Breakthroughs Blog: Microbicides

In this regular feature on Breakthroughs, we highlight some of the most interesting reads in global health research from the past week. In this year’s State of the Union, President Obama mentioned “federally-funded research” and recognized that “there are entire industries based on vaccines that stay ahead of drug-resistant bacteria.” While a modest statement, the President’s recognition of these important US contributions to global health is significant. Last week during the World Health Organization Executive Board meeting, Member States met to discuss moving forward on eight demonstration projects that would look at new ways to spur research and development (R&D) for diseases that affect populations in low- and middle-income countries. However, some advocates were disappointed that the topic of alternative funding mechanisms for global health R&D was not substantively debated. The US Agency for International Development (USAID) announced this week that the Centre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa (CAPRISA) 004 Tenofovir gel trial was the winner of the agency’s Science and Technology Pioneers Prize. The prize recognizes “excellence in the use of science and technology to solve development challenges.” This is the first year USAID has awarded the prize. The Swiss Federal Department of Home Affairs and the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to improve access to health interventions through the strengthening of regulatory systems. The partnership could improve and accelerate access to health interventions and therapeutic products in resource-constraint countries.

The US Agency for International Development (USAID) is the nation’s lead foreign assistance agency. Throughout its 50-year history, USAID has worked with other government agencies, the private sector, and nongovernmental organizations to support the development and introduction of affordable health products appropriate for addressing the diseases and health issues in developing countries. The GHTC has launched a new blog series to highlight the impact of USAID’s commitment to global health research and development (R&D). The series will showcase stories from individuals who have benefited from the agency’s support and investment in R&D—as well as people whose lives would vastly improve if USAID were to expand its support for health R&D into new areas. Our fourth and final post in the series is by Dr. Cynthia Gama, a principal investigator with MatCH and works with the International Partnership for Microbicides (IPM) in South Africa. Based on her experiences, Cynthia writes about the need for USAID to support R&D for microbicides to protect women from HIV. Q: As a microbicide researcher working in South Africa, you witness every day the impact of HIV on women. Can you tell us about the effect of HIV on women in your community? A: It is very difficult to not see the face of HIV and AIDS every single day when working in communities such as ours. The KwaZulu Natal province in South Africa has a high incidence of HIV and while we all know that women bear the brunt of the epidemic, the resulting impact can been seen not only in the women but also in the young children who have lost their parents; the old grandmothers who care for orphans; the daughters who often drop out of school to help them; and the impact that HIV has had on all aspects of people’s lives. What gives me hope is knowing that we are working toward a product—a microbicide for women— that may help to reverse this trend in our community and give women and their families a better future. Dr. Cynthia Gama of MatCH. Photo: IPM Q: Why are microbicides and other women-controlled prevention methods so important in the fight against HIV? Are currently available prevention methods, like male condoms, realistic options for women in your community and other parts of the world? A: We know that condoms work—both male and female condoms—and we know that South Africa has one of the largest and best-established public-sector male and female condom programs worldwide. Women in our community receive HIV prevention and contraception advice from various sources. While women may have access to these prevention products, the challenge is that women may not always have the ability to negotiate their use with their partners. This could explain the disproportionately high numbers of our women being infected with HIV. As a researcher, I know that women desire more options to protect themselves, hence my commitment to making sure that collectively we can deliver more options to our communities. Our research center and community is involved in The Ring Study, which is evaluating a unique product, a long-acting microbicide ring. Women who participate are shown how to insert the ring themselves, which is designed to stay in place for a month at a time and release an antiretroviral drug to prevent HIV. Q: How has USAID support helped advance your research and the microbicide field as a whole? A: The support that our study sponsor, IPM, receives from donors such as USAID ensures that new products for women are developed, and that we can do the much needed work and research that would one day turn the hope of a microbicide product into reality. Without funding, none of what has been achieved thus far could have been possible. Q: What other benefits of clinical research for microbicide development—such as capacity building and infrastructure development—has USAID support had in your community? A: HIV prevention research has most certainly strengthened the scientific and medical research sector overall. Expertise in conducting large clinical trials is now available and well-developed, and has offered more employment opportunities. USAID support has helped to bring communities closer to science, and helped communities appreciate the need for clinical research and understand its benefits. Q: When a safe and effective microbicide becomes available, what impact are you hoping to see for women in your community and around the world? What role will USAID have played in this effort? A: On that day of jubilation we would know that our sisters, daughters, and granddaughters have much to look forward to. I hope that once a product shows efficacy, that our policy makers will ensure that it is made available as soon as possible. Organizations such as USAID and others together are making it possible for this dream to become reality.

