IMPORTANCEMost of the global morbidity and mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) occurs in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs), with significant economic effects.OBJECTIVE To assess the discriminative accuracy of 3 instruments using questionnaires and peak expiratory flow (PEF) to screen for COPD in 3 LMIC settings. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSA cross-sectional analysis of discriminative accuracy, conducted between January 2018 and March 2020 in semiurban Bhaktapur, Nepal; urban Lima, Peru; and rural Nakaseke, Uganda, using a random age-and sex-stratified sample of the population 40 years or older.EXPOSURES Three screening tools, the COPD Assessment in Primary Care to Identify Undiagnosed Respiratory Disease and Exacerbation Risk (CAPTURE; range, 0-6; high risk indicated by a score of 5 or more or score 2-5 with low PEF [<250 L/min for females and <350 L/min for males]), the COPD in LMICs Assessment questionnaire (COLA-6; range, 0-5; high risk indicated by a score of 4 or more), and the Lung Function Questionnaire (LFQ; range, 0-25; high risk indicated by a score of 18 or less) were assessed against a reference standard diagnosis of COPD using quality-assured postbronchodilator spirometry. CAPTURE and COLA-6 include a measure of PEF. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was discriminative accuracy of the tools in identifying COPD as measured by area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) with 95% CIs. Secondary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. RESULTS Among 10 709 adults who consented to participate in the study (mean age, 56.3 years (SD, 11.7); 50% female), 35% had ever smoked, and 30% were currently exposed to biomass smoke. The unweighted prevalence of COPD at the 3 sites was 18.2% (642/3534 participants) in Nepal, 2.7% (97/3550) in Peru, and 7.4% (264/3580) in Uganda. Among 1000 COPD cases, 49.3% had clinically important disease (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease classification B-D), 16.4% had severe or very severe airflow obstruction (forced expiratory volume in 1 second <50% predicted), and 95.3% of cases were previously undiagnosed. The AUC for the screening instruments ranged from 0.717 (95% CI, 0.677-0.774) for LFQ in Peru to 0.791 (95% CI, 0.770-0.809) for COLA-6 in Nepal. The sensitivity ranged from 34.8% (95% CI, 25.3%-45.2%) for COLA-6 in Nepal to 64.2% (95% CI, 60.3%-67.9%) for CAPTURE in Nepal. The mean time to administer the instruments was 7.6 minutes (SD 1.11), and data completeness was 99.5%. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThis study demonstrated that screening instruments for COPD were feasible to administer in 3 low-and middle-income settings. Further research is needed to assess instrument performance in other low-and middle-income settings and to determine whether implementation is associated with improved clinical outcomes.

Introduction The leishmaniases represent a group of parasitic diseases caused by infection with one of several species of Leishmania parasites. Disease presentation varies because of differences in parasite and host genetics and may be influenced by additional factors such as host nutritional status or co-infection. Studies in experimental models of Leishmania infection, vaccination of companion animals and human epidemiological data suggest that many forms of leishmaniasis could be prevented by vaccination, but no vaccines are currently available for human use. Areas covered We describe some of the existing roadblocks to the development and implementation of an effective leishmaniasis vaccine, based on a review of recent literature found on PubMed, BioRxiv and MedRxiv. In addition to discussing scientific unknowns that hinder vaccine candidate identification and selection, we explore gaps in knowledge regarding the commercial and public health value propositions underpinning vaccine development and provide a route map for future research and advocacy. Expert opinion Despite significant progress, leishmaniasis vaccine development remains hindered by significant gaps in understanding that span the vaccine development pipeline. Increased coordination and adoption of a more holistic view to vaccine development will be required to ensure more rapid progress in the years ahead.

BackgroundUniversal health coverage (UHC) requires that local health sector institutions—such as local authorities—are properly funded to fulfil their service delivery commitments. In this study, we examine how formula funding can align sub-national resource allocations with national priorities. This is illustrated by outlining alternative options for using mathematical formula to guide the allocation of national drug and service delivery budgets to district councils in Malawi in 2018/2019.MethodsWe use demographic, epidemiological and health sector budget data with information on implementation constraints to construct three variant allocation formulae. The first gives an equal per capita allocation to each district, and is included as a baseline to compare alternatives. The second allocates funds to districts using estimates of the resources required to provide Malawi’s essential health package of priority cost-effective interventions to the full population in need of each intervention. The third adjusts these estimates to reflect a practicable level of attainable coverage for each intervention, based on the current configurations of health services and demand for interventions.FindingsCompared with current district allocations, not underpinned by an explicit formula, the formulae presented in this study suggest sizeable shifts in the allocations received by many districts. In some cases, the magnitude of these shifts exceed 50% reductions or doubling of district budgets. The large shifts illustrate inequities in the current system of budget allocation and the potential improvements possible.ConclusionThe use of mathematical formulae can guide the efficient and equitable allocation of healthcare funds to local health authorities. The formulae developed were facilitated by the existence of an explicit package of priority interventions. The approach can be replicated in wide range of countries seeking to achieve UHC.

