Who funded the research behind the Oxford–AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine?

Cross, Samuel; Rho, Yeanuk; Reddy, Henna; Pepperrell, Toby; Rodgers, Florence; Osborne, Rhiannon; Eni-Olotu, Ayolola; Banerjee, Rishi; Wimmer, Sabrina; Keestra, Sarai

doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2021-007321

Cited by 50 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, the increasing acceptance rate of the vaccine, albeit snail-paced, is pointing to a potential funding gap for COVID-19 vaccines [ 26 ]. In light of this, many Asian [ 23 , 27 ] and western countries [ 28 , 29 ] have initiated the discourse on sustainable funding arrangements for COVID-19 vaccination. Unfortunately, within the context of LMICs, the debate on sustainable financing solutions for COVID-19 vaccination remains muted evidenced by the paucity of empirical research on willingness to pay (WTP) for COVID-19 vaccination in these resource constrained settings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Financing COVID-19 vaccination in sub-Saharan Africa: lessons from a nation-wide willingness to pay (WTP) survey in Ghana

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Over 13 million doses of the corona virus disease, 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines have been administered in Ghana as at March, 2022; 28.5% of the population have received one dose while 16.3% have been fully vaccinated. Cost associated with COVID-19 vaccinations in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) requires rethinking on sustainable funding arrangements to consolidate gains made towards containing the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective Ascertain the determinants of willingness to pay (WTP) for COVID-19 vaccination among adult eligible population in Ghana, and prefer evidence-based policy recommendations on sustainable financing regime for COVID-19 vaccination in the global south. Methods Setting/design: A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted among adult population aged 18 years and above across the sixteen (16) administrative regions of Ghana. Participants: A sub-sample of 697 participants willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine was used as the unit of analysis. Outcome measures: main outcome measures of interests were willingness to pay for COVID-19 vaccination and the specific amount respondents were willing to pay. The odds of WTP and specific amount were predicted using the step-wise backward logistic regression and backward step-wise OLS, respectively. Results A total of 2,107 adult respondents aged 18 years and above were reached out to answer the questionnaire; 1,556 successfully completed the questionnaire, representing 74% response rate. Out of the 1,556 valid responses, 697 said they will receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Out of the 697 sub-sample willing to accept the vaccine, 386 (55%) were willing to pay an average of US$6.00 for the vaccine. Positive predictors of WTP were: being an educated male (OR = 0.55, 95% [CI = 0.366, 0.826], p = 0.004), married and educated (OR = 2.19, 95% [CI = 1.077, 4.445], p = 0.030), being a married health worker (OR = 0.43, 95% [CI = 0.217, 0.845], p = 0.015), and having positive perception of the vaccine (OR = 2.40, 95% [CI = 1.144, 5.054], p = 0.021). High WTP amounts correlated positively with adherence to COVID-19 prevention protocols (Coef. = 10.30, 95% [CI = 0.463, 20.137], p = 0.040) and being a health worker with tertiary education (Coef. = 56.339, 95% [CI = 8.524, 104.154], p = 0.021). Christians who are also health workers by occupation were less likely to pay higher amounts for the vaccine (Coef. = -71.431, 95% [CI = 118.821, -24.040], p = 0.003). Conclusions WTP for COVID-19 vaccination in Ghana is low relative to comparative studies in the sub-region. There is the need for accelerated, advocacy and public education on the benefits of vaccination. Likewise, there should be broader stakeholder engagement and national dialogue on sustainable financing options for COVID-19 vaccination as donor support continues to dwindle for LIMCs like Ghana.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Financing COVID-19 vaccination in sub-Saharan Africa: lessons from a nation-wide willingness to pay (WTP) survey in Ghana

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The extent of the public funding contribution, particularly to the Moderna mRNA vaccine, could justify the government invoking step-in rights regarding the IP through the Bayh-Dole Act 1980 ( 25 ). In the UK, public and charitable funders accelerated the development of the AstraZeneca vaccine ( 26 , 27 ) and the European Union has spent an estimated €93 billion on public sector investment in COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics R&D ( 27 ).…”

