Bringing neglected tropical diseases into the spotlight.

The correlation between poverty and the neglected tropical disease (NTD) burden is undeniable. NTDs are a brand without copyright; an international movement gathering momentum towards a common goal of tackling major causes of preventable illness in low-income countries. New reports by Liese and Schubert and Moran et. al. act as a call to arms, highlighting a need for research into NTD treatment and control that is essential to improving the lives of the 'bottom billion.

Genetically engineered parasites: the solution to designing an effective malaria vaccine?

Genetic engineering provides an ingenious method of attenuating Plasmodium falciparum parasites for next generation vaccines. A novel approach stimulates new optimism in the struggle to eliminate the burden of malaria

Systematic analysis of funding awarded for norovirus research to institutions in the United Kingdom, 1997-2010

Objectives:Norovirus infections pose great economic and disease burden to health systems around the world. This study quantifies the investments in norovirus research awarded to UK institutions over a 14-year time period.Design:A systematic analysis of public and philanthropic infectious disease research investments awarded to UK institutions between 1997 and 2010.Participants:NoneSetting:UK institutions carrying out infectious disease research.Main outcome measures:Total funding for infectious disease research, total funding for norovirus research, position of norovirus research along the R&amp;D value chain.Results:The total dataset consisted of 6165 studies with sum funding of £2.6 billion. Twelve norovirus studies were identified with a total funding of £5.1 million, 0.2% of the total dataset. Of these, eight were categorized as pre-clinical, three as intervention studies and one as implementation research. Median funding was £200,620.Conclusions:Research funding for norovirus infections in the UK appears to be unacceptably low, given the burden of disease and disability produced by these infections. There is a clear need for new research initiatives along the R&amp;D value chain: from pre-clinical through to implementation research, including trials to assess cost-effectiveness of infection control policies as well as clinical, public health and environmental interventions in hospitals, congregate settings and in the community.</p

Gamma-ray emission from dark matter wakes of recoiled black holes

A new scenario for the emission of high-energy gamma-rays from dark matter annihilation around massive black holes is presented. A black hole can leave its parent halo, by means of gravitational radiation recoil, in a merger event or in the asymmetric collapse of its progenitor star. A recoiled black hole which moves on an almost-radial orbit outside the virial radius of its central halo, in the cold dark matter background, reaches its apapsis in a finite time. Near or at the apapsis passage, a high-density wake extending over a large radius of influence, forms around the black hole. It is shown that significant gamma-ray emission can result from the enhancement of neutralino annihilation in these wakes. At its apapsis passage, a black hole is shown to produce a flash of high-energy gamma-rays whose duration is determined by the mass of the black hole and the redshift at which it is ejected. The ensemble of such black holes in the Hubble volume is shown to produce a diffuse high-energy gamma-ray background whose magnitude is compared to the diffuse emission from dark matter haloes alone.Comment: version to appear in Astrophysical Journal letters (labels on Fig. 3 corrected

Systematic analysis of funding awarded for mycology research to institutions in the UK, 1997–2010

Objectives: Fungal infections cause significant global morbidity and mortality. We have previously described the UK investments in global infectious disease research, and here our objective is to describe the investments awarded to UK institutions for mycology research and outline potential funding gaps in the UK portfolio. Design: Systematic analysis. Setting: UK institutions carrying out infectious disease research. Primary and secondary outcome measures Primary outcome is the amount of funding and number of studies related to mycology research. Secondary outcomes are describing the investments made to specific fungal pathogens and diseases, and also the type of science along the R&D value chain. Methods: We systematically searched databases and websites for information on research studies from public and philanthropic funding institutions awarded between 1997 and 2010, and highlighted the mycology-related projects. Results: Of 6165 funded studies, we identified 171 studies related to mycology (total investment £48.4 million, 1.9% of all infection research, with mean annual funding £3.5 million). Studies related to global health represented 5.1% of this funding (£2.4 million, compared with 35.6% of all infectious diseases). Leading funders were the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (£14.8 million, 30.5%) and Wellcome Trust (£12.0 million, 24.7%). Preclinical studies received £42.2 million (87.3%), with clinical trials, intervention studies and implementation research in total receiving £6.2 million (12.7%). By institution, University of Aberdeen received most funding (£16.9 million, 35%). Studies investigating antifungal resistance received £1.5 million (3.2%). Conclusions: There is little translation of preclinical research into clinical trials or implementation research in spite of substantial disease burden globally, and there are few UK institutions that carry out significant quantities of mycology research of any type. In the context of global health and the burden of disease in low-income countries, more investment is required for mycology research

