Three Pillars of Support for Orphan Drug Programs: Individual Valuations, Societal Valuations, and Anonymous Altruism.

OBJECTIVES: To identify and describe potential societal and individual sources of support for orphan drug programs. METHODS: The generalized risk-adjusted cost-effectiveness (GRACE) method shows that acute illness and disability severity increase individuals' willingness to pay (WTP) for health gains. We develop a social welfare function (SWF) that incorporates individuals' own values, combined with politically- or ethically determined weights. We introduce the concept of horizontal equity-that individuals in similar situations should be treated similarly-into the SWF. Finally, we introduce anonymous altruism into individuals' utility functions-the desire to help others, without knowing their identity. RESULTS: Combined with the empirical link between disease severity and rarity, GRACE demonstrates heightened WTP for health gains, leading rational individuals to support orphan drug programs, our first pillar of support. Adding horizontal equity to the SWF further increases societal support for orphan drug programs. Anonymous altruism, focusing most strongly on those in the most-dire circumstances, leads to altruistic support for those with severe disorders. Because innovators' economic incentives lead them to focus on larger markets, anonymous altruistic individuals to specifically support orphan drug programs. The presence of free-rider problems translates this into public program support. CONCLUSIONS: We identify supporting three pillars for orphan drug programs: (1) individuals' desire for treatments to treat rare disease that are often severe and life-threatening; (2) the concept of horizontal equity in our SWF: (3) anonymous altruism, the desire to people, even when unknown, in dire circumstances.

Clinical development and marketing application review times for novel orphan-designated drugs.

Development of an orphan-designated drug has been more challenging and financially less attractive than that of other drugs due to low prevalence of the condition, poorly defined biomarkers and lack of experience of healthcare providers in diagnosing and treating the condition. Guidance and incentives in some countries support the sponsors in developing orphan-designated drugs despite the challenges. Expedited regulatory programs as offered by the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) support the development of drugs, provide shorter marketing application review times or provide preliminary approval. In this study, we analyze marketing application review times in the US and in the European Union (EU) and clinical development times for novel, i.e., containing new molecular entity, orphan-designated drugs that were approved in the US between 1 June 2020 and 31 May 2023, and their correlation with expedited regulatory programs. Seventy-three marketing applications for novel orphan-designated drugs were approved by the FDA, and 39 also received a positive opinion from the EMA. The marketing application review time by the FDA for the 73 novel orphan-designated drugs approved in the US was 244 days (n = 73, median), and the marketing application review time by the EMA for the 39 drugs that were also approved in the EU was 353 days (n = 39, median). The typical clinical development time for a novel orphan-designated drug was 7.2 years (n = 72).

Comparative policy analysis of national rare disease funding policies in Australia, Singapore, South Korea, the United Kingdom and the United States: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Rare diseases pose immense challenges for healthcare systems due to their low prevalence, associated disabilities, and attendant treatment costs. Advancements in gene therapy, such as treatments for Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA), have introduced novel therapeutic options, but the high costs, exemplified by Zolgensma® at US$2.1 million, present significant financial barriers. This scoping review aimed to compare the funding approaches for rare disease treatments across high-performing health systems in Australia, Singapore, South Korea, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US), aiming to identify best practices and areas for future research. METHODS: In accordance with the PRISMA-ScR guidelines and the methodological framework by Arksey and O'Malley and ensuing recommendations, a comprehensive search of electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane) and grey literature from health department websites and leading national organizations dedicated to rare diseases in these countries was conducted. Countries selected for comparison were high-income countries with advanced economies and high-performing health systems: Australia, Singapore, South Korea, the UK, and the US. The inclusion criteria focused on studies detailing drug approval processes, reimbursement decisions and funding mechanisms, and published from 2010 to 2024. RESULTS: Based on a thorough review of 18 published papers and grey literature, various strategies are employed by countries to balance budgetary constraints and access to rare disease treatments. Australia utilizes the Life Saving Drugs Program and risk-sharing agreements. Singapore depends on the Rare Disease Fund, which matches public donations. South Korea's National Health Insurance Service covers specific orphan drugs through risk-sharing agreements. The UK relies on the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to evaluate treatments for cost-effectiveness, supported by the Innovative Medicines Fund. In the US, a combination of federal and state programs, private insurance and non-profit support is used. CONCLUSION: Outcome-based risk-sharing agreements present a practical solution for managing the financial strain of costly treatments. These agreements tie payment to actual treatment efficacy, thereby distributing financial risk and promoting ongoing data collection. Countries should consider adopting and expanding these agreements to balance immediate expenses with long-term benefits, ultimately ensuring equitable access to crucial treatments for patients afflicted by rare diseases.

