Leave no one behind: response to new evidence and guidelines for the management of cryptococcal meningitis in low-income and middle-income countries.

In 2018, WHO issued guidelines for the diagnosis, prevention, and management of HIV-related cryptococcal disease. Two strategies are recommended to reduce the high mortality associated with HIV-related cryptococcal meningitis in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs): optimised combination therapies for confirmed meningitis cases and cryptococcal antigen screening programmes for ambulatory people living with HIV who access care. WHO's preferred therapy for the treatment of HIV-related cryptococcal meningitis in LMICs is 1 week of amphotericin B plus flucytosine, and the alternative therapy is 2 weeks of fluconazole plus flucytosine. In the ACTA trial, 1-week (short course) amphotericin B plus flucytosine resulted in a 10-week mortality of 24% (95% CI -16 to 32) and 2 weeks of fluconazole and flucytosine resulted in a 10-week mortality of 35% (95% CI -29 to 41). However, with widely used fluconazole monotherapy, mortality because of HIV-related cryptococcal meningitis is approximately 70% in many African LMIC settings. Therefore, the potential to transform the management of HIV-related cryptococcal meningitis in resource-limited settings is substantial. Sustainable access to essential medicines, including flucytosine and amphotericin B, in LMICs is paramount and the focus of this Personal View.

A critical comparison between the World Health Organization list of essential medicines for children and the Brazilian list of essential medicines (Rename).

OBJECTIVE: To perform a critical comparison between the Brazilian national essential medicines list (Rename, 2012) with the list of essential medicines for children (LEMC, 2011) of the World Health Organization (WHO), regarding the differences among drugs and formulations listed for children. METHODS: The LEMC drugs were classified into four categories: 1) absent in Rename; 2) included in Rename but without any formulation suitable for children; 3) listed in Rename only in some formulations; 4) present in Rename in all formulations. The missing formulations were analyzed by therapeutic group. Alternatives present in Rename were searched. RESULTS: From the 261 drugs of interest on the LEMC, 30.3% are absent from Rename, 11.1% are in Rename but without any pediatric formulation, and 32.2% are present in some but not all formulations listed in LEMC. Considering all formulations items listed in the LEMC (n = 577), 349 are missing from Rename, of these 19.6% due to their strength, and 18.5% due to the the dosage form. Useful formulations specific for neonatal care, respiratory tract, central nervous system, and anti-infectives, among other groups, are missing. CONCLUSION: The lack of age-appropriate formulations of essential medicines for children in Brazil includes important therapeutic groups and indispensable drugs for severe clinical conditions. Some of these products exist in the Brazilian pharmaceutical market, but not in public facilities; others could be produced by national laboratories with commercial interest or stimulated by a specific governmental policy, as in other countries.

Uma comparação crítica entre a Lista de Medicamentos Essenciais para Crianças da Organização Mundial de Saúde e a Relação Nacional de Medicamentos Essenciais (Rename) / A critical comparison between the World Health Organization list of essential medicines for children and the Brazilian list of essential medicines (Rename)

OBJECTIVE: To perform a critical comparison between the Brazilian national essential medicines list (Rename, 2012) with the list of essential medicines for children (LEMC, 2011) of the World Health Organization (WHO), regarding the differences among drugs and formulations listed for children. METHODS: The LEMC drugs were classified into four categories: 1) absent in Rename; 2) included in Rename but without any formulation suitable for children; 3) listed in Rename only in some formulations; 4) present in Rename in all formulations. The missing formulations were analyzed by therapeutic group. Alternatives present in Rename were searched. RESULTS: From the 261 drugs of interest on the LEMC, 30.3% are absent from Rename, 11.1% are in Rename but without any pediatric formulation, and 32.2% are present in some but not all formulations listed in LEMC. Considering all formulations items listed in the LEMC (n = 577), 349 are missing from Rename, of these 19.6% due to their strength, and 18.5% due to the the dosage form. Useful formulations specific for neonatal care, respiratory tract, central nervous system, and anti-infectives, among other groups, are missing. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of age-appropriate formulations of essential medicines for children in Brazil includes important therapeutic groups and indispensable drugs for severe clinical conditions. Some of these products exist in the Brazilian pharmaceutical market, but not in public facilities; others could be produced by national laboratories with commercial interest or stimulated by a specific governmental policy, as in other countries.

