BILL ANALYSIS Ó SB 115 Page 1 Date of Hearing: June 23, 2015 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HEALTH Rob Bonta, Chair SB 115 (Fuller) - As Amended April 20, 2015 SENATE VOTE: 39-0 SUBJECT: Valley fever. SUMMARY: Appropriates $1 million from the General Fund (GF) to the California Department of Public Health (DPH) for the 2015-16 fiscal year (FY), for purposes of valley fever vaccine research. Requires $100,000 to be allocated to DPH in the 2015-16 FY for purposes of costs associated with the administration of existing law above. EXISTING LAW: 1)Requires funds appropriated to DPH for the purpose of valley fever (coccidioidomycosis) vaccine research to be used to continue and expand the current research effort being conducted by the Valley Fever Vaccine Project (VFVP). 2)Permits DPH to contract on a sole source basis with a SB 115 Page 2 nonprofit organization that has provided funding for vaccine research on valley fever. Requires the contract to require the organization to distribute research grants to support research efforts that are likely to advance the effort to develop a vaccine. 3)Requires the contractor in 2) above to establish an advisory group consisting of persons with relevant expertise in the fields of mycology and vaccine development and a representative from DPH. Requires the advisory group to approve grants for those whose research is likely to advance the effort to develop a safe and effective vaccine and to seek advice from the appropriate agencies in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and other federal agencies with experience in supporting vaccine research when reviewing the research of those receiving funds. 4)Requires the contractor in 2) above to provide DPH with periodic status reports on the progress of the researchers receiving funds. Requires DPH to review progress reports from the contractor describing the research progress and plans for future funding. 5)Requires the contract to require that funding is provided on the condition that, if a valley fever vaccine is developed and successfully marketed, the state be reimbursed for the cost of grants made in proportion to the state's contribution to the research and development effort. FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, $1 million from the GF for the 2015-16 FY. SB 115 Page 3 COMMENTS: 1)PURPOSE OF THIS BILL. According to the author, California has seen an increase of valley fever case counts from 719 to 5,697 over the last 13-year period. Valley fever is caused by air or soil disturbance of the Coccidioides fungus, which lives and breeds in the soil. When the dust containing the Coccidioides spores is inhaled, the fungus attacks the respiratory system, causing infection that can lead to symptoms that resemble a cold, influenza, or pneumonia. Within California, cases of valley fever have been reported from most counties. Over 75% of cases have been reported in portions of the Sacramento Valley, all of the San Joaquin Valley, desert regions, and portions of Southern California. Valley fever can be costly and debilitating, with nearly 75% of patients missing work or school because of their illness, and more than 40% requiring hospitalization. There is also an influx of cases among prison inmates and employees. Anyone can get valley fever, even young and healthy people. The author states that although there is currently no cure for valley fever, researchers are close to developing a vaccine that will help combat this devastating disease. Experts say the lack of funding and serious attention to valley fever has stalled efforts to combat the disease. 2)BACKGROUND. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Coccidioides lives in soil in the southwestern U.S. and parts of Mexico, Central America, and South America. Inhaling the airborne fungal spores can cause infection, but is not spread from person to person. Most people who are exposed to the fungus do not get sick, but some people develop flu-like symptoms that may last for weeks to months. In a very small proportion of people who get valley fever, the infection can spread from the lungs to the rest of SB 115 Page 4 the body and cause more severe conditions, such as meningitis or even death. A March 2013 CDC report notes that more than 20,000 cases of valley fever are reported each year in the U.S., but many more cases likely go undiagnosed. Some researchers estimate that each year the fungus infects more than 150,000 people, many of whom are sick without knowing the cause or have cases so mild they are not detected. It is difficult to avoid exposure to the fungus that causes valley fever, and there is no vaccine to prevent the infection. 