02702nas a2200241 4500000000100000008004100001653001300042653001200055653003900067653001900106653000900125100001800134700001600152700001300168700001200181700001600193245015000209856007600359300001000435490000600445520199500451022001402446 2015 d10aResearch10aPoverty10aNeglected tropical diseases (NTDs)10aDisease burden10aDALY1 aPhilipsborn P1 aSteinbeis F1 aBender M1 aRegmi S1 aTinnemann P00aPoverty-related and neglected diseases - an economic and epidemiological analysis of poverty relatedness and neglect in research and development. uhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4306754/pdf/GHA-8-25818.pdf a258180 v83 a

BACKGROUND: Economic growth in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) has raised interest in how disease burden patterns are related to economic development. Meanwhile, poverty-related diseases are considered to be neglected in terms of research and development (R&D).

OBJECTIVES: Developing intuitive and meaningful metrics to measure how different diseases are related to poverty and neglected in the current R&D system.

DESIGN: We measured how diseases are related to economic development with the income relation factor (IRF), defined by the ratio of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) per 100,000 inhabitants in LMIC versus that in high-income countries. We calculated the IRF for 291 diseases and injuries and 67 risk factors included in the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. We measured neglect in R&D with the neglect factor (NF), defined by the ratio of disease burden in DALYs (as percentage of the total global disease burden) and R&D expenditure (as percentage of total global health-related R&D expenditure) for 26 diseases.

RESULTS: The disease burden varies considerably with the level of economic development, shown by the IRF (median: 1.38; interquartile range (IQR): 0.79-6.3). Comparison of IRFs from 1990 to 2010 highlights general patterns of the global epidemiological transition. The 26 poverty-related diseases included in our analysis of neglect in R&D are responsible for 13.8% of the global disease burden, but receive only 1.34% of global health-related R&D expenditure. Within this group, the NF varies considerably (median: 19; IQR: 6-52).

CONCLUSIONS: The IRF is an intuitive and meaningful metric to highlight shifts in global disease burden patterns. A large shortfall exists in global R&D spending for poverty-related and neglected diseases, with strong variations between diseases.

 a1654-9880