International comparison of availability for orphan drugs: focused on approved orphan drugs in South Korea.

Introduction: In this study, we aimed to comparatively analyse the indicators of availability to orphan drugs in South Korea, the United States of America, Europe Union, and Japan. Methods: For 169 drugs designated as orphan drugs in South Korea between 2012 and 2021, information on the drugs designated as orphan drugs from each jurisdiction was extracted by country. Then, the availability indicators (approval time, drug lag time, and designation gap) were analysed for the drugs approved in each jurisdiction. Results: The approval rate of drugs designated as orphan drugs were 11.22% and 6.31% in the USA and EU, respectively, which was lower than that of orphan drugs in South Korea and Japan. The highest number of approved drugs was in the USA (87 drugs), EU 27 drugs, Japan 22 drugs and Korea 21 drugs. Furthermore, the approval time significantly differed between South Korea and the other countries. South Korea had a significantly different drug lag time and designation gap compared with the USA and EU. Conclusion: Our findings show that to fundamentally improve the access to treatments for rare disease, a policy of regulatory science that can comprehensively support the early stages of research and development and commercialisation is needed.

Orphan drug policy analysis in China.

Rare diseases have various types, low incidence rates, complex conditions, and are often difficult to diagnose. Due to China's large population, there is a significant number of rare disease patients, but there is a shortage of orphan drugs. Consequently, these patients often find themselves in a situation where necessary medications are either unavailable or unaffordable. To address this urgent clinical need, China has implemented a series of orphan drug policies aimed at improving drug accessibility and affordability. In terms of drug accessibility, companies are encouraged to expedite drug development through the implementation of tax incentives, guidance for clinical research on rare diseases, and the provision of data protection periods of 6 years, along with market exclusivity periods limited to a maximum of 7 years. Moreover, exemptions for clinical trials, acceptance of overseas clinical trial data, and the creation of a list prioritizing clinically urgent new drugs from overseas have been introduced to expedite the drug registration application, review, inspection, and approval processes. In terms of drug affordability, the import value-added tax on rare disease drugs has been reduced by 3%, and various provinces and cities have established a representative rare disease protection model, which includes special funds, medical assistance programs, and serious disease insurance. The national medical insurance catalog has been adjusted to reduce the financial burden on rare disease patients, resulting in an increase in the number of orphan drugs covered by the catalog to 95 as of March 2024. By comparing orphan drug policies in the United States, the European Union, Japan, Australia, and other countries (or regions), we will provide relevant suggestions to further improve orphan drug policies in China, thus bringing more treatment options and hope to patients with rare diseases.

Drug repurposing for rare diseases.

Repurposing drugs for rare diseases is a creative and cost-efficient method for creating new treatment options for certain conditions. This technique entails repurposing existing pharmaceuticals for new uses by utilizing established information regarding pharmacological characteristics, modes of operation, safety profiles, and interactions with biological systems. Creating new treatments for uncommon diseases is frequently difficult because of factors including small patient groups, disease intricacy, and insufficient knowledge of disease pathobiology. Drug repurposing is a more efficient and cost-effective approach compared to developing new drugs from scratch. It typically requires collaboration among academia, pharmaceutical firms, and patient advocacy groups.

Recombinant Alpha-1 Antitrypsin-Fc Fusion Protein INBRX-101 in Adults With Alpha-1 Antitrypsin Deficiency: A Phase 1 Study.