3)INCIDENCE IN CALIFORNIA. In California, providers and labs are required to report valley fever to DPH. According to an article in the Spring 2013 Medical Board of California Newsletter written by DPH Infectious Diseases Branch staff, there has been a substantial increase in the numbers of reported cases and hospitalizations of valley fever. From 2000 to 2011, the annual number of reported cases increased greater than six-fold, from 816 to 5,366 cases per year. These increases represent a substantial and growing burden to California residents, providers, and the government, but the reason for the increase is unclear. Researchers believe that contributing factors may include changes in climate and rainfall patterns, soil-disturbing construction activities, an increase in susceptible persons moving to disease-endemic areas, and heightened awareness and diagnosis. While anyone in an endemic area is at risk, those working in occupations involving dirt and dust exposure may be at increased risk of infection. Several groups of people are at higher risk for developing the severe forms of valley fever, including African Americans, Asians, women in their 3rd trimester of pregnancy, people with weak immune systems, including those with an organ transplant or who have HIV/AIDS. In California, highly endemic counties (more than 20 cases SB 115 Page 5 per 100,000 population per year), are Kern, Kings, Fresno, Merced, Madera, Tulare, and San Luis Obispo. According to an article published in The Atlantic in August 2014, a valley fever epidemic hit the southern San Joaquin Valley in 2001 and is continuing. It led to the deaths of more than three dozen inmates since 2006 at two nearby state prisons, Avenal and Pleasant Valley. Because the prisons house high concentrations of black and Filipino inmates, valley fever infection rates are higher than the state average: 1,000 times higher at Pleasant Valley, where more than 1,000 inmates have contracted valley fever over the past five years, and 189 times higher at Avenal. Following a federal mandate to transfer more than 2,500 at-risk inmates out of Kern County in 2013, the NIH and the CDC announced plans to start a clinical trial in Bakersfield. 4)ORPHAN DISEASES. An orphan disease is defined as a condition that affects fewer than 200,000 people nationwide. Some diseases have patient populations of fewer than a hundred. Collectively, however, they affect as many as 25 million Americans, according to NIH. Historically, pharmaceutical companies and research institutions have not focused on research for orphan product development due to inability to recoup research and development costs with a large enough market. The Orphan Drug Act of 1983 created financial incentives for drug and biologics manufacturers, including tax credits for costs of clinical research, government grant funding, assistance for clinical research, and a seven-year period of exclusive marketing given to the first sponsor of an orphan-designated product who obtains market approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the same indication. At the same time, federal programs at the FDA and the NIH began encouraging product development, as well as clinical research for products targeting rare diseases. 5)EFFORTS TO DEVELOP A VACCINE. Valley fever research has been going on since the 1930s and 40s, with not much progress towards a vaccine. According to a 2012 published report by SB 115 Page 6 the Reporting On Health collaborative, when a valley fever vaccine was evaluated in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and proved to be effective in mice and monkeys, hundreds of people signed up for the human clinical (Phase III) trials. However, patients complained of very sore arms and swelling at the injection site even at low doses. The shot was so painful people dropped out of the trial and ultimately the vaccine did not show conclusive protection. 6)Valley Fever Vaccine Project. The Valley Fever Vaccine Project (VFVP) is an inter-institutional cooperative which seeks to discover a vaccine for valley fever. The California State University, Bakersfield Foundation is the primary contractor and has overseen the distribution of grants to researchers at the University of California (UC) San Francisco, UC Davis, UC San Diego Veterans Medical Center, the University of Arizona, and the Medical College of Ohio. Through a combination of funds from the State of California, the California HealthCare Foundation (CHCF), and other donors, the VFVP funded research projects for developing and conducting trials on potential valley fever vaccines. The project was launched with a $1.5 million grant from CHCF, $700,000 in state GF, and a contribution of more than $100,000 from rotary clubs. With further contributions over the next decade from CHCF, the federal government, the state, the County of Kern, and nonprofit groups, total funding reached about $16 million. In 2009, the Budget Act included an ongoing appropriation of $1 million to continue research activities earmarked toward the development of a vaccine. 