Breakthroughs Blog: HHS

Interested in more global health innovation news? Every week GHTC scours media reports worldwide to deliver essential global health R&D news and content to your inbox. Sign up now to receive our weekly R&D News Roundup email. Last Wednesday, The New England Journal of Medicine published the full results of the PURPOSE 2 trial testing Gilead Science’s twice-yearly lenacapavir shot for HIV prevention, finding that it was extremely effective in a broad and geographically diverse range of cisgender men and gender-diverse people. These results follow those of the first PURPOSE trial published earlier this year, which found that the drug was 100 percent effective as a prevention option in a study of women and adolescent girls. Lenacapavir is already approved and available in several countries, including the United States, as an HIV treatment option. With additional approvals as an HIV prevention option, the shot could be a game-changer for many marginalized communities that face the highest risk of HIV infection.A recent study found that the investigational drug quabodepistat in combination with delamanid and bedaquiline demonstrated safety and efficacy as a treatment for pulmonary tuberculosis (TB). TB treatment has historically been months long and difficult to tolerate, leading to discontinued treatment courses that raise the risk of the emergence of drug resistance. This combination treatment could potentially help fill the gap for safer, shorter regimens that cause fewer side effects. Further large-scale and long-term trials will be needed to validate these findings before this treatment combination can be available to the communities that face the highest burden of TB.Last week, the US Department of Health and Human Services announced nearly $27 million to support the rapid development and scale-up of manufacturing capacity for diagnostic tests to address future biologic threats through the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority consortium. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the gap in the United States' capacity to quickly develop, validate, produce, and roll out diagnostic tests to curb the spread of an infectious disease outbreak. While the funding will specifically support the development of tests to detect Burkholderia pseudomallei, the bacterium that causes melioidosis, and Marburg virus, the aim is to advance diagnostics platforms that can be leveraged to quickly produce tests for other threats as they emerge.

Interested in more global health innovation news? Every week GHTC scours media reports worldwide to deliver essential global health R&D news and content to your inbox. Sign up now to receive our weekly R&D News Roundup email. Two recent studies found that the virus that causes COVID-19 is developing resistance to two antiviral drugs commonly used for treatment in patients with compromised immune systems: remdesivir and nirmatrelvir. The first study from Cornell University and US National Institutes of Health researchers, which specifically looked at immunocompromised patients, found that the virus developed a reduced sensitivity to the drugs, while the second study from University of Pittsburgh, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Stanford University, and Harvard University researchers also found resistant mutations, with the effect more evident in the immunocompromised and those who had received nirmatrelvir. These results raise concerns as the threat of antimicrobial resistance globally grows.Researchers from the University of California, Riverside; the University of California, Irvine; and the Yale School of Medicine have designed a new synthetic compound, MED6-189, which is effective against drug-sensitive and drug-resistant Plasmodium falciparum malaria strains in vitro and in mice engineered to have human blood. MED6-189, inspired by a compound extracted from marine sponges, works by targeting and disrupting a specialized part of P. falciparum cells, as well as the pathways used to transport materials within the cells, thereby preventing the pathogen from developing resistance. The next steps include continued optimization of the MED6-189 and further confirmation of its mechanisms of action, but, if the compound continues to demonstrate success, this research could lead to the development of an important tool to address the rising challenge of antimalarial drug resistance.Last week, the US Department of Health and Human Services through the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health announced funding for the Transforming Antibiotic R&D with Generative AI to stop Emerging Threats project that will use artificial intelligence (AI) to speed up the discovery and development of new classes of antibiotics to meet the urgent need for new drugs amid the growing threat of antibiotic resistance. While conventional antibiotic discovery methods require time-consuming manual screening and testing of potential molecular compounds, most of which do not advance into further development, this project will employ deep learning to develop new methods to identify biomolecules with potential and use generative AI to expand the number of potential antibiotic candidates.

