The knock-on effects of COVID-19 pandemic on the supply and availability of generic medicines in Ethiopia: mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic posed a major impact on the availability and affordability of essential medicines. This study aimed to assess the knock-on effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the supply availability of non-communicable chronic disease (NCD) medicines and paracetamol products in Ethiopia. METHODS: A mixed methods study was conducted to assess the supply and availability of twenty-four NCD drugs and four paracetamol products listed on the national essential medicines list for hospitals. Data were collected from twenty-six hospitals located in seven zones of Oromia region in the southwestern part of Ethiopia. We extracted data on drug availability, cost and stock out for these drugs between May 2019 and December 2020. The quantitative data were entered into Microsoft Excel and exported to statistical package software for social science (SPSS) version 22 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA) software for analysis. RESULTS: The overall mean availability of selected basket medicines was 63.4% (range 16.7% to 80.3%) during the pre-COVID-19 time. It was 46.3% (range 2.8% to 88.7) during the pandemic. There was a relative increase in the availability of two paracetamol products [paracetamol 500 mg tablet (67.5% versus 88.7%) and suppository (74.5% versus 88%)] during the pandemic. The average monthly orders fill rates for the selected products range from 43 to 85%. Pre-COVID-19, the average order fill rate was greater or equal to 70%. However, immediately after the COVID-19 case notification, the percentage of order(s) filled correctly in items and quantities began decreasing. Political instability, shortage of trained human resources, currency inflation, and limited drug financing were considered as the major challenges to medicine supply. CONCLUSION: The overall stock out situation in the study area has worsened during COVID-19 compared to pre-COVID-19 time. None of the surveyed chronic disease basket medicines met the ideal availability benchmark of 80% in health facilities. However, availability of paracetamol 500 mg tablet surprisingly improved during the pandemic. A range of policy frameworks and options targeting inevitable outbreaks should exist to enable governments to ensure that medicines for chronic diseases are consistently available and affordable.

Patient Access in 14 High-Income Countries to New Antibacterials Approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, European Medicines Agency, Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency, or Health Canada, 2010-2020.

BACKGROUND: Inaccessibility of medicines in low- and middle-income countries is a frequent challenge. Yet it is typically assumed that high-income countries have complete access to the full arsenal of medicines. This study tests this assumption for new antibacterials, which are saved as a last resort in order to prevent the development of resistance, resulting in insufficient revenues to offset costs. Prior studies report only regulatory approval, missing the important lag that occurs between approval and commercial launch, although some antibiotics never launch in some countries. METHODS: We identified all antibacterials approved and launched in the G7 and 7 other high-income countries in Europe for the decade beginning 1 January 2010, using quantitative methods to explore associations. RESULTS: Eighteen new antibacterials were identified. The majority were accessible in only 3 countries (United States, United Kingdom, and Sweden), with the remaining 11 high-income countries having access to less than half of them. European marketing authorization did not lead to automatic European access, as 14 of the antibacterials were approved by the European Medicines Agency but many fewer were commercially launched. There was no significant difference in access between "innovative" and "noninnovative" antibacterials. Median annual sales in the first launched market (generally the United States) for these 18 antibiotics were low, $16.2M. CONCLUSIONS: Patient access to new antibacterials is limited in some high-income countries including Canada, Japan, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain. With low expected sales, companies may have decided to delay or forego commercialization due to expectations of insufficient profitability.

Antimicrobial Resistance: Is Health Technology Assessment Part of the Solution or Part of the Problem?

Antimicrobial resistance is a serious challenge to the success and sustainability of our healthcare systems. There has been increasing policy attention given to antimicrobial resistance in the last few years, and increased amounts of funding have been channeled into funding for research and development of antimicrobial agents. Nevertheless, manufacturers doubt whether there will be a market for new antimicrobial technologies sufficient to enable them to recoup their investment. Health technology assessment (HTA) has a critical role in creating confidence that if valuable technologies can be developed they will be reimbursed at a level that captures their true value. We identify 3 deficiencies of current HTA processes for appraising antimicrobial agents: a methods-centric approach rather than problem-centric approach for dealing with new challenges, a lack of tools for thinking about changing patterns of infection, and the absence of an approach to epidemiological risks. We argue that, to play their role more effectively, HTA agencies need to broaden their methodological tool kit, design and communicate their analysis to a wider set of users, and incorporate long-term policy goals, such as containing resistance, as part of their evaluation criteria alongside immediate health gains.

