\n\n“the attention and resources dedicated to repurposing old drugs detracts from the pursuit of new therapies that would be true breakthroughs, exponential advancements in science. Feldman describes such innovation as \u201cvalue beyond pearls.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt\u2019s rare, it\u2019s beautiful, it\u2019s startling, it\u2019s a thing of beauty,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But that kind of innovation takes time and money with no certain payoff. It\u2019s simpler and cheaper to modify existing products to somewhat improve their efficacy or to tweak them to treat a different condition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cI worry that our system is not well primed for it,\u201d she said. \u201cIt\u2019s all about the incentives. Our incentives aren\u2019t directed properly.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
She pointed to the shift away from antibacterial resistance research and drug development, even though researchers anticipate<\/a> millions of global deaths annually within the next few decades because bacteria have become resistant to the drugs that we already have to fight them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Drug makers currently devote a lot of their attention to end-stage cancers, because they can benefit from \u201corphan drug\u201d designation and other competitively advantageous policies, while Feldman argued that chronic conditions have been underserved. Looking at it from a societal perspective, the latter obviously has more value than the former \u2014 and yet that is not necessarily what our innovation system has been designed to reward.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Or look at the antiviral space, which is the most relevant to the coronavirus response.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Antiviral research investment historically has not been a priority for the major drugmakers. The Wall Street Journal reported<\/a> Pfizer had to reestablish its antiviral research department for its Covid-19 work because the unit was disbanded in 2009. Novartis ended<\/a> its antiviral and antibacterial research in 2018. One systemic review<\/a> of the past 30 years of antiviral research found \u201conly a few drugs were approved to treat acute viral infections\u201d in that time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAntibiotics and antivirals are both areas that haven\u2019t seen a tremendous amount of new drug development because the economic incentives haven\u2019t justified significant R&D in this area,\u201d Caroline Pearson, senior fellow with NORC-University of Chicago, told me recently<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So long as these incentive structures remain in place, Feldman warned, we will never be ahead of the curve in fighting off the next pandemic. She said that the US should be asking: \u201cWhat\u2019s of value and what should we incentivize people to do?\u201d”<\/p>\n\n\n\n