Negotiating public-health intellectual property licensing agreements to increase access to health technologies: an insider's story.

Public health voluntary licensing of intellectual property has successfully been applied to increase access to medicines in certain disease areas, producing health benefits and economic savings, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. There is however limited understanding of the intricacies of the approach, the modalities by which it works in practice, its levers and the trade-offs made. Such knowledge may be critical in deciding what role licensing should have in pandemic preparedness and equitable access to health technologies more broadly. This paper examines the case for licensing, the considerations for balancing public health needs, the challenges of negotiations, and the processes for validating proposed agreements. No access mechanism is perfect, but evidence suggests that public-health licensing has an important role to play, although it remains underused. Understanding some of the realities, strengths, limitations and complexities of applying the model may help calibrate expectations and develop incentives to expand its applications.

Improving uptake of hepatitis B and hepatitis C testing in South Asian migrants in community and faith settings using educational interventions-A prospective descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic viral hepatitis (CVH) is a leading contributor to the UK liver disease epidemic, with global migration from high prevalence areas (e.g., South Asia). Despite international guidance for testing high-risk groups in line with elimination targets, there is no consensus on how to achieve this. The objectives of this study were to assess the following: (1) the feasibility of recruiting South Asian migrants to view an educational film on CVH, (2) the effectiveness of the film in promoting testing and increasing knowledge of CVH, and (3) the methodological issues relevant to scale-up to a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: South Asian migrants were recruited to view the film (intervention) in community venues (primary care, religious, community), with dried blood spot CVH testing offered immediately afterwards. Pre/post-film questionnaires assessed the effectiveness of the intervention. RESULTS: Two hundred and nineteen first-generation migrants ≥18 years of age (53% female) were recruited to view the film at the following sites: religious, n = 112 (51%), community n = 98 (45%), and primary care, n = 9 (4%). One hundred and eighty-four (84%) underwent CVH testing; hepatitis B core antibody or hepatitis C antibody positivity demonstrated exposure in 8.5%. Pre-intervention (n = 173, 79%) and post-intervention (n = 154, 70%) questionnaires were completed. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the feasibility of recruiting first-generation migrants to view a community-based educational film promoting CVH testing in this higher risk group, confirming the value of developing interventions to facilitate the global World Health Organization plan for targeted case finding and elimination, and a future randomized controlled trial. We highlight the importance of culturally relevant interventions including faith and culturally sensitive settings, which appear to minimize logistical issues and effectively engage minority groups, allowing ease of access to individuals 'at risk'.

Cost-Effectiveness of One-Time Birth Cohort Screening for Hepatitis C as Part of the National Health Service Health Check Program in England.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Birth cohort screening for the hepatitis C virus (HCV) has been implemented in the US, but there is little evidence of its cost-effectiveness in England. We aim to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of one-time HCV screening for individuals born between 1950 and 1979 as part of the National Health Service health check in England, a health check for adults aged 40 to 74 years in primary care. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to analyze add-on HCV testing to the National Health Service health check for individuals in birth cohorts between 1950 and 1979, versus current background HCV testing only, over a lifetime horizon. The model used data from a back-calculation model of the burden of HCV in England, sentinel surveillance of HCV testing, and published literature. Results are presented from a health service perspective in pounds in 2017, as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per quality-adjusted life years gained. RESULTS: The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from £7648 to £24 434, and £18 681 to £46 024, across birth cohorts when considering 2 sources of HCV transition probabilities. The intervention is most likely to be cost-effective for those born in the 1970s, and potentially cost-effective for those born from 1955 to 1969. The model results were most sensitive to the source of HCV transition probabilities, the probability of referral and receiving treatment, and the HCV prevalence among testers. The maximum value of future research across all birth cohorts was £11.3 million at £20 000 per quality-adjusted life years gained. CONCLUSION: Birth cohort screening is likely to be cost-effective for younger birth cohorts, although considerable uncertainty exists for other birth cohorts. Further studies are warranted to reduce uncertainty in cost-effectiveness and consider the acceptability of the intervention.

