06Jun

In a report scoring the efforts of 20 global pharmaceutical companies in providing access to their medicines the industry came in for some rare praise, as well as a bit of scolding for too often putting poor countries last.

“After years of encouraging access planning, we are now seeing a strategic shift in this direction [of inclusion] by pharma companies,” said Jayasree K. Iyer, executive director of the Access to Medicine Foundation.

“This could radically change how fast access to new products is achieved – if company leadership is determined to ensure people living in low- and middle-income countries are not last in line.”

Iyer’s comments came in connection with the foundation’s release of Access to Medicine Index 2021, its biennial report ranking the largest pharma companies on how well they are doing to make drugs and vaccines accessible to the world’s poorest nations.

GlaxoSmithKline came in first, as it has in the previous 6 reports.

Access to meds rankings 2021 - blog.jpg

Close on its heels is Novartis. It ranked 2nd in the 2018 report, and 2nd again, but this year edged closer to the top spot on the strength of its product delivery. Of Novartis the report says, “Leading consistently across access strategies, it is the only company that applies equitable access strategies in low-income countries (LICs) for all its products.”

GSK, a mere 0.05 points ahead of Novartis, held onto the top position on the strength of its R&D performance. “Performance in R&D is a significant factor in its retention of the top spot,” the report explains. “It has access plans covering the largest proportion of late-stage projects.”

The highly detailed, 236 page report digs deep into each of the 20 companies, scoring them in three areas:

  1. Governance – The area looks at the governance, planning, implementation and integration of access to medicine initiatives into corporate strategy and the extent of staff incentivization towards fostering access. It also considers marketing and disclosure practices.
  2. R&D – Focus is placed on product development, access planning, and R&D capacity building. Affordability, accessibility, and availability are crucial aspects to be considered for the pipeline. Companies also need to contribute to local R&D capacity building, empowering local researchers to address relevant needs.
  3. Product Delivery  The report assesses post-development actions on the ground to ensure companies offer equitable access to their products and overcome any local barriers in accessing hard-to-reach markets and patient populations.

The purpose of ranking each company, explains the foundation, is to spur them “to compete and collaborate on priority access-to-medicine topics, while identifying best practices, areas of progress and gaps where more action is urgently needed.”

The report observes that the industry “continues to inch forward,” but laments that progress is largely due to a handful of companies that “account for the bulk of the R&D projects that the global health community considers a priority, underscoring a worrying dependency on just a few large players.”

Image by Arek Socha

5 Tips to Ace Your Virtual Interview

Whether you’re preparing for a phone screen or a final stage interview, virtual interviews are now an inevitable component of the hiring process.

Jun 6, 2023

A Lifesciences Lab Where Robots Do All the Experiments

In the heart of Silicon Valley is a biotech laboratory run by robots. They carry out experiments ordered by scientists anywhere in the world who simply login to the lab, describe their project, set options like the cells to use or the types of analyses to perform, and go on to do other things while the robots do the rest.

The Strateos lab in Menlo Park, California is as sophisticated as many research facilities and it becomes more so all the time. In partnership with Eli Lilly, Strateos opened a second robotic cloud laboratory in San Diego this year that focuses on the drug discovery process.

Lilly is using part of this Life Sciences Studio for its own projects. The remaining capacity is available to startups in the biosciences to run their own experiments, providing them access to tools and processes few of them can afford on their own.

Though still rare, fully robotic, remote laboratories like these are the future of drug development and biological research. They’re a clear sign of just how much laboratory automation has advanced. From the early days of handling routine and basic functions like blood chemistries, immunoassay and urinalysis, the cutting edge Life Sciences Studio can synthesize, test, and optimize compounds in pursuit of new drug therapies without human help.

At the Texas Medical Center (TMC) Innovation Institute in Houston, concept automation is tested and demonstrated. One of the most futuristic is YuMi, a product of ABB Robotics, which has a research hub there. Already in use in a handful of facilities, YuMi manages viral antigen testing in one lab and handles tissue, bone, and sterile fluid samples at another.

ABB predicts that by 2025, 60,000 nonsurgical robots, many as versatile as YuMi, will be in use in healthcare. 5,000 deployed in laboratories.

Robots,says Robin Felder, PhD, professor of pathology and associate director of clinical chemistry and toxicology at the University of Virginia School of Medicine, are “beginning to swallow up all of the manual parts of the laboratory.”

But more than that, with the rapid advances in artificial intelligence, Ben Miles, PhD, head of product at Strateos, sees a future where the robots will analyze data to initiate experiments on their own.

We’re not there yet. But as Dr. Dean Ho, Provost’s chair professor of biomedical engineering at the National University of Singapore, said, “At some point, we’ll be able to move beyond solely relying on pre-existing data and algorithm training and prediction making.”

Photo by Daan Stevens on Unsplash

[bdp_post_carousel]