ArticlePublic health action2014
Activism on rifapentine pricing: removing cost barriers to improve the uptake of tuberculosis research innovations.
Article in Public health action, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pharmacokinetics of antiretroviral and tuberculosis drugs in children with HIV/TB co-infection: a systematic review.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2020Pooled it
- Programmatic impact and cost-effectiveness of scaling up the short-course 3HP regimen for tuberculosis preventive treatment in Brazil.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- Willingness to accept reimbursement for visits to an HIV clinic for tuberculosis preventive therapy.The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease · 2020Article
- Tuberculosis Elimination in the Asia-Pacific Region and the WHO Ethics Guidance.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As recent advances have been made in developing tools to fight tuberculosis (TB), there is also a trend towards increasing advocacy by the civil society for TB research and access. One recent successful effort to increase access to treatment options for TB involved a collaborative effort to identify the need for and barriers to the use of rifapentine (RPT) use in the United States. Survey responses confirmed the under-utilization of RPT: 82% of survey respondents selected cost as a significant or potential barrier to use. Survey results provided data to support a year-long advocacy campaign urging the drug company Sanofi to lower the price of RPT. This campaign was based on a common evidence base built in part by the stakeholders themselves. After multiple engagements with communities and providers, Sanofi US announced on 12 December 2013 that they would drop the price of RPT to US$32 per blister pack of 32 tablets for US public health programs. While further work remains to secure access to RPT in the United States and worldwide, the lowering of the price of RPT reflects the positive impact that collaborative advocacy can accomplish, and sets an example for other drug companies to follow.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.