Accelerating the elimination of viral hepatitis: a Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology Commission.

Viral hepatitis is a major public health threat and a leading cause of death worldwide. Annual mortality from viral hepatitis is similar to that of other major infectious diseases such as HIV and tuberculosis. Highly effective prevention measures and treatments have made the global elimination of viral hepatitis a realistic goal, endorsed by all WHO member states. Ambitious targets call for a global reduction in hepatitis-related mortality of 65% and a 90% reduction in new infections by 2030. This Commission draws together a wide range of expertise to appraise the current global situation and to identify priorities globally, regionally, and nationally needed to accelerate progress. We identify 20 heavily burdened countries that account for over 75% of the global burden of viral hepatitis. Key recommendations include a greater focus on national progress towards elimination with support given, if necessary, through innovative financing measures to ensure elimination programmes are fully funded by 2020. In addition to further measures to improve access to vaccination and treatment, greater attention needs to be paid to access to affordable, high-quality diagnostics if testing is to reach the levels needed to achieve elimination goals. Simplified, decentralised models of care removing requirements for specialised prescribing will be required to reach those in need, together with sustained efforts to tackle stigma and discrimination. We identify key examples of the progress that has already been made in many countries throughout the world, demonstrating that sustained and coordinated efforts can be successful in achieving the WHO elimination goals.

Global progress on the elimination of viral hepatitis as a major public health threat: An analysis of WHO Member State responses 2017.

In 2016, the World Health Assembly passed a resolution to eliminate viral hepatitis as a public health threat by 2030. We aimed to examine the status of the global viral hepatitis response. METHODS: In 2017, the World Health Organization (WHO) asked the Ministries of Health in all 194 Member States to complete a Country Profile on Viral Hepatitis policy uptake indicators, covering national plans/funding, engagement of civil society, testing guidance, access to treatment, and strategic information. RESULTS: Of 194 Member States, 135 (70%) responded, accounting for 87% of the global population infected with hepatitis B virus (HBV) and/or C virus (HCV). Of those responding, 84 (62%) had developed a national plan, of which, 49 (58%) had dedicated funding, and 62 (46%) had engaged with civil society; those engaged with civil society were more likely to have a funded plan than others (52% vs. 23%, p = 0.001). Guidance on testing pregnant women (for HBV) and people who inject drugs (for HCV) was available in 70% and 46% of Member States, respectively; 59% and 38% of Member States reported universal access to optimal therapies for HBV and HCV, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Most people living with hepatitis B and C reside in a country with a national hepatitis strategy. Governments who engaged with civil society were more advanced in their response. Member States need to finance these national strategies and ensure that those affected have access to hepatitis services as part of efforts to achieve universal health coverage. LAY SUMMARY: The World Health Organization's goal to eliminate viral hepatitis as a public health threat by 2030 requires global action. Our results indicate that progress is being made by countries to scale-up national planning efforts; however, our results also highlight important gaps in current policies.

The HepTestContest: a global innovation contest to identify approaches to hepatitis B and C testing.

BACKGROUND: Innovation contests are a novel approach to elicit good ideas and innovative practices in various areas of public health. There remains limited published literature on approaches to deliver hepatitis testing. The purpose of this innovation contest was to identify examples of different hepatitis B and C approaches to support countries in their scale-up of hepatitis testing and to supplement development of formal recommendations on service delivery in the 2017 World Health Organization hepatitis B and C testing guidelines. METHODS: This contest involved four steps: 1) establishment of a multisectoral steering committee to coordinate a call for contest entries; 2) dissemination of the call for entries through diverse media (Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, email listservs, academic journals); 3) independent ranking of submissions by a panel of judges according to pre-specified criteria (clarity of testing model, innovation, effectiveness, next steps) using a 1-10 scale; 4) recognition of highly ranked entries through presentation at international conferences, commendation certificate, and inclusion as a case study in the WHO 2017 testing guidelines. RESULTS: The innovation contest received 64 entries from 27 countries and took a total of 4 months to complete. Sixteen entries were directly included in the WHO testing guidelines. The entries covered testing in different populations, including primary care patients (n = 5), people who inject drugs (PWID) (n = 4), pregnant women (n = 4), general populations (n = 4), high-risk groups (n = 3), relatives of people living with hepatitis B and C (n = 2), migrants (n = 2), incarcerated individuals (n = 2), workers (n = 2), and emergency department patients (n = 2). A variety of different testing delivery approaches were employed, including integrated HIV-hepatitis testing (n = 12); integrated testing with harm reduction and addiction services (n = 9); use of electronic medical records to support targeted testing (n = 8); decentralization (n = 8); and task shifting (n = 7). CONCLUSION: The global innovation contest identified a range of local hepatitis testing approaches that can be used to inform the development of testing strategies in different settings and populations. Further implementation and evaluation of different testing approaches is needed.