OBJETIVO: Realizar uma comparação crítica entre a Relação Nacional de Medicamentos Essenciais (Rename, 2012) e a Lista de Medicamentos Essenciais para Crianças (LMEC, 2011) da Organização Mundial de Saúde (OMS), com relação às diferenças entre os medicamentos e as formulações listadas para crianças. MÉTODOS: Os medicamentos da LMEC foram classificados em quatro grupos: 1) não constam na Rename; 2) constam na Rename, porém sem qualquer formulação adequada para crianças; 3) listados na Rename apenas com algumas formulações; 4) constam na Rename em todas as formulações. As formulações que faltam foram analisadas por grupos terapêuticos. As alternativas presentes na Rename foram pesquisadas. RESULTADOS: Dos 261 medicamentos de interesse listados na LMEC, 30,3% não estão presentes na Rename, 11,1% estão na Rename, mas sem qualquer formulação pediátrica, e 32,3% estão presentes em algumas, mas não todas as formulações listadas na LMEC. Considerando todos os itens de formulações listados na LMEC (n = 577), 349 não constam na Rename, desses, 19,6% devido à intensidade de dosagem, e 18,5% devido à forma farmacêutica. Faltam formulações úteis específicas para cuidado neonatal, trato respiratório e sistema nervoso central, anti-infecciosos, entre outros grupos. CONCLUSÃO: A ausência de formulações adequadas à idade de medicamentos essenciais para crianças no Brasil inclui importantes grupos terapêuticos e medicamentos indispensáveis para quadros clínicos graves. Alguns desses produtos são encontrados no mercado farmacêutico brasileiro, porém não existem em unidades públicas; outros poderiam ser produzidos por laboratórios nacionais com interesse comercial ou estimulados por uma política governamental específica, como é feito em outros países.

Successful public/private donation programs: a review of the Diflucan Partnership Program in South Africa.

A review of the partnership between Pfizer Inc. and the South African Ministry of Health to distribute free Diflucan (fluconazole) in the Diflucan Partnership Program (DPP) demonstrates that product donations may be a useful response to AIDS if they are coupled with efforts to build means of drug distribution and enhance professional healthcare capacity to treat patients. Equally important is the creation of a new set of productive working relationships between stakeholders who came to the project with different backgrounds and perspectives, as well as a frankly disparate set of objectives. A decision tree illustrates how these relationships were built into the DPP. This review concludes with a few lessons learned in providing medicines not only to South Africa, but also to the 77 other African countries now participating in the DPP. As the search for new treatments and vaccines continues, increasing access to existing medicines through targeted donations--including training and infrastructure support--is the most practical way for the health community to address the problem of ill health among the poor. In addition to a detailed analysis of the DPP, there is also a discussion of the benefits of a donation program that addresses the AIDS crises on a global scale. This review may serve as a blueprint for establishing programs that are successful in fighting AIDS and improving the lives of millions of people.

Fluconazole: Pfizer asked to lower Africa price.

Pfizer, Inc.'s fluconazole costs almost 15 times as much in South Africa, where it is patent protected, than in Thailand where it is generic. The result is that many Africans die of cryptococcal meningitis and other fungal infections because they cannot obtain the patented drug at Pfizer's price. In South Africa, a coalition of major organizations has asked Pfizer to either reduce the price to the Thailand level, or voluntarily license the patent to that the treatment could be made available.

South Africa: historic "defiance campaign" imports generic fluconazole.

South African treatment advocates have raised national and international issues by purchasing a generic version of fluconazole in Thailand, where it cost 50 50 times less than the South African retail price, and importing it into South Africa in defiance of patent laws. Many Africans die because they cannot afford the South African price of the patented drug. The South African government has been hostile, but the action has been supported by civil society throughout the country and abroad.