Background: Alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (AATD) is characterized by low alpha-1 antitrypsin (AAT) levels, predisposing individuals to lung disease. The standard of care, plasma-derived AAT (pdAAT), is delivered as weekly infusions to maintain serum AAT concentrations ≥11µM (≈50% of those in healthy individuals). INBRX-101, a recombinant human AAT-Fc fusion protein, was designed to have a longer half-life and achieve higher AAT levels than pdAAT. Methods: In this phase 1 dose-escalation study (N=31), adults with AATD received 1 dose (part 1) or 3 doses (part 2) of 10 (part 1), 40, 80, or 120mg/kg INBRX-101 every 3 weeks (Q3W) via intravenous infusion. The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability. Secondary endpoints were pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and immunogenicity of INBRX-101. Results: INBRX-101 was well tolerated. Most treatment-emergent adverse events were grade ≤2. In part 2 (n=18; each dose, n=6), dose-related increases in serum functional AAT (fAAT) were observed; mean fAAT levels remained above the 21 µM target for up to 4 weeks after the final dose in the 120-mg/kg cohort. Antidrug antibodies had no meaningful impact on PK or PD. INBRX-101 was detected in pulmonary epithelial lining fluid (PELF) from all patients assessed (n=11), and PELF fAAT increased after dosing. PK/PD modeling projected steady-state serum fAAT ≥21µM at 120 mg/kg Q3W (average concentration ≈43µM; trough concentration ≈28µM) and Q4W (≈34µM; ≈21µM). Conclusion: The favorable safety profile and ability to maintain serum fAAT levels >21µM with extended-interval dosing, support a phase 2 trial evaluating Q3W and Q4W dosing of INBRX-101.

HTA criteria adopted in different models of public healthcare systems for orphan drugs: A scoping review.

Access to drugs for rare diseases constitutes a challenge to healthcare systems, especially those with public funding. This study aimed to map and summarize the criteria used by HTA agencies in different healthcare systems to evaluate reimbursement recommendations for orphan drugs. A comprehensive literature search was performed on the databases PubMed, LILACS, Scopus, and Embase and the gray literature (Google Scholar and websites of HTA agencies). Publications addressing the criteria used by HTA agencies in countries with public healthcare systems when evaluating reimbursement recommendations for orphan drugs were included. This scoping review included 23 studies published between 2014 and 2023, mostly consisting of reviews of HTA reports, guidance documents, and original articles. The criteria were mapped from 19 countries and ranked within three models of healthcare systems (National Health System, National Health Insurance, and Social Health Insurance). All models shared concerns about unmet needs and disease nature. In addition, NHS countries (e.g., United Kingdom, Sweden, and Italy) prioritized innovation and system-level impact, while SHI countries (e.g., Germany, France, the Netherlands) usually valued budget impact and employed expedited evaluation processes. This review provides a comprehensive understanding of the general tendencies of each healthcare system model in establishing differentiated criteria to address the challenges posed by the limited evidence and investment in the field of rare diseases.

Development of the Emirates Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Tool for Orphan Drugs.

Background The number of orphan drug approvals is currently increasing globally. This creates a significant burden on payers and healthcare systems. This study aimed to create a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) tool for evaluating orphan drugs within the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The intended result of the tool is to provide evidence-based guidance to decision-makers in reimbursement and procurement decisions. Methods We conducted a literature search and local expert interviews to identify relevant preliminary criteria for the MCDA tool. Then we conducted a structured consensus-building session for healthcare experts and decision-makers in the UAE to develop the Emirati MCDA tool for orphan drugs. The experts voted for the criteria to be included in the tool and their ranking according to importance, as well as the weight of each criterion and its scoring function. To improve understanding and facilitate the voting process, experts were provided with a brief illustration of similar tools conducted in other countries before the voting sessions. Finally, the tool was developed in a Microsoft Excel sheet (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington, United States), and it was validated and tested based on real case studies, then it was fine-tuned accordingly based on the experts' discussions. The final tool was provided to the attendees to guide their decisions in the reimbursement and procurement of orphan drugs. Results The created tool provides a score for each analyzed orphan drug based on its value. Ten criteria were included in the final MCDA tool. These were cost-effectiveness (25.1% of the weight), magnitude of health gain (20.1%), availability of therapeutic alternative (14.3%), disease severity (11%), budget impact (7.9%), disease rarity (5.6%), strength of clinical evidence (5.6%), burden on households (4.5%), indication uniqueness (3.2%), and patients' age (2.6%). Conclusions Implementation of evidence-based healthcare necessitates assessing the fair value of each health technology. Addressing the high unmet medical needs and improving healthcare for patients with rare diseases are priorities within the UAE. The created Emirates MCDA tool for orphan drugs has the potential to help decision-makers implement value-based and evidence-based reimbursement decisions for orphan drugs.

