectional Web-based survey was circulated to 633 level II/III ICUs of Australia, New Zealand (NZ), Singapore, Hong Kong (HK), India, and the Philippines.FindingsTwo hundred sixty-three intensivists responded, representing 231 individual ICUs eligible for analysis. Response rates were 68-100% in all countries except India, where it was 24%. Ninety-seven percent of ICUs either conformed to or exceeded World Health Organization recommendations for PPE practice. Fifty-nine percent ICUs used airborne precautions irrespective of aerosol generation procedures. There were variations in negative-pressure room use (highest in HK/Singapore), training (best in NZ), and PPE stock awareness (best in HK/Singapore/NZ). High-flow nasal oxygenation and noninvasive ventilation were not options in most HK (66.7% and 83.3%, respectively) and Singapore ICUs (50% and 80%, respectively), but were considered in other countries to a greater extent. Thirty-eight percent ICUs reported not having specialised airway teams. Showering and "buddy systems" were underused. Clinical waste disposal training was suboptimal (38%).ConclusionsMany ICUs in the Asia-Pacific reported suboptimal PPE preparedness in several domains, particularly related to PPE training, practice, and stock awareness, which requires remediation. Adoption of low-cost approaches such as buddy systems should be encouraged. The complete avoidance of high-flow nasal oxygenation reported by several intensivists needs reconsideration. Consideration must be given to standardise PPE guidelines to minimise practice variations. Urgent research to evaluate PPE preparedness and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission is required.

Project description:BackgroundAvailability and affordability of medicines are key determinants of universal health coverage, yet achieving them presents a major challenge especially in low-income countries. We here present an analysis of availability and prices of antimalarial and antibiotic medicines in public, faith-based and private health facilities in Malawi. Medicines are provided free of charge in the public health care system of Malawi. In contrast, facilities of the Christian Health Association of Malawi (CHAM) usually charge their patients for medicines, as do private for-profit facilities.MethodsAs part of a study on medicine quality, samples of six antimalarial and six antibiotic medicines were collected in 31 health facilities in four districts of southern Malawi. These included 15 public facilities (i.e. health centres, district hospitals and central hospitals), eight CHAM and eight private facilities. Random selection was used in choosing the included health facilities. The availability of medicines was recorded, including the number of units which could be collected of each medicine, as well as the prices of medicines which were charged in CHAM and private facilities. These data were analyzed using the standard methodology developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) and Health Action International (HAI).ResultsAvailability of the antimalarials artemether/lumefantrine and sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine, which are provided with financial support from international donors, was high in public and CHAM facilities (93% and 100%, respectively). However, availability of antibiotics was much lower (e.g. 40% availability of amoxicillin tablets/capsules in public health centres). Medicine prices were lower than reported from many other countries. The median price ratio (MPR) to a wholesale international procurement price was 2.8 in CHAM facilities and even lower in the private sector (MPR 2.3). Nevertheless, for 10 of the 12 investigated medicines the cost for one course of treatment exceeded the daily wage of a low-paid government worker in Malawi and therefore had to be considered as unaffordable for a major part of the population.ConclusionsContinued efforts are required to improve the availability of essential medicines in Malawi. The free provision of medicines in the public health care system remains important in order to achieve universal health coverage, due to the low income in this country.

Dataset Information

Monoclonal antibodies and Fc-fusion protein biologic medicines: A multinational cross-sectional investigation of accessibility and affordability in Asia Pacific regions between 2010 and 2020.

Background

Methods

Findings

Interpretation

Funding

Publications

Monoclonal antibodies and Fc-fusion protein biologic medicines: A multinational cross-sectional investigation of accessibility and affordability in Asia Pacific regions between 2010 and 2020.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets