ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2014
Reimbursement of orphan drugs in Belgium: what (else) matters?
Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of moral reasons on orphan drug reimbursement.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2021Pooled it
- Systematic review on the evaluation criteria of orphan medicines in Central and Eastern European countries.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2016Pooled it
- Multi-criteria decision analysis of value evaluation of rare disease medical insurance drugs in China.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Defining 'therapeutic value' of medicines: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Innovative thinking of clinical investigation for rare disease drug development.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2023Review
- How Can We Optimize the Value Assessment and Appraisal of Orphan Drugs for Reimbursement Purposes? A Qualitative Interview Study Across European Countries.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Patient Organizations' Barriers in Pharmacovigilance and Strategies to Stimulate Their Participation.Drug safety · 2021Article
- How to Value Orphan Drugs? A Review of European Value Assessment Frameworks.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
- Interviews with experts in rare diseases for the development of clinical decision support system software - a qualitative study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020Article
- The Case for the Use of Patient and Caregiver Perception of Change Assessments in Rare Disease Clinical Trials: A Methodologic Overview.Advances in therapy · 2019Review
- Reimbursement of Orphan Drugs in Europe in Relation to the Type of Authorization by the European Medicines Agency and the Decision Making Based on Health Technology Assessment.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2018Article
- Patient Involvement in the Lifecycle of Medicines According to Belgian Stakeholders: The Gap Between Theory and Practice.Frontiers in medicine · 2018Article
- Exploring patient and family involvement in the lifecycle of an orphan drug: a scoping review.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2017Article
- Negotiating prices of drugs for rare diseases.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2016Article
- Access to Orphan Drugs: A Comprehensive Review of Legislations, Regulations and Policies in 35 Countries.PloS one · 2015Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMost orphan drugs do not meet traditional standards of cost-effectiveness. Yet, most orphan drugs are reimbursed, which implies that other factors are taken into account at the time of reimbursement. To increase accountability of decision-makers, there is a need for more transparency in the factors that play a role in reimbursement decisions of orphan drugs. Therefore, the aim of this study is to use a combination of qualitative research methods to examine which official and non-official factors influence reimbursement decisions for orphan drugs in Belgium.
methodsSix semi-structured interviews with past or present members of the Drug Reimbursement Committee (DRC) were performed with a view to obtaining an overview of the potential factors influencing reimbursement. Additionally, these presence of these factors was assessed in the reimbursement dossiers of all orphan drugs (n = 64) for which an application for reimbursement was submitted to the National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance in Belgium between January 2002 and July 2013.
resultsDifferent official (i.e. therapeutic value, budget impact, price and impact in clinical practice) and non-official factors (i.e. pricing and reimbursement in other countries, interference by patient organisations and experts, arguments related to quality of branded drug versus compounding, media attention, innovative character, economic importance, ethical arguments and the political climate) may have influenced past reimbursement decisions for orphan drugs in Belgium. DISCUSSION: The identification of factors influencing orphan drug reimbursement is a crucial step in the development of a transparent and consistent framework which will guide future decision-making for reimbursement of orphan drugs.
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.