Capitalizing on Hope: Questionable Marketing Approval and Pricing of a New ALS Drug.

Regulatory agencies must balance patient demands to access new treatments for fatal diseases with limited treatment options while ensuring drug safety and efficacy. However, questionable U.S. regulatory actions resulted in the early approval of AMX0035 to treat amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) by reconvening advisory commissions to obtain positive decisions and designating the drug as a new molecular entity. Data from one randomized clinical trial suggests minimal delays in disease progression and longer survivability, but debate remains about the lack of confirmatory evidence of effectiveness owing to study limitations. A patient's decision-making process details the experience of using the drug, including perspectives on access, cost, effectiveness, and adverse effects. In line with the "nichebuster" business model, the drugmaker, Amylyx Pharmaceuticals, is charging US$158,000/year/patient and thus forecast to turn a profit on a drug with debatable clinical effectiveness prior to completing a Phase 3 trial. Early marketing approval, despite community demands, is unnecessary and may have reduced access because of the end of a compassionate use program, and the high price tag results in restricted coverage and high out-of-pocket costs. Also, the drug's key ingredients are available as a generic and a supplement.

Availability and Access to Orphan Drugs for Rare Cancers in Bulgaria: Analysis of Delays and Public Expenditures.

Rare cancers are defined by an annual incidence of fewer than 6 per 100,000. Bearing similarities to rare diseases, they are associated with substantial health inequalities due to diagnostic complexity and delayed access to innovative therapies. This situation is further aggravated in Southeastern European countries like Bulgaria, where limited public resources and expertise underscore the need for additional policy and translational research on rare cancers. This study aimed to explore the availability and access to orphan drugs for rare cancers in Bulgaria for the period of 2020-2023. We cross-compared data from both the European Union and national public sources to evaluate the number of available and accessible orphan drugs for rare cancers, the delay from market authorization to reimbursement, the dynamics of public expenditures, and regional disparities in access across the country. We juxtaposed the main characteristics of oncological and non-oncological orphan drugs as well. Only 15 out of 50 oncological orphan drugs that were authorized by the European Medicine Agency were accessible for rare cancer patients in Bulgaria. The median delay between market authorization and inclusion in the Bulgarian Positive Drug List was 760 days. The total expenditures for all orphan drugs for rare cancers amounted to EUR 74,353,493 from 2020 to 2023. The budgetary impact of this group rose from 0.24% to 3.77% of total public medicinal product expenditures for the study period. Rare cancer patients represent a vulnerable population that often faces limited to no access to treatment. We call for targeted European and national policies to address this major inequality.

Patient and family experiences of lysosomal storage diseases in Canada: A qualitative interview study.

Canadian patients and families affected by rare genetic lysosomal storage diseases (LSDs) suffer from numerous challenges related to disease management, including issues navigating healthcare and social support services, access to orphan drugs, and intensive treatment regimens. These challenges significantly impact people's quality of life, yet they remain obscure and have not been the subject of comprehensive analysis. Thus, we conducted qualitative interviews with Canadian patients and caregivers living with LSDs to advance current understanding of their experiences with rare-disease (RD) management and health systems navigation to support patient-focused RD policies and programs and improve the health outcomes of the 2.8 million Canadians affected by RDs. This study employed a qualitative descriptive research design with inductive thematic analysis. The study data were collected using semi-structured interviews. Thirty Canadian participants were interviewed in person or remotely via video chat to allow for an interactive discussion and the acquisition of rich data related to the insights and perceptions of people with LSDs. Between April and November 2019, 30 participants (16 patients and 14 caregivers) with experiences with nine types of LSDs and living in seven Canadian provinces were interviewed. Five themes were identified using comprehensive thematic analysis. These themes were the complexity of the diagnosis process; navigation of healthcare systems; psychological, social, and financial implications of LSDs; access to social support services; and access to orphan drugs. Our findings reveal that patients' access to appropriate healthcare and social services is subject to significant delays and lacks care coordination. The process of accessing orphan drugs in Canada is extremely complex and convoluted. The study results also illuminate experiences of RD stigma when navigating healthcare and social support systems. Our study offers new insights into the complex nature and extensive needs of Canadians with LSDs that are currently unmet. The management of these complex diseases requires holistic patient care and support beyond having access to orphan drugs. Our findings highlight the importance of bridging existing gaps between health and social care for RD patients. Policymakers should utilize these results when developing the forthcoming national RD strategy.