Section: The Role Of the Pharmaceutical Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Public investment was instrumental in accelerating COVID-19 vaccine discovery, with technologies often being based on decades of academic research ( 27 , 28 ). Public investment also supported vaccine development through clinical development stages, with the use of government facilities, research grants, and by accelerating regulatory approval ( 29 ).…”

Section: The Role Of the Pharmaceutical Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Global COVID-19 Vaccine Inequity: Failures in the First Year of Distribution and Potential Solutions for the Future

Pilkington

Keestra

Hill

2022

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within the first year of distribution of vaccines against COVID-19, high-income countries (HICs) have achieved vaccination rates of 75-80%, whilst low-income countries (LICs) vaccinated <10%. This disparity in access has been one of the greatest failures of international cooperation during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Global COVID-19 vaccine inequity affects us all, with ongoing risk of new variants emerging until global herd immunity is strengthened. The current model of global vaccine distribution is based on financial competition for limited vaccine supplies, resulting in HICs getting first access to vaccines, with LICs being forced to rely on voluntary donations through schemes like COVAX. Pharmaceutical companies own the intellectual property (IP) rights for COVID-19 vaccines, allowing them to control manufacturing, distribution, and pricing. However, the pharmaceutical industry did not develop these vaccines alone, with billions of dollars of public funding being instrumental in their discovery and development. Solutions to enable global equitable access already exist. The next step in scale up of manufacture and distribution worldwide is equitable knowledge sharing and technology transfer. The World Health Organization centralized technology transfer hub would facilitate international cooperation. Investments made into developing this infrastructure benefit the COVID-19 response whilst promoting future pandemic preparedness. Whilst globally there is majority support for waivers of IP to facilitate this next step, key opponents blocking this move include the UK and other European countries which host large domestic pharmaceutical industries. A nationalistic approach is not effective during a global pandemic. International cooperation is essential to achieve global goals against COVID-19.

show abstract

“…A University of Oxford team began rapidly developing and animal testing a candidate vaccine using a chimpanzee common cold (adenovirus) viral vector that was modified to prevent replication (ChAdOx1). The ChAdOx technology had been developed by the team over two decades and funded almost entirely (97%–99%) from public sector sources 8. Oxford researchers hoped the candidate vaccine would offer the world an affordable, highly deployable, effective, single-dose option; they originally aimed to share all rights to manufacture and market the vaccine with any manufacturer willing to make the vaccine available free of charge 9…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a new model of global health justice: the case of COVID-19 vaccines

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper questions an exclusively state-centred framing of global health justice and proposes a multilateral alternative. Using the distribution of COVID-19 vaccines to illustrate, we bring to light a broad range of global actors up and down the chain of vaccine development who contribute to global vaccine inequities. Section 1 (Background) presents an overview of moments in which diverse global actors, each with their own priorities and aims, shaped subsequent vaccine distribution. Section 2 (Collective action failures) characterises collective action failures at each phase of vaccine development that contributed to global vaccine disparities. It identifies as critical the task of establishing upstream strategies to coordinate collective action at multiple stages across a range of actors. Section 3 (A Multilateral model of global health governance) takes up this task, identifying a convergence of interests among a range of stakeholders and proposing ways to realise them. Appealing to a responsibility to protect (R2P), a doctrine developed in response to human rights atrocities during the 1990s, we show how to operationalise R2P through a principle of subsidiarity and present ethical arguments in support of this approach.

show abstract

Who funded the research behind the Oxford–AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine?

Cited by 50 publications

References 23 publications

Financing COVID-19 vaccination in sub-Saharan Africa: lessons from a nation-wide willingness to pay (WTP) survey in Ghana

Financing COVID-19 vaccination in sub-Saharan Africa: lessons from a nation-wide willingness to pay (WTP) survey in Ghana

Global COVID-19 Vaccine Inequity: Failures in the First Year of Distribution and Potential Solutions for the Future

Towards a new model of global health justice: the case of COVID-19 vaccines

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About