Interested in more global health innovation news? Every week GHTC scours media reports worldwide to deliver essential global health R&D news and content to your inbox. Sign up now to receive our weekly R&D News Roundup email. The results of a new study presented at the 2024 International AIDS Conference showed that long-acting injectable cabotegravir was safe and well tolerated as an HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis method in cisgender women before and during pregnancy. These exciting results come from an extension study of the efficacy trials among cisgender women that analyzed the outcomes of more than 300 pregnancies and infants. There has been limited data on the safety of long-acting injectable cabotegravir during pregnancy, so hopefully, these findings can fill that knowledge gap and lead to greater access to this highly effective HIV prevention option for this population, who may experience biological changes and social dynamics that can increase their likelihood of acquiring HIV during and after pregnancy.Last week, the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response at the US Department of Health and Human Services announced $25 million in funding to Walgreens to support a decentralized clinical trial testing COVID-19 vaccines. The study specifically aims to identify vaccine correlates of protection, or measurable immunity markers that correlate with protection against disease, using licensed or authorized COVID-19 vaccines to help assess immunity duration and streamline future clinical trials. This decentralized approach, which will include about 20 Walgreens pharmacies in urban, suburban, and rural communities, allows for a more diverse pool of study participants by bringing the study closer to where participants live. The funding comes through Project NextGen, a US government-led program to accelerate the development of next-generation COVID-19 technologies, including vaccines.  New data shows that Merck & Co.’s monoclonal antibody is safe and effective at reducing the incidence of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV)-related infections in infants. The Phase 2b/3 trial tested clesrovimab, also known as MK-1654, in healthy pre-term and full-term infants, finding that the antibody reduced the incidence of RSV-related infections over 150 days when compared to a placebo and hit key safety measures. The company announced that detailed findings will soon be presented to the scientific community and filed with global regulators. Hopefully, the antibody will eventually serve as an additional tool in the growing toolkit of new vaccines and monoclonal antibodies to address the burden of RSV in infants and older adults.

Nearly six months into fiscal year 2024 (FY24), the US government has finally agreed upon a budget for the remaining six months. Nevertheless, March brings with it a new appropriations cycle forcibly run in parallel with the last. With the release of the President’s Budget Request (PBR) for fiscal year 2025 (FY25) and ongoing meetings with appropriations staff, the prospects for future US spending on global health research and development (R&D) are coming into focus, with both good and bad on the horizon.FY24 spending package: A mixed bag for global health R&D This year’s appropriations process was certainly one for the history books in that it was historically difficult—largely due to partisan divisions and threats to the House speakership. But on March 22, moments before a partial government shutdown was set to go into effect, a six-bill “minibus” was voted through by the House of Representatives and the Senate and later signed into law, which will keep the government operational until September 30. This second spending package included funding bills for Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies (LHHS); State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs (SFOPS); and Defense, which are a mixed bag for funding for global health R&D.LHHSThe LHHS bill, which covers funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), included some welcome increases to agencies and programs that support global health research alongside overall stagnant funding.Out of the three agencies, BARDA, which focuses on the R&D of countermeasures against emerging health threats, received the largest increase in funding with a $65 million (6.8 percent) boost over fiscal year 2023 (FY23) levels, bringing its total budget to $1.015 billion. The CDC, America’s lead public health agency, and NIH, the primary agency responsible for biomedical health research, witnessed marginal adjustments, with their budget lines most relevant to global health R&D remaining largely static. Notably, CDC's National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID) received a $9.5 million (1.27 percent) boost, which will help bolster crucial surveillance initiatives such as the Advanced Molecular Detection program.  Additionally, the minibus also included complimentary directives, known as report language, which were championed by GHTC, that reinforce the importance of global health and neglected disease research taking place at CDC and NIH. It also included important language encouraging BARDA to consider the needs of people living in low-resource settings in its R&D funding decisions and directing the agency to provide more transparent and regular reporting on its investments and allocate at least $10 million of its budget to create a new Disease X medical countermeasures program to develop tools against viral families with pandemic potential.SFOPSThe SFOPS bill covers global health work undertaken by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and the US Department of State (State). Unfortunately, the FY24 spending package included a significant cut of $530.95 million (5.3 percent) to State and USAID global health programs.Much of this reduction is due to a decrease in funding by $350 million for the US contribution to The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, which fell from $2 billion in FY23 to $1.65 billion in FY24. While this is a large cut, it was both expected and supported by advocates, given that US law caps the maximum contribution that the United States can make to the fund relative to the contributions of other donors. Thus, the “cut” was implemented in line with the cap to avoid a harsh drop-off in US funding in the coming years. Accordingly, many advocates are not viewing it as an actual cut. The remaining decrease in funding comes from a significant $200 million (22 percent) cut to USAID Global Health Security (GHS). The FY24 funding for GHS of $700 million retains a $100 million carve-out for a US contribution to the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, or CEPI, but advocates are still piecing together what the $200 million slash could mean for other GHS programming. This picture is further complicated by the opaque nature of how the US government intends to fund a contribution to the World Bank Pandemic Fund, which is neither specified in the bill in terms of a funding number nor in the programmatic budget line. The