Differences in research funding for women scientists: a systematic comparison of UK investments in global infectious disease research during 1997–2010

Objectives: There has not previously been a systematic comparison of awards for research funding in infectious diseases by sex. We investigated funding awards to UK institutions for all infectious disease research from 1997 to 2010, across disease categories and along the research and development continuum. Design: Systematic comparison. Methods: Data were obtained from several sources for awards from the period 1997 to 2010 and each study assigned to—disease categories; type of science (preclinical, phases I–III trials, product development, implementation research); categories of funding organisation. Fold differences and statistical analysis were used to compare total investment, study numbers, mean grant and median grant between men and women. Results: 6052 studies were included in the final analysis, comprising 4357 grants (72%) awarded to men and 1695 grants (28%) awarded to women, totalling £2.274 billion. Of this, men received £1.786 billion (78.5%) and women £488 million (21.5%). The median value of award was greater for men (£179 389; IQR £59 146–£371 977) than women (£125 556; IQR £30 982–£261 834). Awards were greater for male principal investigators (PIs) across all infectious disease systems, excepting neurological infections and sexually transmitted infections. The proportion of total funding awarded to women ranged from 14.3% in 1998 to 26.8% in 2009 (mean 21.4%), and was lowest for preclinical research at 18.2% (£285.5 million of £1.573 billion) and highest for operational research at 30.9% (£151.4 million of £489.7 million). Conclusions: There are consistent differences in funding received by men and women PIs: women have fewer funded studies and receive less funding in absolute and in relative terms; the median funding awarded to women is lower across most infectious disease areas, by funder, and type of science. These differences remain broadly unchanged over the 14-year study period

Funding Infectious Disease Research: A Systematic Analysis of UK Research Investments by Funders 1997–2010

Background: Research investments are essential to address the burden of disease, however allocation of limited resources is poorly documented. We systematically reviewed the investments awarded by funding organisations to UK institutions and their global partners for infectious disease research. Methodology/Principal Findings Public and philanthropic investments for the period 1997 to 2010 were included. We categorised studies by infectious disease, cross-cutting theme, and by research and development value chain, reflecting the type of science. We identified 6165 funded studies, with a total research investment of UK £2.6 billion. Public organisations provided £1.4 billion (54.0%) of investments compared with £1.1 billion (42.4%) by philanthropic organisations. Global health studies represented an investment of £928 million (35.7%). The Wellcome Trust was the leading investor with £688 million (26.5%), closely followed by the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) with £673 million (25.9%). Funding over time was volatile, ranging from ∼£40 million to ∼£160 million per year for philanthropic organisations and ∼£30 million to ∼£230 million for public funders. Conclusions/Significance: Infectious disease research funding requires global coordination and strategic long-term vision. Our analysis demonstrates the diversity and inconsistent patterns in investment, with volatility in annual funding amounts and limited investment for product development and clinical trials

Sublingual immunotherapy : SLIT

Background: We report the first study that analyses public and philanthropic investments awarded to UK institutions for research related to sexually transmitted infections (STIs).Methods: We systematically searched award data from the major funders for information on all infectious disease research funding awarded in 1997–2013. The STI–related projects were identified and categorised by pathogen, disease and type of science along the research pipeline from preclinical to translational research.Findings: We identified 7393 infection–related awards with total investment of GBP 3.5 billion. Of these, 1238 awards (16.7%) covering funding of GBP 719.1 million (20.5%) were for STI research. HIV as an STI received GBP 465 million across 719 studies; non–HIV STIs received GBP 139 million across 378 studies. The Medical Research Council provided greatest investment (GBP 193 million for HIV, GBP 45 million for non–HIV STIs). Preclinical awards totalled GBP 233 million (37.1%), whilst translational research received GBP 286 million (39.7%). Substantial proportions of HIV investment addressed global health research (GBP 265 million), vaccinology (GBP 110 million) and therapeutics (GBP 202 million). For other STIs, investments focused on diagnostics (GBP 45 million) and global health (GBP 27 million). Human Papilloma Virus research received GBP 58 million and chlamydia GBP 24 million. Funding for non–HIV STIs has declined in the three most recent years of this data set.Conclusions: The investment for HIV research awarded to UK institutions correlates with the high global burden, but other STIs are relatively neglected, including gonorrhoea and syphilis. Future STI funding should be better aligned with burden while addressing the emerging risk of antimicrobial resistance in Neisseria gonorrhoeae and outbreaks of other pathogens