Clinical aspects of reimbursement policies for orphan drugs in Central and Eastern European countries.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to characterize the reimbursement policy for orphan drugs (ODs) in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries in relation to the availability and impact of clinical evidence, health technology assessment (HTA) procedure, selected economic indicators, and the drug type according to indications. Materials and methods: A list of authorized medicines with orphan designation and information about active substance, Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification, and therapeutic area was extracted from the web-based register of the European Medicines Agency (EMA). A country-based questionnaire survey was performed between September 2021 and January 2022 in a group of selected experts from nine CEE countries (an invitation was sent to 11 countries). A descriptive and statistical analysis was conducted to determine statistical significance, correlations, between the drug or country characteristic and the positive recommendation or reimbursement of ODs. Results: The proportion of reimbursed orphan drugs differed between countries, ranging from 17.7% in Estonia to 49.6% in Hungary (p < 0.001). The odds that ODs were reimbursed were reduced in countries with a "strong" level of impact of drug safety and efficacy on reimbursement decisions (p=0.018), the presence of other additional specific clinical aspects (e.g., genomic data) considered in the reimbursement decision (p < 0.001) and mandatory (without exception) safety assessments (p=0.004). The probability that ODs were reimbursed was increased in countries with a "moderate" level of impact of drug safety and efficacy on reimbursement decisions (p=0.018), when reimbursement decisions are dependent on the EMA registration status and orphan drug designation (p < 0.001), the presence of the "positive HTA recommendation guarantees reimbursement" policy (p < 0.001), higher GDP per inhabitant (p=0.003), and higher healthcare expenditure (p < 0.001). Conclusion: We found that there are differences among CEE countries in the reimbursement of orphan drugs, and we identified aspects that may influence these differences. Safety, efficacy, and specific clinical aspect issues significantly influenced reimbursement decisions. Antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents drugs were the largest group of ODs and increased the chance of getting a positive recommendation. The higher GDP per inhabitant and healthcare expenditures per inhabitant were positively linked to the chance that an OD receives reimbursement.

A systematic review of real-world evidence (RWE) supportive of new drug and biologic license application approvals in rare diseases.

BACKGROUND: Real-world evidence (RWE) generated using real-world data (RWD) presents the potential to contextualize and/or supplement traditional clinical trials for regulatory approval of rare diseases (RDs). This systematic review evaluated the use of RWD for non-oncologic RD therapies with orphan drug designation (ODD) to support efficacy outcomes in regulatory application packages to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). New drug applications (NDAs) and biologic license applications (BLAs) submitted between January 2017 and October 2022 were obtained from publicly available FDA drug approval websites. NDAs and BLAs of non-oncologic RD therapies were screened, and manually reviewed using RWE-related keywords. Quantitative summary of number/proportion of study types was provided, whereas qualitative synthesis focused on key categories of output assessing the use of RWD in overall drug approval process, including agency's feedback on its strengths and key challenges. RESULTS: A total of 868 NDAs and BLAs were identified, of which 243 were screened for non-oncologic RDs with ODD, and 151 were subsequently reviewed for the RWD used to support efficacy outcomes. Twenty (12 NDAs, 8 BLAs) applications met the review inclusion criteria. Most (19; 95%) applications used only retrospective RWD, while one (5%) collected RWD both retrospectively and prospectively. RWD studies included natural history including registry-based/retrospective historical controls (14; 70%), retrospective medical chart-reviews (4; 20%), and external RWD controls from other studies (2; 10%). The FDA generally accepted RWD studies demonstrating a large effect size despite the noted concerns and criticisms. However, the agency expressed concerns about overall quality and comparability of RWD with trial data for some applications, including RWD study designs with respect to differences in patients' baseline characteristics, missing information, and potential bias and measurement errors. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights potential benefits of appropriately conducted RWE studies in RD, which can strengthen the clinical evidence for efficacy comparison and contextualization to support product approval efforts, particularly when a large magnitude of effect is observed for the new intervention. Nonetheless, quality and completeness of RWD and its comparability with trial data remain areas of concern that can serve as valuable learnings for advancing future science and regulatory approvals.