7)State Funding for VFVP. State funding for the VFVP began with a budget augmentation request by then-Assemblymember Ashburn for $700,000 in FY 1997-98. GF monies allocated to the VFVP SB 115 Page 7 by fiscal year are as follows: -------------------- |Fiscal |Amount | |Year | | | | | | | | |---------+----------| | 1997-98 |$0.7 | | |million | | | | | | | |---------+----------| | 1998-99 |$1.7 | | |million | | | | | | | |---------+----------| | 1999-00 |$1.7 | | |million | | | | | | | |---------+----------| | 2000-01 |$1.7 | | |million | | | | | | | |---------+----------| | 2001-02 |$1.2 | | |million | | | | | | | |---------+----------| | 2002-03 |$0.7 | | |million | SB 115 Page 8 | | | | | | |---------+----------| | 2006-07 |$1 | | |million | | | | | | | |---------+----------| | 2009-10 |$1 | | |million | | | | | | | -------------------- In 2009, the Budget Act included an ongoing appropriation of $1 million to continue research activities earmarked toward the development of a vaccine. Funding was subsequently discontinued in 2010. Since that time, funding dried up and the research stalled. In June of 2014, the FDA also announced plans to include cocci on its Generating Antibiotic Incentives Now program, a federal system intended to encourage the development of new antibacterial or antifungal drugs to treat what the government deems serious or life-threatening infections. Adding cocci to the list extends the period that valley fever antibiotics or vaccines can be sold without any generic-brand competition on the market by five years, which is expected to act as an incentive for a pharmaceutical company to jump on board and manufacture a vaccine. According to an August 2014 SB 115 Page 9 announcement from UC Merced, the university's Health Sciences Research Institute received approval and funding to conduct patient studies at Children's Hospital Central California in Madera. Researchers will study the blood of 30 pediatric patients with valley fever to understand the immune system's response to the disease, with a long-term goal of developing a vaccine. 8)SUPPORT. Valley Fever Solutions, a small biotech company working to develop a new antifungal treatment for valley fever, writes that drug development is frightfully expensive, and vaccine development is even more expensive. Valley fever is considered an orphan disease, which means it is devilishly hard to find investors until drug development is significantly advanced, to the point scientists can demonstrate the drug is going to work. Valley Fever Solutions states that government support for combating this rare disease is important and precious and is often the make or break component without which motivated researchers simply have to turn away and work on other projects that have better support. 9)PREVIOUS LEGISLATION. SB 1044 (Fuller) of 2014 would have appropriated $1 million from the GF for FY 2014 15, for purposes of extending the VFVP. SB 1044 was referred to Banking and Finance but never acted upon. 10)POLICY COMMENTS. a) Vaccine development is a multi-year, multi-million dollar effort. News reports state that CHCF stopped supporting the vaccine project because the foundation is not set up to thoroughly evaluate such scientific research. Significant state, federal, and private money was previously invested in this project; yet there is no way of knowing how much more would be needed to bring this important vaccine to market. Without commitments from SB 115 Page 10 outside groups for matching funds or a long-term funding commitment from the state, it is unclear how much of a meaningful impact on the effort the one-time appropriation contained in this bill would accomplish. b) DPH notes that state funding for the vaccine ended about six years ago and DPH does not currently have expertise or experience with Valley Fever vaccine development. The project was not under the jurisdiction of DPH other than as a function of pass through of funds. This project was conducted by California State University, Bakersfield Foundation with whom CDPH does not have a current relationship. Committee staff has been unable to confirm whether the VFVP public-private cooperative is still in operation. The committee may wish to ask the author about the status of the VFVP cooperative and their capability and timing for using the funds appropriated in this bill. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION: Support American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO California Life Science Association California Prison Moratorium Project Center on Race, Poverty & the Environment SB 115 Page 11 Central California Environmental Justice Network Coalition for Clean Air Comité Si Se Puede Committee for a Better Arvin Committee for a Better Shafter Global Community Monitor Greenfield Walking Group Leadership Council for Justice and Accountability Padres Socios de Lamont Physicians for Social Responsibility - Los Angeles Residentes Organizados al Servicio de un Ambiente Sano (ROSAS) Tri-Valley CARES Valley Fever Solutions SB 115 Page 12 Opposition None of file. Analysis Prepared by:Dharia McGrew / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097