Financing Pull Mechanisms for Antibiotic-Related Innovation: Opportunities for Europe.

Antibiotic innovation is in serious jeopardy as companies continue to abandon the market due to a lack of profitability. Novel antibiotics must be used sparingly to hinder the spread of resistance, but small companies cannot survive on revenues that do not cover operational costs. When these companies either go bankrupt or move onto other therapeutic areas, these antibiotics may be no longer accessible to patients. Although significant research efforts have detailed incentives to stimulate antibiotic innovation, little attention has been paid to the financing of these incentives. In this article, we take a closer look at 4 potential financing models (diagnosis-related group carve-out, stewardship taxes, transferable exclusivity voucher, and a European-based "pay or play" model) and evaluate them from a European perspective. The attractiveness of these models and the willingness for countries to test them are currently being vetted through the European Joint Action on AMR and Healthcare-Associated Infections (EU-JAMRAI).

Ensuring Antibiotic Development, Equitable Availability, and Responsible Use of Effective Antibiotics: Recommendations for Multisectoral Action.

Antibiotic resistance is a growing threat to global public health. The World Health Organization's Global Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance recommends engaging multisectoral stakeholders to tackle the issue. However, so far, few studies have addressed barriers to antibiotic development, equitable availability, and responsible antibiotic use from the perspective of stakeholders outside healthcare facilities or patient communities: the so-called third-party stakeholders. Third-party stakeholders include, inter alia, governments, regulatory agencies, and professionals working in antibiotic research and development and medical ethics. This viewpoint provides an overview of barriers to antibiotic development, equitable availability of effective antibiotics, and the responsible use of antibiotics. The barriers were identified in an exploratory, qualitative interview study with an illustrative sample of 12 third-party stakeholders. Recommendations to lift these barriers are presented, together with examples of recently-made progress. The recommendations should guide future antibiotic policies and multisectoral policy action.

Pull Incentives for Antibacterial Drug Development: An Analysis by the Transatlantic Task Force on Antimicrobial Resistance.

New alternative market models are needed to incentivize companies to invest in developing new antibacterial drugs. In a previous publication, the Transatlantic Task Force on Antimicrobial Resistance (TATFAR) summarized the key areas of consensus for economic incentives for antibacterial drug development. That work determined that there was substantial agreement on the need for a mixture of push and pull incentives and particularly those that served to delink the revenues from the volumes sold. Pull incentives reward successful development by increasing or ensuring future revenue. Several pull incentives have been proposed that could substantially reward the development of new antibacterial drugs. In this second article authored by representatives of TATFAR, we examine the advantages and disadvantages of different pull incentives for antibacterial drug development. It is TATFAR's hope that this analysis, combined with other related analyses, will provide actionable information that will shape policy makers' thinking on this important issue.

International cooperation to improve access to and sustain effectiveness of antimicrobials.

Securing access to effective antimicrobials is one of the greatest challenges today. Until now, efforts to address this issue have been isolated and uncoordinated, with little focus on sustainable and international solutions. Global collective action is necessary to improve access to life-saving antimicrobials, conserving them, and ensuring continued innovation. Access, conservation, and innovation are beneficial when achieved independently, but much more effective and sustainable if implemented in concert within and across countries. WHO alone will not be able to drive these actions. It will require a multisector response (including the health, agriculture, and veterinary sectors), global coordination, and financing mechanisms with sufficient mandates, authority, resources, and power. Fortunately, securing access to effective antimicrobials has finally gained a place on the global political agenda, and we call on policy makers to develop, endorse, and finance new global institutional arrangements that can ensure robust implementation and bold collective action.

An antibiotic's journey from marketing authorization to use, Norway.

