ArticlePharmacoEconomics2011
Availability of and access to orphan drugs: an international comparison of pharmaceutical treatments for pulmonary arterial hypertension, Fabry disease, hereditary angioedema and chronic myeloid leukaemia.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 87 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of moral reasons on orphan drug reimbursement.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- A National Approach to Reimbursement Decision-Making on Drugs for Rare Diseases in Canada? Insights from Across the Ponds.Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2015Pooled it
- International patented medicine prices: how does Canada compare to the OECD? A descriptive analysis of list prices.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2026Article
- Multi-criteria decision analysis of value evaluation of rare disease medical insurance drugs in China.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Comparative policy analysis of national rare disease funding policies in Australia, Singapore, South Korea, the United Kingdom and the United States: a scoping review.Health economics review · 2024Article
- Are the European reference networks for rare diseases ready to embrace machine learning? A mixed-methods study.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2024Article
- Clinical aspects of reimbursement policies for orphan drugs in Central and Eastern European countries.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Enhancing Equitable Access to Rare Disease Diagnosis and Treatment around the World: A Review of Evidence, Policies, and Challenges.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Literature Review on Health Emigration in Rare Diseases-A Machine Learning Perspective.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Assessing the value of orphan drugs using conventional cost-effectiveness analysis: Is it fit for purpose?Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2022Review
- Availability and Accessibility of Orphan Medicinal Products to Patients in Slovakia in the Years 2010-2019.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Patient Accessibility and Budget Impact of Orphan Drugs in South Korea: Long-Term and Real-World Data Analysis (2007-2019).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Management of patients with hereditary angioedema in Germany: comparison with other countries in the Icatibant Outcome Survey.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2019Observational
- Lanadelumab Injection Treatment For The Prevention Of Hereditary Angioedema (HAE): Design, Development And Place In Therapy.Drug design, development and therapy · 2019Review
- Policies and availability of orphan medicines in outpatient care in 24 European countries.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Article
- Common drug review recommendations for orphan drugs in Canada: basis of recommendations and comparison with similar reviews in Quebec, Australia, Scotland and New Zealand.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2018Article
- Orphan drug policies and use in pediatric nephrology.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2017Article
- The availability and affordability of orphan drugs for rare diseases in China.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2016Article
- Translating rare-disease therapies into improved care for patients and families: what are the right outcomes, designs, and engagement approaches in health-systems research?Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMarket authorization does not guarantee patient access to any given drug. This is particularly true for costly orphan drugs because access depends primarily on co-payments, reimbursement policies and prices. The objective of this article is to identify differences in the availability of orphan drugs and in patient access to them in 11 pharmaceutical markets: Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, Switzerland and the US.
methodsFour rare diseases were selected for analysis: pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), Fabry disease (FD), hereditary angioedema (HAE) and chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML). Indicators for availability were defined as (i) the indications for which orphan drugs had been authorized in the treatment of these diseases; (ii) the application date; and (iii) the date upon which these drugs received market authorization in each country. Indicators of patient access were defined as (i) the outcomes of technology appraisals; (ii) the extent of coverage provided by healthcare payers; and (iii) the price of the drugs in each country. For PAH we analysed bosentan, iloprost, sildenafil, treprostinil (intravenous and inhaled) as well as sitaxentan and ambrisentan; for FD we analysed agalsidase alfa and agalsidase beta; for HAE we analysed icatibant, ecallantide and two complement C1s inhibitors; for CML we analysed imatinib, dasatinib and nilotinib.
resultsMost drugs included in this study had received market authorization in all countries, but the range of indications for which they had been authorized differed by country. The broadest range of indications was found in Australia, and the largest variations in indications were found for PAH drugs. Authorization process speed (the time between application and market authorization) was fastest in the US, with an average of 362 days, followed by the EU (394 days). The highest prices for the included drugs were found in Germany and the US, and the lowest in Canada, Australia and England. Although the prices of all of the included drugs were high compared with those of most non-orphan drugs, most of the insurance plans in our country sample provided coverage for authorized drugs after a certain threshold.
conclusionsAvailability of and access to orphan drugs play a key role in determining whether patients will receive adequate and efficient treatment. Although the present study showed some variations between countries in selected indicators of availability and access to orphan drugs, virtually all of the drugs in question were available and accessible in our sample. However, substantial co-payments in the US and Canada represent important barriers to patient access, especially in the case of expensive treatments such as those analysed in this study. Market exclusivity is a strong instrument for fostering orphan drug development and drug availability. However, despite the positive effect of this instrument, the conditions under which market exclusivity is granted should be reconsidered in cases where the costs of developing an orphan drug have already been amortized through the use of the drug's active ingredient for the treatment of a common indication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.