Associations between national viral hepatitis policies/programmes and country-level socioeconomic factors: a sub-analysis of data from the 2013 WHO viral hepatitis policy report.

BACKGROUND: As more countries worldwide develop national viral hepatitis strategies, it is important to ask whether context-specific factors affect their decision-making. This study aimed to determine whether country-level socioeconomic factors are associated with viral hepatitis programmes and policy responses across WHO Member States (MS). METHODS: WHO MS focal points completed a questionnaire on national viral hepatitis policies. This secondary analysis of data reported in the 2013 Global Policy Report on the Prevention and Control of Viral Hepatitis in WHO Member States used logistic regression to examine associations between four survey questions and four socioeconomic factors: country income level, Human Development Index (HDI), health expenditure and physician density. RESULTS: This analysis included 119 MS. MS were more likely to have routine viral hepatitis surveillance and to have a national strategy and/or policy/guidelines for preventing infection in healthcare settings if they were in the higher binary categories for income level, HDI, health expenditure and physician density. In multivariable analyses, the only significant finding was a positive association between having routine surveillance and being in the higher binary HDI category (adjusted odds ratio 26; 95% confidence interval 2.0-340). CONCLUSION: Countries with differing socioeconomic status indicators did not appear to differ greatly regarding the existence of key national policies and programmes. A more nuanced understanding of the multifaceted interactions of socioeconomic factors, health policy, service delivery and health outcomes is needed to support country-level efforts to eliminate viral hepatitis.

Late presentation of chronic viral hepatitis for medical care: a consensus definition.

INTRODUCTION: We present two consensus definitions of advanced and late stage liver disease being used as epidemiological tools. These definitions can be applied to assess the morbidity caused by liver diseases in different health care systems. We focus is on hepatitis B and C virus infections, because effective and well tolerated treatments for both of these infections have greatly improved our ability to successfully treat and prevent advanced and late stage disease, especially if diagnosed early. A consensus definition of late presentation with viral hepatitis is important to create a homogenous, easy-to-use reference for public health authorities in Europe and elsewhere to better assess the clinical situation on a population basis. METHODS: A working group including viral hepatitis experts from the European Association for the Study of the Liver, experts from the HIV in Europe Initiative, and relevant stakeholders including patient advocacy groups, health policy-makers, international health organisations and surveillance experts, met in 2014 and 2015 to develop a draft consensus definition of late presentation with viral hepatitis for medical care. This was refined through subsequent consultations among the group. RESULTS: Two definitions were agreed upon. Presentation with advanced liver disease caused by chronic viral hepatitis for medical care is defined as a patient with chronic hepatitis B and C and significant fibrosis (≥ F3 assessed by either APRI score > 1.5, FIB-4 > 3.25, Fibrotest > 0.59 or alternatively transient elastography (FibroScan) > 9.5 kPa or liver biopsy ≥ METAVIR stage F3) with no previous antiviral treatment. Late stage liver disease caused by chronic viral hepatitis is clinically defined by the presence of decompensated cirrhosis (at least one symptom of the following: jaundice, hepatic encephalopathy, clinically detectable ascites, variceal bleeding) and/or hepatocellular carcinoma. CONCLUSION: These consensus definitions will help to improve epidemiological understanding of viral hepatitis and possibly other liver diseases, as well as testing policies and strategies.