Here we describe in detail marketing authorization and reimbursement procedures for medicinal products in Norway, with particular reference to nine novel antibiotics that received marketing authorization between 2005 and 2015. The description illustrates that, in places like Norway, with effective antibiotic stewardship policies and an associated low prevalence of antibiotic-resistant bacterial infection, there is little need for newer, more expensive antibiotics whose therapeutic superiority to existing compounds has not been demonstrated. Since resistance begins to emerge as soon as an antibiotic is used, Norway's practice of leaving newer antibiotics on the shelf is consistent with the goal of prolonging the effectiveness of newer antibiotics. An unintended consequence is that the country has signalled to the private sector that there is little commercial value in novel antibiotics, which may nevertheless still be needed to treat rare or emerging infections. Every country aims to improve infection control and to promote responsible antibiotic use. However, as progress is made, antibiotic-resistant bacteria should become less common and, consequently, the need for, and the commercial value of, novel antibiotics will probably be reduced. Nevertheless, antibiotic innovation continues to be essential. This dilemma will have to be resolved through the introduction of alternative reward systems for antibiotic innovation. The DRIVE-AB (Driving re-investment in research and development and responsible antibiotic use) research consortium in Europe has been tasked with identifying ways of meeting this challenge.

Nous décrivons ici en détail les procédures d'autorisation de mise sur le marché et de remboursement des médicaments en Norvège, en particulier de neuf nouveaux antibiotiques qui ont reçu une autorisation de mise sur le marché entre 2005 et 2015. Cette description montre que, dans les pays comme la Norvège qui ont adopté des politiques d'utilisation raisonnée des antibiotiques et qui affichent ainsi une faible prévalence d'infections bactériennes résistantes aux antibiotiques, il n'est guère besoin de nouveaux antibiotiques plus coûteux dont la supériorité thérapeutique par rapport aux composés existants n'a pas été démontrée. Étant donné que la résistance apparaît dès que l'on commence à utiliser un nouvel antibiotique, la désaffection de la Norvège pour les nouveaux antibiotiques concorde avec l'objectif d'en prolonger l'efficacité. Conséquence inattendue, le pays a signalé au secteur privé que ces nouveaux antibiotiques ne présentaient qu'un faible intérêt commercial mais qu'ils pourraient cependant être nécessaires pour traiter des maladies infectieuses rares ou nouvelles. Tous les pays souhaitent faire avancer la lutte contre les infections et promouvoir l'utilisation responsable des antibiotiques. Cependant, à mesure qu'ils progresseront, les bactéries résistantes aux antibiotiques devraient devenir moins fréquentes et la nécessité ainsi que l'intérêt commercial de nouveaux antibiotiques devraient par conséquent s'en trouver réduits. L'innovation en matière d'antibiotiques reste toutefois essentielle. Ce dilemme devra être résolu avec l'introduction de systèmes de récompenses alternatifs pour l'innovation dans le domaine des antibiotiques. Le consortium de recherche européen DRIVE-AB (Driving re-investment in research and development and responsible antibiotic use) a été chargé de trouver des solutions pour relever ce défi.

En este documento se detallan los procedimientos de autorización de comercialización y compensación para productos medicinales en Noruega, con especial referencia a nueve antibióticos nuevos que recibieron la autorización de comercialización entre 2005 y 2015. La descripción ilustra que, en lugares como Noruega, que cuentan con políticas eficaces de administración de antibióticos y una prevalencia baja relacionada de infecciones bacterianas resistentes a los antibióticos, hay poca necesidad de antibióticos nuevos más caros cuya superioridad terapéutica respecto a los componentes existentes no ha sido demostrada. Dado que la resistencia comienza a surgir tan pronto como se utiliza un antibiótico, la práctica de Noruega de dejar nuevos antibióticos de lado es coherente con el objetivo de prolongar la eficacia de los nuevos antibióticos. Una consecuencia inesperada es que el país ha explicado al sector privado que los antibióticos nuevos apenas tienen valor comercial, los cuales, sin embargo, pueden ser necesarios para tratar infecciones raras o nuevas. Todos los países tratan de mejorar su control de infecciones y fomentar un uso responsable de los antibióticos. No obstante, conforme se va progresando, las bacterias resistentes a los antibióticos deberían ser cada vez menos comunes y, por tanto, es probable que la necesidad y el valor comercial de los antibióticos nuevos se vean reducidos. Sin embargo, la innovación en el campo de los antibióticos sigue siendo fundamental. Este dilema deberá resolverse mediante la introducción de sistemas de recompensa alternativos por innovar con antibióticos. El consorcio de investigación europeo DRIVE-AB, que fomenta la reinversión en investigación y desarrollo y en el uso responsable de los antibióticos, deberá identificar formas de lograr este objetivo.

