ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2014
Orphan drugs expenditure in the Netherlands in the period 2006-2012.
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 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Systematic review on the evaluation criteria of orphan medicines in Central and Eastern European countries.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2016Pooled it
- Methodological Quality Assessment of Budget Impact Analyses for Orphan Drugs: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
- 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
- Public spending on orphan medicines: a review of the literature.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2020Article
- An analysis of orphan medicine expenditure in Europe: is it sustainable?Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2019Article
- Generic Substitution of Orphan Drugs for the Treatment of Rare Diseases: Exploring the Potential Challenges.Drugs · 2018Review
- Negotiating prices of drugs for rare diseases.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2016Article
- Pharmaceutical expenditure on drugs for rare diseases in Canada: a historical (2007-13) and prospective (2014-18) MIDAS sales data analysis.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2016Article
- Impact of orphan drugs on Latvian budget.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2016Article
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
backgroundThe relatively low budget impact of orphan drugs is often used as an argument in reimbursement decisions. However, overall, the budget impact of orphan drugs can still be substantial. In this study, we assess the uptake and budget impact of orphan drugs in the Netherlands.
methodsWe examined the number of orphan drugs, the number of patients and budget impact of orphan drugs in the Netherlands in the period 2006 to 2012, both for inpatient and outpatient orphan drugs. Budget impact was provided in absolute numbers and relative to total pharmaceutical spending.
resultsThe number of orphan drugs and patients treated increased substantially over the period studied. Overall, budget impact increased substantially over a period of six years, both in absolute terms (326% increase) as well as relative to total pharmaceutical spending (278% increase). Growth rates decreased over time. In 2012, 17% of available drugs had an individual budget impact of more than €10 million per year.
conclusionsIndividual budget impact of orphan drugs is often limited, although exceptions exist. However, in total, the budget impact of orphan drugs is considerable and has grown substantially over the years. This could potentially influence reimbursement decisions for orphan drugs in the future.
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.