Choosing the right incentive strategy for research and development in neglected diseases

19Citations
Citations of this article
53Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

For the first time in history, worldwide neglected disease budgets may be large enough to deliver a new drug every few years. That said, sponsors will only succeed if they extract maximum value from every dollar spent. This paper reviews possible cost-containment strategies and provides an evidence-based framework for choosing between them. Current proposals can be categorized as "end-to-end" proposals which require the sponsor to set a single reward for companies that complete the entire drug discovery process or "pay-as-you-go" schemes in which sponsors offer repeated rewards as drug candidates progress through the pipeline. A generic weakness of end-to-end proposals is that rewards are likely to be 20-30% higher than they would be in an equivalent pay-as-you-go programme. However, the benefits of pay-as-you-go programmes may be lost if commercial pharmaceutical companies are substantially better at choosing successful programmes than are their non-profit counterparts. The efficiency of pay-as-you-go methods depends on sponsors' willingness to withdraw funding from failed drug discovery programmes.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Maurer, S. M. (2006, May). Choosing the right incentive strategy for research and development in neglected diseases. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.06.029835

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free