Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38950021›Full record

ReviewPLOS global public health2024

Novel approaches to enable equitable access to monoclonal antibodies in low- and middle-income countries.

Shelly Malhotra, Anne-Isabelle Cameron, Dzintars Gotham, Esteban Burrone, Peter J Gardner, Colleen Loynachan, Sébastien Morin, Cherise P Scott, Carmen Pérez-Casas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PLOS global public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Achieving Equitable Access to Obstetric Devices Through Innovation, Improvisation and Off-Label Use.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
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

9 authors.

Shelly MalhotraGlobal Access, IAVI, New York, New York, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7457-386X
Anne-Isabelle CameronStrategy, Unitaid, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-5453-9672
Dzintars GothamConsultant, Gotham Research Ltd, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0359-1259
Esteban BurroneStrategy, Policy and Market Access, Medicines Patent Pool, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7554-2064
Peter J GardnerInfectious Disease Programme, Wellcome, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4940-2639
Colleen LoynachanInfectious Disease Programme, Wellcome, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5617-4091
Sébastien MorinStrategy, Policy and Market Access, Medicines Patent Pool, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4426-326X
Cherise P ScottStrategy, Unitaid, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6469-9450
Carmen Pérez-CasasStrategy, Unitaid, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8993-0658

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are revolutionizing management of non-communicable diseases in high-income countries and are increasingly being advanced for a range of infectious diseases (IDs). However, access to existing mAbs is limited in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and investment in developing fit-for-purpose mAbs for IDs that disproportionately affect LMICs has been limited. Underlying these access barriers are systemic challenges, including a lack of commercial incentives to target LMIC markets and complexity in manufacturing and regulatory processes. Novel strategies are needed to overcome systemic access barriers for mAbs. We outline key areas where new approaches could address these barriers, based on a multistakeholder consultation in March 2023. Three disease-market archetypes are identified to guide thinking about business models tailored to different contexts. New business models are needed to incentivize development and manufacturing of ID mAbs and to ensure mAbs are optimized with a target product profile and cost of goods that enable use in diverse LMIC settings. Lessons can be applied from voluntary licensing strategies and product development partnerships that have shown success in catalysing development and affordable supply for a range of infectious diseases. Technology transfer will be key to expand LMIC research and manufacturing capacity and to enable sustainable and diversified supply. Improved market intelligence, demand aggregation mechanisms, and portfolio-based manufacturing models could be used to de-risk commercial investment and establish a sustainable manufacturing ecosystem for affordable mAbs. Novel regulatory approaches and robust technology transfer may reduce data requirements and timelines for biosimilar approvals. Trailblazer products, with coordinated "end-to-end" support from funders, can demonstrate proof of concept for pathways to accessible mAbs across a broader range of LMICs. Research funders; local, regional, global health agencies; and, private sector partners should commit to implementing innovative partnerships and end-to-end strategies that enable equitable access to mAbs for infectious diseases in LMICs.

Identifiers

PMID38950021
PMCPMC11216602

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.