Introduction Despite the rising burden of chronic respiratory disease globally, and although many respiratory medications are included in the World Health Organization Essential Medications List (WHO-EML), there is limited information concerning the availability and affordability of treatment drugs for respiratory conditions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods All public and private pharmacies in catchment areas of the Global Excellence in COPD outcomes (GECo) study sites in Bhaktapur, Nepal, Lima, Peru, and Nakaseke, Uganda, were approached in 2017–2019 to assess pricing and availability of medications for the management of asthma and COPD. Results We surveyed all 63 pharmacies in respective study areas in Nepal (95.2% private), 104 pharmacies in Peru (94.2% private) and 53 pharmacies in Uganda (98.1% private). The availability of any medication for respiratory disease was higher in private (93.3%) compared to public (73.3%) pharmacies. Salbutamol (WHO-EML) monotherapy in any formulation was the most commonly available respiratory medication among the three sites (93.7% Nepal, 86.5% Peru and 79.2% Uganda) while beclomethasone (WHO-EML) was only available in Peru (33.7%) and Nepal (22%). LABA-LAMA combination therapy was only available in Nepal (14.3% of pharmacies surveyed). The monthly treatment cost of respiratory medications was lowest in Nepal according to several cost metrics: the overall monthly cost, the median price ratio comparing medication costs to international reference prices at time of survey in dollars, and in terms of days’ wages of the lowest-paid government worker. For the treatment of intermittent asthma, defined as 100 mcg Salbutamol/Albuterol inhaler, days’ wages ranged from 0.47 days in Nepal and Peru to 3.33 days in Uganda. Conclusion The availability and pricing of respiratory medications varied across LMIC settings, with medications for acute care of respiratory diseases being more widely available than those for long-term management.

Background A pressing need exists to develop vaccines for neglected diseases, including leishmaniasis. However, the development of new vaccines is dependent on their value to two key players–vaccine developers and manufacturers who need to have confidence in the global demand in order to commit to research and production; and governments (or other international funders) who need to signal demand based on the potential public health benefits of the vaccine in their local context, as well as its affordability. A detailed global epidemiological analysis is rarely available before a vaccine enters a market due to lack of resources as well as insufficient global data necessary for such an analysis. Our study seeks to bridge this information gap by providing a generalisable approach to estimating the commercial and public health value of a vaccine in development relying primarily on publicly available Global Burden of Disease (GBD) data. This simplified approach is easily replicable and can be used to guide discussions and investments into vaccines and other health technologies where evidence constraints exist. The approach is demonstrated through the estimation of the demand curve for a future leishmaniasis vaccine. Methodology/Principal findings We project the ability to pay over the period 2030–2040 for a vaccine preventing cutaneous and visceral leishmaniasis (CL / VL), using an illustrative set of countries which account for most of the global disease burden. First, based on previous work on vaccine demand projections in these countries and CL / VL GBD-reported incidence rates, we project the potential long-term impact of the vaccine on disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted as a result of reduced incidence. Then, we apply an economic framework to our estimates to determine vaccine affordability based on the abilities to pay of governments and global funders, leading to estimates of the demand and market size. Based on our estimates, the maximum ability-to-pay of a leishmaniasis vaccine (per course, including delivery costs), given the current estimates of incidence and population at risk, is higher than $5 for 25–30% of the countries considered, with the average value-based maximum price, weighted by quantity demanded, being $5.7–6 [$0.3 - $34.5], and total demand of over 560 million courses. Conclusion/Significance Our results demonstrate that both the quantity of vaccines estimated to be required by the countries considered as well as their ability-to-pay could make a vaccine for leishmaniasis commercially attractive to potential manufacturers. The methodology used can be equally applied to other technology developments targeting health in developing countries.