The Global Drug Facility as an intervention in the market for tuberculosis drugs.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate funding for the Global Drug Facility since 2001 and to analyse the facility's influence on the price of high-quality tuberculosis drugs. METHODS: Data on the price of tuberculosis drugs were obtained from the Global Drug Facility for 2001 to 2012 and, for the private sector in 15 countries, from IMS Health for 2002 to 2012. Data on funding of the facility were also collected. FINDINGS: Quality-assured tuberculosis drugs supplied by the Global Drug Facility were generally priced lower than drugs purchased in the private sector. In 2012, just three manufacturers accounted for 29.9 million United Stated dollars (US$) of US$ 44.5 million by value of first-line drugs supplied. The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria provided 73% (US$ 32.5 million of US$ 44.5 million) and 89% (US$ 57.8 million of US $65.2 million) of funds for first- and second-line drugs, respectively. Between 2010 and 2012, the facility's market share of second-line tuberculosis drugs increased from 26.1% to 42.9%, while prices decreased by as much as 24% (from US$ 1231 to US$ 939). Conversely, the facility's market share of first-line drugs fell from 37.2% to 19.2% during this time, while prices increased from US$ 9.53 to US$ 10.2. CONCLUSION: The price of tuberculosis drugs supplied through the facility was generally less than that on the private market. However, to realize its full potential and meet the needs of more tuberculosis patients, the facility requires more diverse and stable public funding and greater flexibility to participate in the private market.

Reducing the price of treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis through the Global Drug Facility.

PROBLEM: Many countries have limited experience of securing the best prices for drugs and have little negotiating power. This is particularly true for the complex, lengthy and expensive regimens used to treat multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. APPROACH: The Stop TB Partnership's Global Drug Facility is dedicated to improving worldwide access to antituberculosis medicines and diagnostic techniques that meet international quality standards. LOCAL SETTING: The Global Drug Facility is able to secure price reductions through competitive tendering among prequalified drug manufacturers and by consolidating orders to achieve large purchase volumes. Consolidating the market in this way increases the incentives for suppliers of quality-assured medicines. RELEVANT CHANGES: In 2013 the Global Drug Facility reduced the price of the second-line drugs it supplies for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis: the overall cost of the longest and most expensive treatment regimen for a patient decreased by 26% - from 7890 United States dollars (US$) in 2011 to US$ 5822 in 2013. LESSONS LEARNT: The price of treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis supplied by the Global Drug Facility was reduced by consolidating orders to achieve large purchase volumes, by international, competitive bidding and by the existence of donor-funded medicine stockpiles. The rise in the number of suppliers of internationally quality-assured drugs was also important. The savings achieved from lower drug costs could be used to increase the number of patients on high-quality treatment.

Safety and availability of clofazimine in the treatment of multidrug and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis: analysis of published guidance and meta-analysis of cohort studies.

OBJECTIVES: Given the spread of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB), new therapies are urgently needed, including the repurposing of existing drugs. We aimed to assess key considerations for the clinical and programmatic use of clofazimine (Cfz), a riminophenazine with antimycobacterial activity currently used to treat leprosy. DESIGN: Fixed and random effects meta-analysis of cohort studies and systematic review. SETTING: Electronic and manual searches were combined. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Observational studies on treatment of multidrug-resistant and extremely drug-resistant tuberculosis with Cfz or a Cfz-containing regimen, and published guidance and documents relating to cost and availability were eligible. RESULTS: 5 observational studies enrolled 861 patients, of which 602 received Cfz. The pooled proportion of adverse drug reactions requiring discontinuation of Cfz treatment was 0.1% (95% CI (0.0 to 0.6%)), and the median frequency of all adverse events was 5.1%. Cfz showed in vitro efficacy against Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and Cfz-containing regimens may have had a useful role in the treatment of patients with drug-resistant strains and who had limited alternative treatment options. However, Cfz uptake remains insufficient to meet global needs; there is only one internationally quality-assured manufacturer, which produces a limited quantity of the drug prioritised for treatment of leprosy, the only indication for which the drug is registered. CONCLUSIONS: While the data were limited, Cfz was associated with a risk for adverse drug reactions comparable to that of first-line TB treatment, which could be reasonably managed under programmatic conditions. However, low market availability and high cost are important barriers to access to Cfz for patients with MDR-TB.