Financing and collaboration on research and development for nodding syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Nodding syndrome is a neurological disease with no known cure or treatment, impacting children aged 3-18 years old, mainly in East Africa. Children progressively develop varying degrees of cognitive impairment which may lead to severe wasting, a vegetative state and, eventually, death. Despite its 50-year existence, little is known about its cause, risk factors and prognosis. It is a disease where markets will not provide solutions because the patients are both too few and too poor, making it especially neglected. Open source innovation has been recommended as an approach to neglected disease research in order to maximize available funding through greater collaboration and openness to results. Nodding syndrome is a useful case to examine the relevance of open source innovation. METHODS: We assessed the magnitude of research related to nodding syndrome, its availability, financing and the amount of collaboration. We surveyed researchers regarding their motivations, attitudes toward open source innovation concepts and barriers to greater collaboration. RESULTS: Little research is occurring for nodding syndrome, but it is openly available and researchers are highly collaborative. The disease is largely unknown, which is partly attributed to WHO not classifying nodding syndrome as a neglected tropical disease and not including it in any formal programme. Impacted countries, particularly Uganda, demonstrate a strong degree of ownership through both authorship and research financing. Nodding syndrome researchers have been allocated a total of €5 million from 2013 to 2019 in grant funding. Annual financing, due to three new grants, doubled from 2014 to 2015. CONCLUSIONS: Nodding syndrome, a disease previously ignored by the international community, is starting to receive greater attention, although financing remains modest. If infectious, a larger epidemic could take the world by surprise. Open source innovation can likely help by sharing research protocols (to avoid duplication) and early research results (to adjust to the findings of others). The existing scientists have already endorsed open source innovation, but increased financing is needed. The support of just a few high-income countries could reap a large impact.

Mapping of available health research and development data: what's there, what's missing, and what role is there for a global observatory?

The need to align investments in health research and development (R&D) with public health demands is one of the most pressing global public health challenges. We aim to provide a comprehensive description of available data sources, propose a set of indicators for monitoring the global landscape of health R&D, and present a sample of country indicators on research inputs (investments), processes (clinical trials), and outputs (publications), based on data from international databases. Total global investments in health R&D (both public and private sector) in 2009 reached US$240 billion. Of the US$214 billion invested in high-income countries, 60% of health R&D investments came from the business sector, 30% from the public sector, and about 10% from other sources (including private non-profit organisations). Only about 1% of all health R&D investments were allocated to neglected diseases in 2010. Diseases of relevance to high-income countries were investigated in clinical trials seven-to-eight-times more often than were diseases whose burden lies mainly in low-income and middle-income countries. This report confirms that substantial gaps in the global landscape of health R&D remain, especially for and in low-income and middle-income countries. Too few investments are targeted towards the health needs of these countries. Better data are needed to improve priority setting and coordination for health R&D, ultimately to ensure that resources are allocated to diseases and regions where they are needed the most. The establishment of a global observatory on health R&D, which is being discussed at WHO, could address the absence of a comprehensive and sustainable mechanism for regular global monitoring of health R&D.

Availability of essential, generic medicines before and during COVID-19 at selected public pharmaceutical supply agencies in Ethiopia: a comparative cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: Lockdowns and border closures impacted medicine availability during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to assess the availability of essential, generic medicines for chronic diseases at public pharmaceutical supply agencies in Ethiopia. DESIGN: Comparative cross-sectional study. SETTING: The availability of essential, generic medicines for chronic diseases was assessed at two public pharmaceutical supply agency hubs. PARTICIPANTS: The current study included public supply agency hub managers, warehouse managers and forecasting officers at the study setting. OUTCOMES: The assessment encompassed the availability of chronic medicines on the day of data collection, as well as records spanning 8 months before the outbreak and 1 year during the pandemic. A total of 22 medicines were selected based on their inclusion in the national essential drug list for public health facilities, including 17 medicines for cardiovascular disease and 5 for diabetes mellitus. RESULTS: The results of the study indicate that the mean availability of the selected basket medicines was 43.3% (95% CI: 37.1 to 49.5) during COVID-19, which was significantly lower than the availability of 67.4% (95% CI: 62.2 to 72.6) before the outbreak (p<0.001). Prior to COVID-19, the overall average line-item fill rate for the selected products was 78%, but it dropped to 49% during the pandemic. Furthermore, the mean number of days out of stock per month was 11.7 (95% CI: 9.9 to 13.5) before the outbreak of COVID-19, which significantly increased to 15.7 (95% CI: 13.2 to 18.2) during the pandemic, indicating a statistically significant difference (p<0.001). Although the prices for some drugs remained relatively stable, there were significant price hikes for some products. For example, the unit price of insulin increased by more than 130%. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic worsened the availability of essential chronic medicines, including higher rates of stockouts and unit price hikes for some products in the study setting. The study's findings imply that the COVID-19 pandemic has aggravated already-existing medicine availability issues. Efforts should be made to develop contingency plans and establish mechanisms to monitor medicine availability and pricing during such crises.