In the past, the United States has contributed to important breakthroughs in global health—from the eradication of smallpox to a 74 percent drop in measles deaths worldwide. Because of longstanding US leadership and support for global health research and development (R&D), Americans and millions around the world no longer live in fear of diseases like polio and measles, and many more are on treatment for diseases like HIV and AIDS and malaria. In fact, the US government is the largest supporter of global health R&D in the world, supporting the development and delivery of vaccines, drugs, diagnostics, microbicides, and devices. However, as we sit at a very important moment in global health product development, the political and economic environment in the United States is causing some to worry. Budget constraints have put funding at risk at many of the federal agencies involvement in global health R&D. Because of longstanding US leadership and support for global health research and development (R&D), Americans and millions around the world no longer live in fear of diseases like polio and measles, and many more are on treatment for diseases like HIV and AIDS and malaria. Photo: PATH/Evelyn Hockstein Today, the GHTC launches a new fact sheet outlining the important contributions the US government has made to global health R&D and why it’s critical the United States continues to robustly support the global health research pipeline. There are currently more global health products in the pipeline than ever before—with more than 365 new tools under development as of April 2012. Contributing to the success of many of these products is the US government’s partnerships with nonprofit product developers. These organizations partner with the public and private sectors to maximize resources and create tools for patients in low- and middle-income countries. Increased investments in global health research by the United States have the potential to increase the amount of tools combating global diseases. Just some of the products currently in the research pipeline include: The RTS,S malaria vaccine candidate, which is currently being tested and a policy recommendation for its use could be issued as early as 2015. Such a vaccine could reduce the burden of sickness and death from malaria. A new oral drug for sleeping sickness, fexinidazole, which recently entered late-stage clinical trials in patients in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. As a simple, short-course oral pill, fexinidazole could transform care for African sleeping sickness, which is fatal without treatment, and could potentially reduce its incidence among the most afflicted populations and accelerate elimination of the disease. Cost-effective diagnostics that are under development for malaria, tuberculosis, and neglected tropical diseases. These diagnostics could be administered in a variety of health care settings and could rapidly and accurately identify sick patients. An antiretroviral‐based microbicide which offers hope for women’s HIV prevention. Though more testing is needed following promising results from a 2010 advanced clinical trial, a microbicide could give women the power to protect themselves with or without their partners’ cooperation. In sub-Saharan Africa, where the epidemic has hit hardest, women 15 to 24 years old are at least twice as likely to be infected with HIV as young men.   In the research pipeline for global health products, 200 of the 365 products under development have some sort of US government support. With so much investment from the United States, there is even more at risk if funding is cut. Over the past several years, the US Congress has not been able to agree on a long-term budget for the federal government. Policymakers have allowed sequestration, or widespread automatic budget cuts, to affect all federal programs. These constraints have the potential to push back or halt promising research supported by several federal agencies involved in global health R&D—including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Department of Defense (DoD), the US Food and Drug Administration, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the US Agency for International Development (USAID). Due to sequestration: DoD is expected to receive budget cuts between 8 and 10 percent in fiscal year (FY) 2013. The DoD has been instrumental in the development of several global health technologies, many of which are used to protect Americans soldiers serving abroad. These cuts could affect the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, the Naval Medical Research Center, and the Military HIV Research Program. NIH, the largest funder of global health R&D in the world, was forced to cut $1.7 billion from its budget by the end of FY 2013. NIH conducts nearly half the early-stage global health research, and supports thousands of domestic jobs all around the United States. USAID—with a presence in more than 100 countries—is best suited to support the clinical trials in low- and middle-income countries that ensure basic research is translated into appropriate health products. USAID is the largest supporter of HIV vaccine and microbicide development—both of which will be essential to achieve an AIDS-free generation. For many of the products currently in the global health research pipeline, continuous US support is essential. Without it, much of the breakthrough research that pushed these products to later-stage development will be lost—sometimes forever. US leaders should seize upon the recent successes in global health R&D and pass a long-term budget that ensures America’s legacy as a leader in innovation and science is not forgotten.

