Perspective sur la responsabilité de l’industrie pharmaceutique dans la promotion de la recherche pédiatrique et dans l’accès aux médicaments essentiels
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online September, 2021
Perspective sur la responsabilité de l’industrie pharmaceutique dans la promotion de la recherche pédiatrique et dans l’accès aux médicaments essentiels
L’industrie pharmaceutique a permis à de nombreux patients d’améliorer leur santé. Mais elle reste critiquée à cause d’un certain désengagement envers les maladies dans les pays en voie de développement et notamment les maladies pédiatriques. Considérant le cercle vicieux de la pauvreté et de la maladie affectant les enfants dans ces pays, il apparait primordial que les multinationales pharmaceutiques impliquent leur responsabilité à plusieurs niveaux : par la mise en place d’actions concrètes pour mener plus de recherches sur les enfants, vu leurs besoins ; puis en rendant les médicaments accessibles à un plus grand nombre d’enfants.
MacleodSHillSKorenGRaneA (eds). Optimizing Treatment for Children in the Developing World. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2015, pp.225–238.
2.
PickettKEWilkinsonRG.Income inequality and health: a causal review. Soc Sci Med. 2015; 128: 316–326.
3.
PetrynaALakoffAKleinmanA.Global Pharmaceuticals: Ethics, Markets, Practices. Durham, NC: Duke University Press; 2006.
4.
AdlerNEGlymourMMFieldingJ.Addressing social determinants of health and health inequalities. JAMA. 2016; 316: 1641–1642.
5.
SilvaREAmatoAAGuilhemDBCarvalhoMRLimaEdNovaesMR.Factors contributing to exacerbating vulnerabilities in global clinical trials. Front Pharmacol. 2018; 8: 999.
6.
JosephPDCraigJCTongACaldwellPHY. Researchers’, regulators’, and sponsors’ views on pediatric clinical trials: a multinational study. Pediatrics. 2016; 138: e201611.
7.
JosephPDCaldwellPHTongAHansonCSCraigJC.Stakeholder views of clinical trials in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review. Pediatrics. 2016; 137: e20152800.
8.
GalMGobatNFrancisNAHoodKButlerCCBielickiJ, et al. Priority needs for conducting pandemic-relevant clinical research with children in Europe: a consensus study with pediatric clinician-researchers. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2019; 38: e82–e86.
9.
GuptaYKMeenuMMohanP.The Tamiflu fiasco and lessons learnt. Indian J Pharmacol. 2015; 47: 11.
10.
DukeTFullerD.Randomised controlled trials in child health in developing countries: trends and lessons over 11 years. Arch Dis Child. 2014; 99: 615–620.
11.
RuggieriLGiannuzziVBaiardiPBonifaziFDaviesEHGiaquintoC, et al. Successful private–public funding of paediatric medicines research: lessons from the EU programme to fund research into off-patent medicines. Eur J Pediatr. 2015; 174: 481–491.
World Health Organization. Development of pediatric medicines: points to consider in formulation. WHO Technical Report Series; 2012.
14.
gavi.org [Internet]. Alliance globale pour l’initiative de vaccination; c2019 [consulté le 6 septembre 2019]. Accessible à: http://www.gavi.org/.
15.
Executive Summary. The Selection and Use of Essential Medicines 2019. Report of the 22nd WHO Expert Committee on the Selection and Use of Essential Medicines, 1–5 April 2019. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019.
16.
FrattarelliDGalinkinJLGreenTPJohnsonTDNevilleKAPaulIM, et al. Off-label use of drugs in children. Pediatrics. 2014; 133: 563–567.
17.
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Bethesda: The Commission; 1978.
18.
MacLeodSKnoppertDStanton-JeanMAvardD.Pediatric clinical drug trials in low-income countries: key ethical issues. Pediatric Drugs. 2015; 17: 83-90.
19.
CoppiniRSimonsSHMugelliAAllegaertK.Clinical research in neonates and infants: challenges and perspectives. Pharmacol Res. 2016; 108: 80–87.
20.
HurstSA.Vulnerability in research and health care; describing the elephant in the room?Bioethics. 2008; 22: 191–202.
21.
DovalDCShiraliRSinhaR.Post-trial access to treatment for patients participating in clinical trials. Perspect Clin Res. 2015; 6: 82.
22.
LewisK.Post-trial Access to Treatment: How Managed Access Programs could be a Solution. London: SAGE Publications; 2018.
23.
National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Ethical and Policy Issues in International Research: Clinical Trials in Developing Countries. Bethesda: NBAC; 2001.
24.
StaR Child Health [Internet]. Children IFoSfRi; c2019 [consulté le 6 septembre 2019]. International Forum to Advance First Responder Innovation; Accessible à: http://ifsrc.org/.
25.
World Health Organization. Towards access 2030: WHO essential medicines and health products strategic framework 2016-2030. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2017.
26.
BanerjeeA.Who has responsibility for access to essential medical drugs in the developing world?Ethics Econom. 2006; 4: 1–23.
HenryDLexchinJ.The pharmaceutical industry as a medicines provider. Lancet. 2002; 360: 1590–1595.
29.
ResnikDB.Developing drugs for the developing world: an economic, legal, moral, and political dilemma. Dev World Bioeth. 2001; 1: 11–32.
30.
HurstDJ.Restoring a reputation: invoking the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights to bear on pharmaceutical pricing. Med Health Care Philos. 2017; 20: 105–117.
31.
KesselheimASAvornJSarpatwariA.The high cost of prescription drugs in the United States: origins and prospects for reform. JAMA. 2016; 316: 858–871.
32.
BartonJAlexanderDCorreaCMashelkarRSamulesGThomasS.Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy. London: UK Department for International Development, Commission on Intellectual Property Rights; 2002.
33.
LeisingerKM.The corporate social responsibility of the pharmaceutical industry: idealism without illusion and realism without resignation. Bus Ethics Q. 2005; 15: 577–594.
FriedmanM.The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. In: ZimmerliWCHolzingerMRichterK (eds). Corporate Ethics and Corporate Governance. Berlin: Springer; 2007. pp.173–178.
36.
Lee ChangP. Who’s in the business of saving lives?J Med Philos. 2006; 31: 465–482.
37.
HuebnerJM.Moral psychology and the intuition that pharmaceutical companies have a ‘special’obligation to society. J Bus Ethics. 2014; 122: 501–510.
38.
DroppertHBennettS.Corporate social responsibility in global health: an exploratory study of multinational pharmaceutical firms. Glob Health. 2015; 11: 15.
39.
ThorsteinsdóttirHOvtcharenkoNKohlerJC.Corporate social responsibility to improve access to medicines: the case of Brazil. Glob Health. 2017; 13: 10.
40.
PostJEPrestonLESachsE.Managing the extended enterprise: the new stakeholder view. Calif Manage Rev. 2002; 45: 6-28.
41.
LeisingerKMGarabedianLFWagnerAK.Improving access to medicines in low and middle income countries: corporate responsibilities in context. South Med Rev. 2012; 5: 3-8.
AhenF.Responsibilization and MNC – Stakeholder engagement: who engages whom in the pharmaceutical industry? In: FreemanRKujalaJSachsS (eds). Stakeholder Engagement: Clinical Research Cases. Issues in Business Ethics. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2017, pp.87–112.
44.
UNESCO. Déclaration universelle sur la bioéthique et les droits de l’homme. 2005.
