Reflections on the Future of Pharmaceutical Public-Private Partnerships: From Input to Impact.

Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) are multiple stakeholder partnerships designed to improve research efficacy. We focus on PPPs in the biomedical/pharmaceutical field, which emerged as a logical result of the open innovation model. Originally, a typical PPP was based on an academic and an industrial pillar, with governmental or other third party funding as an incentive. Over time, other players joined in, often health foundations, patient organizations, and regulatory scientists. This review discusses reasons for initiating a PPP, focusing on precompetitive research. It looks at typical expectations and challenges when starting such an endeavor, the characteristics of PPPs, and approaches to assessing the success of the concept. Finally, four case studies are presented, of PPPs differing in size, geographical spread, and research focus.

Drug development for exceptionally rare metabolic diseases: challenging but not impossible.

BACKGROUND: We studied to what extent the level of scientific knowledge on exceptionally rare metabolic inherited diseases and their potential orphan medicinal products is associated with sponsors deciding to apply for an orphan designation at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or the European Medicines Agency (EMA). METHODS: All metabolic diseases with a genetic cause and prevalence of less than 10 patients per 1 million of the population were selected from the 'Orphanet database of Rare diseases'. The outcome of interest was the application for an orphan designation at FDA or EMA. The level of publicly available knowledge of the disease and drug candidate before an orphan designation application was defined as whether the physiological function corresponding with the pathologic gene and initiation of the pathophysiological pathway was known, whether an appropriate animal study was identified for the disease, whether preclinical proof of concept was ascertained and the availability of data in humans. Other determinants included in the study were metabolic disease class, the prevalence of the disease, prognosis and time of first description of the disease in the literature. Univariate relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of an orphan designation application were calculated for each of these determinants. In addition, a multivariate Cox regression analysis was conducted (Forward LR). RESULTS: In total, 166 rare metabolic genetic diseases were identified and included in the analysis. For only 42 (25%) of the diseases an orphan designation application was submitted at either FDA or EMA before January 2012. The multivariate analysis identified preclinical proof of concept of a potential medicinal product as major knowledge related determinant associated with an orphan designation application (RRadj 3.9, 95% CI 1.9-8.3) and confirmed that prevalence of the disease is also associated with filing an application for an orphan designation (RRadj 2.8, 95% CI 1.4-5.4). CONCLUSION: For only one out of four known exceptionally rare metabolic inherited diseases sponsors applied for an orphan designation at FDA or EMA. These applications were found to be associated with the prevalence of the rare disease and the level of available scientific knowledge on the proof of concept linking possible drug candidates to the disease of interest.

Towards the harmonization of outcome measures in children with mitochondrial disorders.

AIM: A clinical trial is only as reliable as its outcomes, therefore the careful and systematic selection of outcome measures is extremely important. Currently, the selection of outcome measures for clinical trials designed to evaluate new drugs in patients with mitochondrial disorders is inefficient and has not been addressed systematically. Given that meaningful data can be obtained only from trials in which outcomes are assessed using valid instruments, one should first focus on the validation of a set of selected instruments in the target population. The aim of this review is to systematically select a 'toolbox' of robust outcome measures that are relevant to all patients. METHOD: Using an extensive search of published literature, we systematically compiled a toolbox with outcome measures based on a primary search for possible instruments Subsequently, we reduced this toolbox using strict criteria that were adapted from the United States Food and Drug Administration. RESULTS: A toolbox with clinically relevant and psychometrically robust instruments for performing clinical research in children with mitochondrial disorders was compiled. INTERPRETATION: In coming years, more experience using these outcome measures in children with various mitochondrial disease phenotypes must be obtained before reliable conclusions regarding the validity of these instruments can be drawn.

Does market exclusivity hinder the development of Follow-on Orphan Medicinal Products in Europe?