  “You’re in a position to make such a difference and to be innovative with your thinking,” Margaret McCluskey, senior technical advisor at the US Agency for International Development (USAID), said to an audience of Congressional staffers at a briefing yesterday on Capitol Hill. The briefing, co-hosted by GHTC and PATH, focused on the critical role USAID plays in supporting lifesaving global health research and development (R&D) for new health tools. Panelists also stressed the need for policymakers in Congress and across the US government to support the development of new and innovative health products. All of the panelists at yesterday’s briefing called on the US government to continue its strong investment in global health research. Rep. Albio Sires (D-NJ)—lead co-sponsor of the 21st Century Global Health Technology Act, a bill that would strengthen health R&D and product development at USAID—spoke at the briefing and reiterated this important message. “New vaccines, drugs, and tests are desperately needed, but progress cannot be sustained without R&D,” he said, adding that the United States has a legacy of supporting global health R&D and that health R&D is a smart economic investment. Rep. Sires: “New vaccines, drugs, and tests are desperately needed, but progress cannot be sustained without R&D." Photo credit: Aeras/Liz Roll Much progress in global health R&D has been made over the years, and USAID has unquestionably supported many of today’s success stories—including new tools for malaria, HIV and AIDS, child health, family planning, and reproductive health. Several panelists stressed that product development for global health tools doesn’t happen overnight, and that USAID’s sustained commitment to research has been a crucial element of these health R&D success stories. Dr. Zeda Rosenberg, CEO of the International Partnership for Microbicides, stressed that R&D can take many years, and thanked USAID for its support for mircobicide research—as well as for providing dedicated resources and long-term investments in global health product development.   Panelists also emphasized that despite this progress, there is still a need for sustained investment in R&D today to ensure that there are appropriate tools for diseases of poverty tomorrow. Rosenberg warned that complacency with today’s current tools is the wrong mindset, saying, “As soon as you think you’ve got [a health issue] under control, you’ve lost.” Kari Stoever, vice president of external affairs at Aeras, noted that investing now in tuberculosis (TB) vaccine research will save billions of dollars in future spending for TB treatment programs in low- and middle-income countries, which currently costs $8-10 billion per year. She added, “Without an effective vaccine, many lives are at risk.” USAID does not currently fund TB vaccine R&D. Additionally, USAID’s partnerships with the private and nongovernmental sectors have been key to its success in developing effective public health tools. One particularly effective partnership is USAID’s support for nonprofit product developers (NPPDs). These organizations combine the resources of governments, the experience of the private sector, and the know-how of nonprofit groups. PATH is one such NPPD that, with USAID support, partnered with Becton, Dickenson and Company (BD) to develop the SoloShot™ syringe and Uniject™ system. Both devices are designed specifically for use in low- and middle-income countries. “Though BD is a for-profit company, we share a common goal of providing access to important devices where they are needed most,” said Renuka Gadde, vice president of Global Health at BD. She added at none of these successes would have happened without government agencies like USAID looking at complex global health problems and spurring various sectors to become involved through programs like the Saving Lives at Birth Grand Challenge. Dr. Zeda Rosenberg, CEO of the International Partnership for Microbicides, stressed that R&D can take many years, and thanked USAID for its continuous support. Photo credit: Aeras/Liz Roll While USAID is a key player in global health R&D, coordination between the other US agencies involved in this work—such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Department of Defense, the US Food and Drug Administration, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH)—is crucial. The 21st Century Global Health Technology Act requests that USAID work to align its health-related research strategy with similar strategies at other agencies, with the goal of creating a whole-of government approach to global health R&D. Greater coordination among US agencies can held lead to more efficient health R&D—for example, Rosenberg noted at the briefing that both USAID and NIH are supporting the organization’s microbicide clinical trials. We are at a critical juncture in much of the global health R&D currently underway, and USAID will be instrumental in ensuring these technologies come to fruition. As McCluskey said at the end of the briefing, “Don’t be business as usual with infectious diseases.” Dr. Joanne Carter—executive director of RESULTS/RESULTS Educational Fund and moderator of the briefing—summed it up nicely: “Investments in R&D are what’s needed to take us to the next level in global health.”