Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32456653›Full record

Trial reportOrphanet journal of rare diseases2020

TRUST4RD: tool for reducing uncertainties in the evidence generation for specialised treatments for rare diseases.

Lieven Annemans, Amr Makady

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Literature Review on Health Emigration in Rare Diseases-A Machine Learning Perspective.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Lieven AnnemansDept of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, C Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. Lieven.Annemans@UGent.be.
Amr MakadyDept of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Utrecht Faculty David de Wiedbuilding, Universiteitsweg 99, 3584, Utrecht, CG, Netherlands.
Ghent University · BEUtrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Orphan Drug ProductionRare DiseasesHumansTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalEvidence generationHealth technology assessment (HTA)Orphan medicinal product (OMP)Real world evidence (RWE)Value for money

Identifiers

PMID32456653
PMCPMC7251888
OpenAlexW3028815474

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.