But probably more important is the value and confidence that such reviews give to the local employees working on the projects, as most reviews have been supportive of the development plans submitted by the applicants. Certainly there have been recommendations for some changes, but often the WHO/TAG teams have given support to “carry on as planned”. This gives recipients additional reassurance to proceed and confirms for the executive management that their teams know what they are doing. This is important because of the unique complexities of influenza

vaccine manufacture. Large egg-based production facilities are a new concept for most applicants. To support such production, many recipients have even had to develop their own egg supply facilities. Moreover, most of the countries involved have not had established influenza vaccine delivery programmes and have therefore had to make plans for vaccine delivery in parallel ABT-888 in vivo to building their own indigenous production facilities. Interestingly, only 3 of the 11 grant recipients are developing influenza production facilities in partnership with large international pharmaceutical companies (Instituto Butantan, Brazil and Birmex, Mexico with sanofi pasteur and Bio Farma, Indonesia with Biken). Independent of WHO, these recipients have made their own business arrangements with their technology transfer partner either

LY294002 nmr to construct production facilities or to share the production, fill finish or other components of the larger production process. Given that few of the grantees had previous experience of influenza vaccine development and manufacture, they all required training, although the extent of the training varies by grantee. For this purpose, WHO has established a centre of excellence and training at the Netherlands Vaccine Institute in Bilthoven, the all Netherlands [2]. Feedback from the grantees indicates

that the training courses carried out here and/or at the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control in the United Kingdom have been instrumental for the successful implementation of the projects. The hope that the WHO grants will also stimulate new non-egg production methodologies remains. Although the recent H1N1 epidemic forced some recipients to go straight into egg-based pandemic influenza vaccine production, there is continued interest from several companies to invest in alternative production techniques. In summary, as viewed from the vantage of the TAG, the WHO influenza technology transfer initiative has been successful. Clearly the relatively small WHO investments made in these companies to develop their own influenza vaccine production facilities have had quite dramatic results. A few companies are already producing large amounts of influenza vaccine. Others will soon follow. Whether they are developing egg-based or planning non-egg based influenza vaccine production, all companies are optimistic that their efforts will come to fruition.