A Step Toward the Development of the First National Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Framework to Support Healthcare Decision Making in Saudi Arabia.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the feasibility of implementing multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) and to select the criteria for preparing a national MCDA framework for health technology assessment of orphan drugs in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). METHODS: The study was conducted in 3 phases. In phase I, a targeted literature review was performed to gather relevant information on the implementation of MCDA in healthcare decision making. Phase II was a cross-sectional survey, conducted to obtain insights from different stakeholders and key opinion leaders on specific topics from the KSA perspective. Phase III included a round-table discussion involving experts to validate the results obtained in the phase II survey and further elaborate on specific requirements that may be critical for developing the first national MCDA framework in the KSA. RESULTS: All the key opinion leaders involved in the study acknowledged the importance of implementing MCDA in the KSA. The Ministry of Health was assigned the responsibility of chairing the MCDA decision process. The experts selected the quantitative, qualitative, and economic criteria to be considered for the MCDA framework. The stakeholders decided to initiate a pilot phase using the deliberative MCDA methodology for the assessment of orphan drugs based on the selected criteria for a period of 1 year and then reevaluate the need to adapt the pragmatic MCDA model. CONCLUSION: This article describes the novel initiative that examined the feasibility and process required for the development of the first MCDA framework in the KSA to support healthcare decision making.

Drug repurposing for rare: progress and opportunities for the rare disease community.

Repurposing is one of the key opportunities to address the unmet rare diseases therapeutic need. Based on cases of drug repurposing in small population conditions, and previous work in drug repurposing, we analyzed the most important lessons learned, such as the sharing of clinical observations, reaching out to regulatory scientific advice at an early stage, and public-private collaboration. In addition, current upcoming trends in the field of drug repurposing in rare diseases were analyzed, including the role these trends could play in the rare diseases' ecosystem. Specifically, we cover the opportunities of innovation platforms, the use of real-world data, the use of artificial intelligence, regulatory initiatives in repurposing, and patient engagement throughout the repurposing project. The outcomes from these emerging activities will help progress the field of drug repurposing for the benefit of patients, public health and medicines development.

Implementation status of pharmacological studies in the development of orphan drugs.

BACKGROUND: The nonclinical as well as clinical development of orphan drugs is difficult, owing to unknown pathophysiology and the absence of animal models. Both, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Guidance and European Medicines Agency (EMA) Guidelines, for orphan drug development describe non-clinical studies, but lack specific information, such as animal species and study design. Against this background, this study aimed to elucidate efficient methods for evaluating nonclinical efficacy based on a review report of orphan drugs approved in Japan. RESULTS: A total of 184 orphan drugs, including 84 anticancer and 100 non-anticancer drugs, approved in Japan from January 2010 to December 2019 were investigated. Some anticancer drugs progressed to clinical development without distinct efficacy data in nonclinical studies. Patient-derived cells have been used for some drugs due to a lack of established cell lines. Cells used for non-clinical studies were devised for drugs indicated for cancers resistant to prior therapies, tumours with specific amino acid mutations in the target molecules, and solid tumours with specific biomarkers. For some non-anticancer drugs, similar disease animal models and normal animals were used for evaluation, since animal models did not exist. Biomarkers have been used specifically for evaluation in normal animals and as endpoints in some clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: It was possible to evaluate drug efficacy by flexibly designing nonclinical studies according to disease characteristics for potentials orphan drugs. These approaches, which are not described in detail in the EMA Guideline or FDA Guidance, may thus lead to approval.

Quality and quantity of data used by Health Canada in approving new drugs.

