International R&D funding bodies should contribute to a single fund to develop new antibiotics, says an independent commission established by UK government to draw up a global plan to deal with antimicrobial resistance
The UK Review on Antimicrobial Resistance has published its second report, outlining specific steps for action to tackle the rise of drug-resistant infections worldwide.
The report says that while mounting concern about the rise of antimicrobial resistance is prompting an increase in infectious disease research, a lack of funding means it is difficult to take ideas forward and companies are deterred from entering the field.
“I am calling on international funders, philanthropic or governmental, to allocate money to a fund that can support blue sky science and incubate ideas that are more mature,” said Jim O’Neill, chair of the review, launching the report.
Such a targeted fund would support research needed to pave the way for new drugs, for alternatives to antibiotics, and for new diagnostics to make sure the right drugs are used. It could reverse the brain drain to research areas that are currently better-paid and held in higher academic esteem, such as cancer, diabetes and dementia.
“Antibiotics research is the poor relation to studying chronic diseases of the developed world but, without antibiotics, treating those diseases can be compromised too,” said O’Neill, an economist and former head of Goldman Sachs Asset Management. Major surgery and chemotherapy both involve suppressing the immune system and antimicrobial drugs are often used to prevent and treat life-threatening infections.
The UK government set up the review in July 2014. The first reported, published in December, scoped the problem, concluding that unless action is taken to address this huge global problem, it could cost the world at least an additional 10 million lives a year by 2050, more than the number of people who currently die from cancer each year.
Drug-resistant infections are already claiming more than 700,000 lives a year.
The second report says much innovative thinking is happening in infectious disease research at the moment. But lack of funding means that while people, machines and laboratories are ready to tackle the next challenges, they are unable to do so. It also deters new entrants to the field. Without new doctors and scientists in academia, hospitals and drug companies, the ability to innovate will decrease just at the time it needs to reach its peak.
“In researching our latest report, we found no shortage of ideas and promising new technologies but progress is too slow due to lack of investment, and much of the workforce is edging towards retirement,” said O’Neill.
Five specific actions are recommended as initial steps to tackle the problem:
http://amr-review.org/
The report says that while mounting concern about the rise of antimicrobial resistance is prompting an increase in infectious disease research, a lack of funding means it is difficult to take ideas forward and companies are deterred from entering the field.
“I am calling on international funders, philanthropic or governmental, to allocate money to a fund that can support blue sky science and incubate ideas that are more mature,” said Jim O’Neill, chair of the review, launching the report.
Such a targeted fund would support research needed to pave the way for new drugs, for alternatives to antibiotics, and for new diagnostics to make sure the right drugs are used. It could reverse the brain drain to research areas that are currently better-paid and held in higher academic esteem, such as cancer, diabetes and dementia.
“Antibiotics research is the poor relation to studying chronic diseases of the developed world but, without antibiotics, treating those diseases can be compromised too,” said O’Neill, an economist and former head of Goldman Sachs Asset Management. Major surgery and chemotherapy both involve suppressing the immune system and antimicrobial drugs are often used to prevent and treat life-threatening infections.
The UK government set up the review in July 2014. The first reported, published in December, scoped the problem, concluding that unless action is taken to address this huge global problem, it could cost the world at least an additional 10 million lives a year by 2050, more than the number of people who currently die from cancer each year.
Drug-resistant infections are already claiming more than 700,000 lives a year.
The second report says much innovative thinking is happening in infectious disease research at the moment. But lack of funding means that while people, machines and laboratories are ready to tackle the next challenges, they are unable to do so. It also deters new entrants to the field. Without new doctors and scientists in academia, hospitals and drug companies, the ability to innovate will decrease just at the time it needs to reach its peak.
“In researching our latest report, we found no shortage of ideas and promising new technologies but progress is too slow due to lack of investment, and much of the workforce is edging towards retirement,” said O’Neill.
Five specific actions are recommended as initial steps to tackle the problem:
- An innovation fund to support basic science and to incubate more mature ideas
- Re-examining existing drugs: new doses or combinations could restore the effectiveness of existing antibiotics
- Improved diagnostics: for accurate prescribing and to reduce unnecessary prescribing
- Investing in human capital: training the next generation of scientists, social scientists, economists and vets whose collective minds will be needed to solve the problem
- Tracking the spread of resistance: generating better surveillance data and using it to gather real time information
http://amr-review.org/
Receive the Funding Newswire [full access requires a subscription] each Tuesday, our Policy Bulletin each Thursday, and news about bridging Europe’s east-west innovation gap twice a month in The Widening. 
A unique international forum for public research organisations and companies to connect their external engagement with strategic interests around their R&D system.
