Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22679521›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2012

Consequences of neglect: analysis of the sub-Saharan African snake antivenom market and the global context.

Nicholas I Brown

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06615960 (The Safety and Effectiveness of PANAF- Premium TM Snake Venom Antiserum-Pan Africa Administered As a Standard Treatment for Cases of Snakebites- a Phase IV Open Label Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 78 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06615960 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

The Safety and Effectiveness of PANAF- Premium TM Snake Venom Antiserum-Pan Africa Administered As a Standard Treatment for Cases of Snakebites- a Phase IV Open Label Trial

TypeobservationalSponsorPremium Serums & Vaccines Pvt.Ltd.Ran2024 to 2025Enrolled112ConditionsSnake Bites
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

78 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 120 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Nicholas I BrownMasters of Bioscience Enterprise Program, Institute of Biotechnology, The University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom. nibrown@tpg.com.au
University of Cambridge · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe worldwide neglect of immunotherapeutic products for the treatment of snakebite has resulted in a critical paucity of effective, safe and affordable therapy in many Third World countries, particularly in Africa. Snakebite ranks high among the most neglected global health problems, with thousands of untreated victims dying or becoming permanently maimed in developing countries each year because of a lack of antivenom-a treatment that is widely available in most developed countries. This paper analyses the current status of antivenom production for sub-Saharan African countries and provides a snapshot of the global situation.

methodsA global survey of snake antivenom products was undertaken in 2007, involving 46 current and former antivenom manufacturers. Companies producing antivenom for use in sub-Saharan Africa were re-surveyed in 2010 and 2011.

resultsThe amount of antivenom manufactured for sub-Saharan Africa increased between 2007 and 2010/11, however output and procurement remained far below that required to treat the estimated 300,000-500,000 snakebite victims each year. Variable potency and inappropriate marketing of some antivenoms mean that the number of effective treatments available may be as low as 2.5% of projected needs. Five companies currently market antivenom for sale in Africa; three others have products in the final stages of development; and since 2007 one has ceased production indefinitely. Most current antivenom producers possess a willingness and capacity to raise output. However inconsistent market demand, unpredictable financial investment and inadequate quality control discourage further production and threaten the viability of the antivenom industry.

conclusionFinancial stimulus is urgently needed to identify and develop dependable sources of high-grade antivenoms, support current and emerging manufacturers, and capitalise on existing unutilised production capacity. Investing to ensure a consistent and sustainable marketplace for efficacious antivenom products will drive improvements in quality, output and availability, and save thousands of lives each year.

Indexed as

Africa South of the SaharaAntiveninsBiological ProductsDrug IndustryHealth Services AccessibilityHumansNeglected DiseasesSnake BitesAntiveninsBiological Products

Identifiers

PMID22679521
PMCPMC3367979
OpenAlexW2087227243

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.