BACKGROUND: We determined whether the market exclusivity incentive of the European Orphan Drug Regulation results in a market monopoly or that absence of another Orphan Medicinal Product (OMP) for the same rare disorder, a so-called follow-on OMP, is a matter of time or market size. In the interest of rare disorder patients better understanding of the effect of the market exclusivity incentive on follow-on OMP development is warranted. METHODS: First, the impact of various market-, product- and disease-related characteristics on follow-on OMP development in the EU was determined by comparing rare disorders with an approved OMP and at least one follow-on OMP (N = 26), with rare disorders with an approved OMP and no follow-on OMP (N = 18). Next, we determined whether manufacturers continued development of a follow-on OMP upon approval of the first OMP for the intended rare disorder. Since in the EU significant benefit of an OMP has to be established, we determined for each follow-on OMP for which development was continued on what grounds significant benefit was assumed by the sponsor. Data were collected from the public domain only. RESULTS: The likelihood of a rare disorder with an approved OMP to obtain at least one follow-on OMP development was strongly associated with disease prevalence, turnover of the first OMP, disease class, disease-specific scientific output and age of onset. Out of a total of 120 follow-on OMPs only one follow-on OMP could be identified for which development was discontinued upon approval of the first OMP for the same rare disorder. Only a substantial level of discontinuation of follow-on OMP development would have indicated the existence of a market monopoly. Moreover, sponsors that continued development of a follow-on OMP predominantly assumed that their product had an improved efficacy compared to the first approved OMP. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that absence of follow-on OMP development is a matter of time or market size, rather than that the market exclusivity incentive of the European Orphan Drug Regulation creates a market monopoly.

Safety-related regulatory actions for orphan drugs in the US and EU: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Drugs for rare diseases, so-called orphan drugs, are often intended for serious or chronically debilitating diseases. Safety information is more limited at the time of approval for orphan drugs as a result of various factors, such as the limited number of patients in clinical trials, quality of the clinical trials and special approval procedures. Several studies have been conducted on safety-related regulatory actions for drugs, but none of these have specifically focused on orphan drugs. OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency and nature of safety-related regulatory actions for orphan drugs in the US and EU. METHODS: This cohort study examined publicly available data from the websites of US and EU regulatory authorities on orphan drugs approved in the US and/or the EU between January 2000 and December 2007. The main outcome measures were the nature, frequency and timing of safety-related regulatory actions, defined as (i) safety withdrawals; (ii) 'black-box' warnings; and (iii) written communications to healthcare professionals issued by the US FDA or the European Medicines Agency between January 2000 and June 2008. RESULTS: Ninety-five orphan drugs were approved during the study period (75 in the US, 44 in the EU, and 24 in both regions). Ten products (10.5%) received a safety-related regulatory action. No safety withdrawals, four black-box warnings and 12 written communications were identified. The probability of a first safety-related regulatory action for orphan drugs was 20.3% after 8 years of follow-up. Orphan drugs approved by accelerated approval (relative risk [RR] 3.32; 95% CI 1.06, 10.42), oncological products (RR 7.83; 95% CI 0.96, 63.82) and products for gastrointestinal and metabolism indications (RR 10.44; 95% CI 1.25, 87.27) may have a higher risk for a safety-related regulatory action. CONCLUSIONS: The probability of a first safety-related regulatory action for an orphan drug was slightly lower than that reported in the literature for biologicals in one study and new molecular entities in another study. However, detection of safety issues may be complicated by the limited experience with orphan drugs in practical use due to the low prevalences of the diseases they are used for. Doctors and pharmacists should therefore be vigilant with regard to the occurrence of a safety-related issue for orphan drugs.

Translation of rare disease research into orphan drug development: disease matters.

More than 25 years of orphan drug regulations have yielded several new treatments for patients with rare diseases. Here, we show that successful translation of rare disease research into an orphan drug discovery and development programme is dependent on the disease class, its prevalence and the disease-specific scientific output. Our findings indicate that current orphan drug legislation alone is not sufficient to stimulate orphan drug development for diseases with a very low prevalence. Consequently, additional incentives should focus on stimulating the specific needs of rare disease research at disease class level.

Orphan drug development across Europe: bottlenecks and opportunities.

With the assignment of the 500th European Union orphan drug designation in 2007, the Regulation on Orphan Medicinal Products truly begins to show its potential for delivering new medicines to patients with rare diseases. Here, we analysed European orphan drug development at a national level and unveil a strong relationship between orphan drug development and pharmaceutical innovation performance in Europe. Moreover, we identify gaps in transition from science into orphan drug development as important bottlenecks that exist in several European countries. Our findings underline the importance of innovation-based policies to enhance the development of orphan drugs in Europe.