Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35696433›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2022

Estimating the global demand curve for a leishmaniasis vaccine: A generalisable approach based on global burden of disease estimates.

Sakshi Mohan, Paul Revill, Stefano Malvolti, Melissa Malhame, Mark Sculpher, Paul M Kaye

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Leishmaniasis.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Knock, knock, knocking on EuropeCurrent research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases · 2023
    Review
  20. Review
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

6 authors.

Sakshi MohanCenter for Health Economics (CHE), University of York, York, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1268-1769
Paul RevillCenter for Health Economics (CHE), University of York, York, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8632-0600
Stefano MalvoltiMMGH Consulting, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-0146-1127
Melissa MalhameMMGH Consulting, Zurich, Switzerland.
Mark SculpherCenter for Health Economics (CHE), University of York, York, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3746-9913
Paul M KayeYork Biomedical Research Institute, Hull York Medical School, University of York, York, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8796-4755

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/P028004/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 104726Wellcome Trust 108518
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA pressing need exists to develop vaccines for neglected diseases, including leishmaniasis. However, the development of new vaccines is dependent on their value to two key players-vaccine developers and manufacturers who need to have confidence in the global demand in order to commit to research and production; and governments (or other international funders) who need to signal demand based on the potential public health benefits of the vaccine in their local context, as well as its affordability. A detailed global epidemiological analysis is rarely available before a vaccine enters a market due to lack of resources as well as insufficient global data necessary for such an analysis. Our study seeks to bridge this information gap by providing a generalisable approach to estimating the commercial and public health value of a vaccine in development relying primarily on publicly available Global Burden of Disease (GBD) data. This simplified approach is easily replicable and can be used to guide discussions and investments into vaccines and other health technologies where evidence constraints exist. The approach is demonstrated through the estimation of the demand curve for a future leishmaniasis vaccine. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsWe project the ability to pay over the period 2030-2040 for a vaccine preventing cutaneous and visceral leishmaniasis (CL / VL), using an illustrative set of countries which account for most of the global disease burden. First, based on previous work on vaccine demand projections in these countries and CL / VL GBD-reported incidence rates, we project the potential long-term impact of the vaccine on disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted as a result of reduced incidence. Then, we apply an economic framework to our estimates to determine vaccine affordability based on the abilities to pay of governments and global funders, leading to estimates of the demand and market size. Based on our estimates, the maximum ability-to-pay of a leishmaniasis vaccine (per course, including delivery costs), given the current estimates of incidence and population at risk, is higher than $5 for 25-30% of the countries considered, with the average value-based maximum price, weighted by quantity demanded, being $5.7-6 [$0.3 - $34.5], and total demand of over 560 million courses. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Our results demonstrate that both the quantity of vaccines estimated to be required by the countries considered as well as their ability-to-pay could make a vaccine for leishmaniasis commercially attractive to potential manufacturers. The methodology used can be equally applied to other technology developments targeting health in developing countries.

Indexed as

Leishmaniasis, CutaneousLeishmaniasis VaccinesLeishmaniasis, VisceralGlobal Burden of DiseaseGlobal HealthHumansIncidenceMorbidityLeishmaniasis Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID35696433
PMCPMC9232160

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.