Biden Administration announced last year its intent to contribute $250 million to the fund, but this contribution is not actually detailed in the spending package, so it remains unclear how this commitment will be realized. Slightly cushioning the overall cut to State and USAID global health programs are some modest increases to the budget lines for the maternal and child health (through an increase in funding to GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance), nutrition, and other public health threats programs.In a key win for global health research advocates, Congress also included accompanying report language for SFOPS directing USAID to increase its spending for health R&D over the prior fiscal year and to publish an annual report on its health R&D activities and investments. Notably, the reauthorization of the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR, was also included in the SFOPS bill but only for one year, so authorization will expire next March. This one-year reauthorization tees up another battle, which will certainly be shaped by the political climate and controlling parties following the presidential and congressional elections this fall.DefenseWhile few may think of the US Department of Defense (DoD) as a key global health player, the agency’s spending supports R&D against epidemic-prone diseases and other health issues that pose a risk to US national security and service members stationed abroad—so its investments contribute to combating diseases endemic in many of the world’s poorest places. Encouragingly, language supporting DoD's research on infectious diseases and the development of medical countermeasures was included in the accompanying Defense bill report.Unfortunately, however, Congress did not include tuberculosis among the diseases eligible to be funded via the DoD-led Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program’s (CDMRP’s) Peer Reviewed Medical Research Program (PRMRP), as has been the case in years past. This is a point of future advocacy since the CDMRP PRMRP funds other neglected and emerging diseases in line with the list of eligible diseases defined in the Senate’s Defense bill each year.FY25 President’s Budget: A story of lowered ambitionOn March 11, President Joe Biden released his FY25 budget request, outlining his administration's recommendations to Congress for spending for the next fiscal year. The FY25 PBR is more moderate than Biden’s FY24 proposal, which can be largely attributed to the administration upholding their end of the debt ceiling bargain to keep overall spending levels capped at roughly FY23 levels. But even still, the lack of boldness for global health activities across the board was felt by advocates.With respect to global health programs at State and USAID, the budget proposes an overall decrease of approximately $733 million (7 percent) compared to FY23 enacted levels. This includes a $175 million (4.2 percent) cut to USAID and a $558 million (8.9 percent) cut to State global health programs. Concerning the latter, the cut comes from the PBR proposing a $1.19 billion contribution to the Global Fund, which would be an $810 million reduction from FY23 levels. As previously noted, this drastic cut is due in large part to the cap imposed on maximum US contributions; however, advocates are still pushing for $1.65 billion in FY25, citing projections that the US contribution can be set higher without violating the cap. The proposed USAID cut is more nuanced and comes from an accounting choice by the administration to transfer funding for the US contribution to the Pandemic Fund ($250 million) from under the Global Health Security line at USAID to the budget for State’s new Bureau of Global Health Security and Diplomacy, which will now manage US engagement with the fund. In conversations with the agency, the movement of this funding is not being perceived as a cut—leaving USAID’s global health programs largely untouched in the PBR. Most programs are flat funded, though the budget proposes a modest $30 million (3.3 percent) boost to USAID’s maternal and child health programs and a reduction of $26 million (4.5 percent) to USAID’s family planning account.On the LHHS side, the budget proposal is slightly rosier, though far from ambitious. The PBR proposes increases of $20 million (2.1 percent) for BARDA and $1.4 billion (2.3 percent) for NIH overall, with the latter including a modest boost of $18.72 million (0.3 percent) for NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases but flat funding for NIH’s Fogarty International Center, which supports global health research and training. CDC received a proposed increase of $465.4 million (5 percent) in the PBR, with NCEZID receiving a $30 million (4 percent) increase and the Center for Global Health flat funded.Notably, CDC’s congressional budget justification proposes that $20 million of this funding for NCEZID be put towards wastewater surveillance, which is programming that is currently being supported unsustainably via emergency funding for the COVID-19 response. Additionally, in the BARDA congressional budget justification, the administration suggests a $20 million boost “to increase BARDA’s Broad Spectrum Antimicrobials and Combatting Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria portfolio" through engagement with the Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria Biopharmaceutical Accelerator, or CARB-X, an international partnership focused on accelerating the development of new antibacterial innovations.While GHTC understands the administration’s fiscal situation and negotiating position with Congress, the discrepancy between the administration’s ambitions from the FY24 PBR to the FY25 PBR are stark, with some agencies seeing decreases of over $1 billion between the two presidential requests.FY25 outlook: Not great, but not badWhile it may feel cruel for advocates, there is no breathing room between the FY24 and FY25 appropriations processes. Additionally, the constraints the global health community felt in 2024 in the wake of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023—also known as the Biden-McCarthy Debt Ceiling Deal that capped spending growth—are still with us. Even though the outcomes of the FY24 spending package were discouraging for global health advocates—it went better than many expected. For FY25, while a robust and bold global and public health budget is the goal—holding off any cuts and returning to FY23 topline budgets for global health programs will be critical. GHTC will be working to communicate that message clearly while keeping in mind the uphill battle caused by the parameters forced upon appropriators by last June’s debt ceiling deal.Other obstacles like election-year politicking and a remarkable loss in global health champions in Congress will make future negotiations harder and will require advocates to go more on the offense. Pushing for stronger toplines and no cuts will be vital in FY25 to get the gains the community needs to get the world back on track toward eradicating neglected diseases and better preparing for emerging threats.