Background: This study examined multiple aspects about the approval of new drugs: the characteristics of the drugs, the quality and quantity of information that Health Canada discloses about the demographics of patients enrolled in clinical trials, the characteristics of the trial, and the type of review that it uses. It examines whether there have been changes in these measures between 1 September 2012 and 31 March 2022. Methods: A list of all new drugs approved, type of review used, and drug characteristics was generated from Health Canada annual reports. Therapeutic categories were identified from the World Health Organization Collaborating Center for Drugs Statistics Methodology. The Summary Basis of Decision documents of Health Canada were used to identify patient demographics in clinical trials and clinical trial characteristics. Results: Health Canada approved 326 new drugs for 407 indications. The percent of orphan drugs approved increased from 35.6 to 51.3%. The number of indications per drug decreased (p = 0.0817) as did the number of pivotal trials per drug (p = 0.0091). The percent of Phase 3 trials dropped from 76.3% in 2012-2015 to 64.8% in 2019-2022 (p = 0.005). There was also a statistically significant decrease in the percent of trials that were randomized, controlled, and blinded. The clinical trial characteristics of orphan drugs and the type of review used were both significantly different compared with non-orphan drugs. The percent of trials which had information about the number of patients enrolled, the percent of trials that provided the age of the patients, and the sex breakdown all significantly increased. Conclusion: The results show that there has been a change in regulatory standards that may be due to them becoming less rigorous, because of an adaptation to the number of orphan drugs being submitted or a combination of both reasons. At the same time, there has been some improvement in the transparency of data. Health Canada has recently embarked on a series of reforms in drug regulation and clinical trial management. These changes need to be closely evaluated to be sure that they enhance the efficacy and safety of new drugs.

Costs of orphan medicinal products: longitudinal analysis of expenditure in Wales.

BACKGROUND: The Orphan Regulation ((EC) No 141/2000) has successfully redirected private and public investment towards previously neglected areas through incentives, regulatory obligations and rewards. However, the growth in the number of licensed orphan medicinal products (OMPs) has led to concerns about increased costs. The aims were to investigate the trend in the costs of OMPs to the National Health Service in Wales, to attribute costs of medicines within and outside periods of marketing exclusivity, and estimate the contribution of individual medicines to the overall costs of OMPs. METHODS: Expenditure on OMPs in Wales was analysed between the 2014/15 and 2019/20 financial years using data on prescriptions dispensed in primary care, secondary care, and specialised commissioned services. OMP spend was calculated as a proportion of total medicines expenditure, whether it was incurred during, or outside the marketing exclusivity period (MEP), and by therapeutic area and medicine. RESULTS: Overall spend on OMPs and all medicines increased from £32 m to £82 m, and from £1,030 m to £1,198 m, respectively, with the proportion of spend on OMPs more than doubling from 3.1% to 6.9% per annum. Average year-on-year growth in the costs of OMPs was 21%, compared to 2% for other medicines. Costs following MEP expiry contributed significantly to overall OMP costs, increasing from £8 m to £30 m, corresponding to an increase from 24% to 37%. Treatments for 'malignant disease and immunosuppression', 'nutrition and blood' and the 'respiratory system' accounted for 90% of all OMP spend. Half of total OMP annual expenditure was on just 4 medicines in 2014/15, increasing to 8 in 2019/20. CONCLUSIONS: Both the number of OMPs and the amount spent on OMPs in Wales has increased over time, possibly as a consequence of favourable licensing conditions, permissive health technology assessment policies and dedicated funding.

Analysis of marketed orphan drugs in China.

In recent years, China has increased attention on the issue of rare diseases, and the government has promulgated rare disease-related policies to gradually improve rare disease diagnosis, treatment, drug marketing, and patient burden. Orphan drugs were added to the medical insurance directory in 7 batches, of which 22 drugs were first included in the 2004 medical insurance directory and 8, 16, 12, 7, 8, and 7 were included in the 2009, 2017, 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022 versions, respectively. Currently, 106 orphan drugs are marketed in China, which are suitable for treating 53 rare diseases such as hematologic diseases, congenital metabolism disorders, neuropathies, and digestive system diseases and for other treatment fields. The drugs are mainly manufactured in 15 countries such as China, Switzerland, and the USA, of which 10 drugs can be used to treat different rare diseases. At the same time, there are multiple treatments available for 25 rare diseases. In this paper, we examined the manufacturers, marketing status, indications, and inclusion of orphan drugs in the National Basic Medical Insurance Directory to describe and analyze the current status of 106 orphan drugs that are currently marketed in China to provide a reference for rare disease policy formulation and drug development.