Common characteristics of open source software development and applicability for drug discovery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Innovation through an open source model has proven to be successful for software development. This success has led many to speculate if open source can be applied to other industries with similar success. We attempt to provide an understanding of open source software development characteristics for researchers, business leaders and government officials who may be interested in utilizing open source innovation in other contexts and with an emphasis on drug discovery. METHODS: A systematic review was performed by searching relevant, multidisciplinary databases to extract empirical research regarding the common characteristics and barriers of initiating and maintaining an open source software development project. RESULTS: Common characteristics to open source software development pertinent to open source drug discovery were extracted. The characteristics were then grouped into the areas of participant attraction, management of volunteers, control mechanisms, legal framework and physical constraints. Lastly, their applicability to drug discovery was examined. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that the open source model is viable for drug discovery, although it is unlikely that it will exactly follow the form used in software development. Hybrids will likely develop that suit the unique characteristics of drug discovery. We suggest potential motivations for organizations to join an open source drug discovery project. We also examine specific differences between software and medicines, specifically how the need for laboratories and physical goods will impact the model as well as the effect of patents.

National Facilitators and Barriers to the Implementation of Incentives for Antibiotic Access and Innovation.

Prominent reports have assessed the challenges to antibiotic innovation and recommended implementing "pull" incentives, i.e., mechanisms that give increased and predictable revenues for important, marketed antibiotics. We set out to understand countries' perceptions of these recommendations, through frank and anonymous dialogue. In 2019 and 2020, we performed in-depth interviews with national policymakers and antibiotic resistance experts in 13 countries (ten European countries and three non-European) for a total of 73 individuals in 27 separate interviews. Interviewees expressed high-level support for antibiotic incentives in 11 of 13 countries. There is recognition that new economic incentives are needed to maintain a reliable supply to essential antibiotics. However, most countries are uncertain which incentives may be appropriate for their country, which antibiotics should be included, how to implement incentives, and how much it will cost. There is a preference for a multinational incentive, so long as it is independent of national pricing, procurement, and reimbursement processes. Nine countries indicated a preference for a model that ensures access to both existing and new antibiotics, with the highest priority for existing antibiotics. Twelve of thirteen countries indicated that shortages of existing antibiotics is a serious problem. Since countries are skeptical about the public health value of many recently approved antibiotics, there is a mismatch regarding revenue expectations between policymakers and antibiotic innovators. This paper presents important considerations for the design and implementation of antibiotic pull mechanisms. We also propose a multinational model that appears to match the needs of both countries and innovators.

The effect of generic market entry on antibiotic prescriptions in the United States.

When patented, brand-name antibiotics lose market exclusivity, generics typically enter the market at lower prices, which may increase consumption of the drug. To examine the effect of generic market entry on antibiotic consumption in the United States, we conducted an interrupted time series analysis of the change in the number of prescriptions per month for antibiotics for which at least one generic entered the US market between 2000 and 2012. Data were acquired from the IQVIA Xponent database. Thirteen antibiotics were analyzed. Here, we show that one year after generic entry, the number of prescriptions increased for five antibiotics (5 to 406%)-aztreonam, cefpodoxime, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, ofloxacin-and decreased for one drug: cefdinir. These changes were sustained two years after. Cefprozil, cefuroxime axetil and clarithromycin had significant increases in trend, but no significant level changes. No consistent pattern for antibiotic use following generic entry in the United States was observed.

Infection prevention and control research priorities: what do we need to combat healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance? Results of a narrative literature review and survey analysis.

