Trial reportOrphanet journal of rare diseases2020
TRUST4RD: tool for reducing uncertainties in the evidence generation for specialised treatments for rare diseases.
Trial report in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Drivers of managed entry agreements to reduce reimbursement challenges of orphan medicinal products: the development of a matrix.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Demonstrating transportability of real-world evidence: what do HTA bodies and health technology developers need?International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026Review
- Recommended methods for the collection of clinical expert judgment in rare diseases: Generating evidence to support reimbursement of orphan drugs.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2025Article
- Planning Post-Launch Evidence Generation: Lessons From France, England and Spain.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Review
- Article
- Navigating the unknown: how to best 'reflect' standard of care in indications without a dedicated treatment pathway in health technology assessment submissions.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2024Review
- Response to uncertainty management in regulatory and health technology assessment decision-making on drugs: guidance of the HTAi-DIA Working Group - author's reply.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2023Article
- Response to "UNCERTAINTY MANAGEMENT IN REGULATORY AND HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT DECISION-MAKING ON DRUGS: GUIDANCE OF THE HTAi-DIA WORKING GROUP".International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2023Article
- Exploring the feasibility of using the ICER Evidence Rating Matrix for Comparative Clinical Effectiveness in assessing treatment benefit and certainty in the clinical evidence on orphan therapies for paediatric indications.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2023Article
- Literature Review on Health Emigration in Rare Diseases-A Machine Learning Perspective.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- What, Where, and How to Collect Real-World Data and Generate Real-World Evidence to Support Drug Reimbursement Decision-Making in Asia: A reflection Into the Past and A Way Forward.International journal of health policy and management · 2023Article
- How to balance valuable innovation with affordable access to medicines in Belgium?Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Gene Therapy Evidence Generation and Economic Analysis: Pragmatic Considerations to Facilitate Fit-for-Purpose Health Technology Assessment.Frontiers in public health · 2022Review
- Use of Real-World Data and Evidence in Drug Development of Medicinal Products Centrally Authorized in Europe in 2018-2019.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2022Article
- Multifactorial Rare Diseases: Can Uncertainty Analysis Bring Added Value to the Search for Risk Factors and Etiopathogenesis?Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Review
- The Impasse on Overall Survival in Oncology Reimbursement Decision-Making: How Can We Resolve This?Cancer management and research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany treatments developed for rare diseases will have an Orphan Medicinal Product (OMP) designation, indicating that they are likely to deliver benefit in an area of high unmet need. Their approval may be based on a small or uncontrolled trial, as randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of sufficient size are often difficult to conduct, or repeat, as a result of the rarity of the condition, sparsity of patients, or for ethical reasons. Furthermore, many products are given a conditional marketing authorisation, requiring additional evidence to be collected after product launch. This is even more challenging with the advent of advanced therapeutic medicinal products, which use novel scientific approaches like gene or somatic cell therapy. ISSUE: Given the high unmet need associated with these products, there is pressure for Health Technology Assessment (HTA)/reimbursement bodies to enable rapid access to effective treatments. However, there is often only limited evidence available for assessment.
methodsTRUST4RD proposes an approach to identify uncertainties of most concern for decision-makers by developing an iterative and informed dialogue amongst stakeholders (including manufacturers, clinicians, patients, regulatory- and HTA agencies and payers), so that potential approaches to resolution can be discussed. As evidence is generated, uncertainties are reviewed and prioritised, and evidence-generation plans revised or clarified accordingly. The aim is to develop - both pre- and post HTA submission - a better understanding of evidence requirements versus evidence-generation trade-offs as an evidence base grows and the potential value of a product becomes clearer.
conclusionTRUST4RD presents guidance on defining uncertainties and evidence gaps in the assessment of value and value for money of specialised treatments for rare diseases. It also provides guidance on the potential of Real World Evidence (RWE) to help address such uncertainties, including the typology of evidence uncertainties, the importance of different uncertainties and the data sources available to address them before and after HTA submission. In making use of the guidance, authorisation and reimbursement discussions on such treatments can be embedded in an evidence-rich context, thereby ensuring value to all parties, particularly to patients.
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.