Search

Background: The recent introduction of Direct Acting Antivirals (DAAs) for treating Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) can significantly assist in the world reaching the international target of elimination by 2030. Yet, the challenge facing many individuals and countries today lies with their ability to access these treatments due to their relatively high prices. Gilead Sciences applies differential pricing and licensing strategies arguing that this provides fairer and more equitable access to these life-saving medicines. This paper analyses the implications of Gilead's tiered pricing and voluntary licencing strategy for access to the DAAs.Methods: We examined seven countries in Africa (Egypt, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Democratic Republic of Congo, Cameroon, Rwanda and South Africa) to assess their financial capacity to provide DAAs for the treatment of HCV under present voluntary licensing and tiered-pricing arrangements. These countries have been selected to explore the experience of countries with a range of different burdens of HCV and shared eligibility for supply by licensed generic producers or from discounted Gilead prices.Results: The cost of 12-weeks of generic DAA varies from $684 per patient treated in Egypt to $750 per patient treated in other countries. These countries can also procure the same DAA for 12-weeks of treatment from the originator, Gilead, at a cost of $1200 per patient. The current prices of DAAs (both from generic and originator manufacturers) are much more than the median annual income per capita and the annual health budget of most of these countries. If governments alone were to bear the costs of universal treatment coverage, then the required additional health expenditure from present rates would range from a 4% increase in South Africa to a staggering 403% in Cameroon.Conclusion: The current arrangements for increasing access to DAAs, towards elimination of HCV, are facing challenges that would require increases in expenditure that are either too burdensome to governments or potentially so to individuals and families. Countries need to implement the flexibilities in the Doha Declaration on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights agreement, including compulsory licensing and patent opposition. This also requires political commitment, financial will, global solidarity and civil society activism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Access to medicines and the development of a strong national pharmaceutical industry are two longstanding pillars of health policy in Brazil. This is reflected in a clear emphasis by Brazil's Federal Government on improving access to medicine in national health plans and industrial policies aimed at promoting domestic pharmaceutical development. This research proposes that such policies may act as incentives for companies to pursue a strategic Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) agenda. CSR that supports Governmental priorities could help companies to benefit significantly from the Governmental industrial policy. We sought to determine whether CSR activities of Brazilian pharmaceutical firms are currently aligned with the Federal Government's health prioritization. To do so we examined key Brazilian health related policies since 2004, including the specific priorities of Brazil's 2012-2015 Health Plan, and compared these with CSR initiatives that are reported on the websites of select pharmaceutical firms in Brazil.Results: Brazil's national health plans and industrial policies demonstrated that the Federal Government has followed diverse approaches for improving access to medicines, including strengthening health care infrastructure, increasing transparency, and supporting product development partnerships. Case studies of six pharmaceutical firms, representing both public and private companies of varying size, support the perspective that CSR is a priority for firms. However, while many programs target issues such as health infrastructure, health care training, and drug donation, more programs focus on areas other than health and do not seem to be connected to Governmental prioritization.Conclusion: This research suggests that there are loose connections between Governmental priorities and pharmaceutical firm CSR. However, there remains a significant opportunity for greater alignment, which could improve access to medicines in the country and foster a stronger relationship between the Government and industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]