Roundtable discussion: how the World Hepatitis Summit 2015 strengthened stakeholders' efforts to combat viral hepatitis.

The inaugural World Hepatitis Summit was jointly convened by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Hepatitis Alliance and hosted by the Scottish Government and supported by Glasgow Caledonian University and Health Protection Scotland in September 2015. The three day event convened a broad range of stakeholders to meet and share ideas, experience and best practice in addressing the many facets of viral hepatitis prevention, diagnosis and treatment. With the next World Hepatitis Summit scheduled to take place from 1 to 3 November 2017, the World Hepatitis Alliance asked Hepatology, Medicine and Policy to commission a roundtable discussion article in order to encourage reflection on how the 2015 Summit was significant for stakeholders' efforts and why it is important to keep the momentum going ahead of the World Hepatitis Summit 2017 and in the light of the newly adopted first-ever Global Health Sector Strategy on Viral Hepatitis.

Global policy and access to new hepatitis C therapies for people who inject drugs.

People who inject drugs (PWID) are disproportionately affected by hepatitis C virus (HCV). This review outlines policy recommendations made in the 2014 World Health Organisation (WHO) Guidelines on Screening, Care and Treatment of HCV and their relevance to PWID. It also canvasses issues that will affect translation of these global guidelines into practice. The first global HCV guidelines released by WHO have recently advocated targeted HCV testing for PWID, assessment of liver disease and support for alcohol reduction during care. They also strongly advocate treatment using currently licensed direct-acting antiviral agents for all individuals, in particular PWID as a key affected population. New HCV treatment regimens have the potential to cure more than 90% of treated individuals. Scaling-up treatment among PWID has the potential to improve individual and population health by reducing HCV transmission, improving quality of life and supporting behaviour modifications that lead to less risk-taking over time. PWID face several barriers to accessing HCV care and treatment that need to be overcome. Testing services need re-orientation toward PWID, individuals need to be informed of their results and provided with direct linkage to ongoing care. Health services need to provide care in the community using simpler, cheaper and more accessible modes of delivery. Healthcare costs and pharmaceutical costs need to be minimised so PWID, who are highly marginalised, can access HCV treatment. Sustained scale-up of treatment for PWID could simultaneously improve individual health and achieve the goal of eliminating HCV transmission among this high-risk and vulnerable group.

Patient and physician preferences for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus infections: does the perspective matter?

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to identify and quantify the factors driving patient and physician preferences for treatments of genotype 1 hepatitis C virus infection in the UK. METHODS: A web survey was conducted, including 100 patients (50 treatment-naive and 50 treatment-experienced patients) and 50 physicians (gastroenterologists/ hepatologists and infectious disease specialists). A discrete-choice experiment was conducted to elicit the participants' preferences on the basis of seven attributes with four levels each: efficacy, that is probability of reaching sustained virologic response, treatment duration, treatment convenience (i.e. number of pills and/or injections), gastrointestinal problems, anaemia, dermatological problems and neuropsychological problems. The statistical analysis applied a mixed logit model to estimate preference weights and relative importance scores. RESULTS: Results indicated that the sustained virologic response rate was the most important attribute to participants. Physicians placed an even greater weight on the efficacy of treatments with a relative importance score of 9.33 [95% confidence interval: (6.93-11.91)], as compared with 6.16 [95% confidence interval: (4.34-8.15)] for patients. Neuropsychological problems ranked second for patients and physicians, and were more important to treatment-naive patients than to treatment-experienced patients or physicians. Gastrointestinal problems, anaemia and dermatological problems were of minor importance to all participants. These findings may be explained by the improvement in the management of physical adverse reactions over the last few years, thus making treatment easier to tolerate. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first conjoint analysis assessing and comparing the preferences of patients and physicians in hepatitis C virus.