BACKGROUND: Infection prevention and control (IPC) is one of the most cost-effective interventions against antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Yet, IPC knowledge gaps often receive little prominence in AMR research agendas. In this article, we construct IPC research priorities, in order to draw attention to these critical research needs. METHODS: We developed a 4-step framework to identify IPC knowledge gaps from literature (narrative review). These gaps were then translated into research priorities and sent to two groups of European IPC experts for validation and critique through an online survey. RESULTS: Seventy-nine publications were retrieved from the literature review, identifying fifteen IPC research gaps. Forty-four IPC experts, clustered in two groups, vetted them. The experts classified all research gaps as medium or high priority. Overall agreement between both groups was average (Kendall's τ = 0.43), with strong alignment on the highest priorities: (i) the assessment of organizational, socio-economic, and behavioural barriers/facilitators for the implementation of IPC programmes, (ii) the impact of overcrowding on the spread of infections and (iii) the impact of infrastructural changes, at facility level, on the reduction of infections. Feedback from experts also identified an additional research gap on the interaction between the human and hospital microbiomes. CONCLUSIONS: We formulated a list of sixteen research priorities and identified three urgent needs. Now, we encourage researchers, funding agencies, policymakers and relevant stakeholders to start addressing the identified gaps.

A case study on Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia: available treatment options, antibiotic R&D and responsible antibiotic-use strategies.

OBJECTIVES: This case study addresses: (i) antibiotic treatment options for Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (SAB), for both empirical and targeted therapy; (ii) the current status of and priorities for the antibiotic pipeline to ensure access of effective antibiotics for SAB; and (iii) strategies for responsible antibiotic use relevant to the clinical management of SAB. METHODS: Evidence to address the aims was extracted from the following information sources: (i) EUCAST and CLSI recommendations, summaries of product characteristics (SPCs), antibiotic treatment guidelines and the textbook Kucers' The Use of Antibiotics; (ii) the www.clinicaltrial.gov database; and (iii) quality indicators for responsible antibiotic use. RESULTS: Current monotherapy treatment options for SAB include only three drug classes (ß-lactams, glycopeptides and lipopeptides), of which two also cover MRSA bacteraemia (glycopeptides and lipopeptides). The analysis of the antibiotic pipeline and ongoing clinical trials revealed that several new antibiotics with S. aureus (including MRSA) coverage were developed in the past decade (2009-19). However, none belonged to a new antibiotic class or had superior effectiveness and their added clinical value for SAB remains to be proven. Responsible antibiotic use for the treatment of SAB was illustrated using 11 quality indicators. CONCLUSIONS: Awareness of the problem of a limited antibiotic arsenal, together with incentives (e.g. push incentives), is needed to steer the R&D landscape towards the development of novel and effective antibiotics for treating SAB. In the meantime, responsible antibiotic use guided by quality indicators should preserve the effectiveness of currently available antibiotics for treating SAB.

A one health framework to estimate the cost of antimicrobial resistance.

OBJECTIVES/PURPOSE: The costs attributable to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) remain theoretical and largely unspecified. Current figures fail to capture the full health and economic burden caused by AMR across human, animal, and environmental health; historically many studies have considered only direct costs associated with human infection from a hospital perspective, primarily from high-income countries. The Global Antimicrobial Resistance Platform for ONE-Burden Estimates (GAP-ON€) network has developed a framework to help guide AMR costing exercises in any part of the world as a first step towards more comprehensive analyses for comparing AMR interventions at the local level as well as more harmonized analyses for quantifying the full economic burden attributable to AMR at the global level. METHODS: GAP-ON€ (funded under the JPIAMR 8th call (Virtual Research Institute) is composed of 19 international networks and institutions active in the field of AMR. For this project, the Network operated by means of Delphi rounds, teleconferences and face-to-face meetings. The resulting costing framework takes a bottom-up approach to incorporate all relevant costs imposed by an AMR bacterial microbe in a patient, in an animal, or in the environment up through to the societal level. RESULTS: The framework itemizes the epidemiological data as well as the direct and indirect cost components needed to build a realistic cost picture for AMR. While the framework lists a large number of relevant pathogens for which this framework could be used to explore the costs, the framework is sufficiently generic to facilitate the costing of other resistant pathogens, including those of other aetiologies. CONCLUSION: In order to conduct cost-effectiveness analyses to choose amongst different AMR-related interventions at local level, the costing of AMR should be done according to local epidemiological priorities and local health service norms. Yet the use of a common framework across settings allows for the results of such studies to contribute to cumulative estimates that can serve as the basis of broader policy decisions at the international level such as how to steer R&D funding and how to prioritize AMR amongst other issues. Indeed, it is only by building a realistic cost picture that we can make informed decisions on how best to tackle major health threats.