ReviewOrphanet journal of rare diseases2022
HTA decision-making for drugs for rare diseases: comparison of processes across countries.
Review in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Mapping the landscape of managed entry agreements: a systematic review of global frameworks, system-level components, and implementation challenges.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Redefining value assessment and healthcare funding priorities for medicines: the journey to patient-centric decision making in APAC - a systematic literature review.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2025Pooled it
- Health technology assessment and medical insurance access for rare disease drugs in China: A policy review with quantitative insights from publicly available data.Intractable & rare diseases research · 2026Review
- Multi-criteria decision analysis of value evaluation of rare disease medical insurance drugs in China.BMC public health · 2025Article
- HTA Evidence in Rare Diseases: Just Rare or Also Special?PharmacoEconomics · 2025Review
- Engaging stakeholders along health technology assessment pathways: a scoping review of international practice.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2025Article
- ARM's Perspective on the First Joint Clinical Assessments for ATMPs: Challenges and Opportunities on the Path Ahead.Journal of market access & health policy · 2025Article
- A bibliometric study of rare diseases in English and Chinese databases from 1985 to 2024 based on CiteSpace.Intractable & rare diseases research · 2025Article
- Rare disease publishing trends worldwide and in China: A CiteSpace-based bibliometric study.Intractable & rare diseases research · 2025Article
- Article
- Investigation of Differences Between Manufacturers and Public Analyses in Health Technology Assessment in Japan.Journal of health economics and outcomes research · 2025Article
- Challenges in evaluation and reimbursement of drugs for rare diseases in Saudi Arabia: a Delphi expert consensus.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2025Article
- A Comparative Analysis of International Drug Price Negotiation Frameworks: An Interview Study of Key Stakeholders.The Milbank quarterly · 2024Article
- Review of clinical trials and guidelines for children and youth with mucopolysaccharidosis: outcome selection and measurement.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2024Review
- Federal Funding for Expensive Drugs for Rare Diseases: How Do We Pick and Choose?Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2024Article
- Understanding the Normativity of Health Technology Assessment: Ontological, Moral, and Epistemological Commitments.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2024Article
- 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
- Exploring the landscape of health technology assessment in Iran: perspectives from stakeholders on needs, demand and supply.Health research policy and systems · 2024Review
- Are We Capturing the Socioeconomic Burden of Rare Genetic Disease? A Scoping Review of Economic Evaluations and Cost-of-Illness Studies.PharmacoEconomics · 2023Article
- Challenges in the Evaluation of Emerging Highly Specialised Technologies: Is There a Role for Living HTA?Applied health economics and health policy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDrugs for rare diseases (DRDs) offer important health benefits, but challenge traditional health technology assessment, reimbursement, and pricing processes due to limited effectiveness evidence. Recently, modified processes to address these challenges while improving patient access have been proposed in Canada. This review examined processes in 12 jurisdictions to develop recommendations for consideration during formal government-led multi-sectoral discussions currently taking place in Canada.
methods(i) A scoping review of DRD reimbursement processes, (ii) key informant interviews, (iii) a case study of evaluations for and the reimbursement status of a set of 7 DRDs, and (iv) a virtual, multi-stakeholder consultation retreat were conducted.
resultsOnly NHS England has a process specifically for DRDs, while Italy, Scotland, and Australia have modified processes for eligible DRDs. Almost all consider economic evaluations, budget impact analyses, and patient-reported outcomes; but less than half accept surrogate measures. Disease severity, lack of alternatives, therapeutic value, quality of evidence, and value for money are factors used in all decision-making process; only NICE England uses a cost-effectiveness threshold. Budget impact is considered in all jurisdictions except Sweden. In Italy, France, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom, specific factors are considered for DRDs. However, in all jurisdictions opportunities for clinician/patient input are the same as those for other drugs. Of the 7 DRDs included in the case study, the number that received a positive reimbursement recommendation was highest in Germany and France, followed by Spain and Italy. No relationship between recommendation type and specific elements of the pricing and reimbursement process was found.
conclusionsBased on the collective findings from all components of the project, seven recommendations for possible action in Canada are proposed. These focus on defining "appropriate access", determining when a "full" HTA may not be needed, improving coordination among stakeholder groups, developing a Canadian framework for Managed Access Plans, creating a pan-Canadian DRD/rare disease data infrastructure, genuine and continued engagement of patient groups and clinicians, and further research on different decision and financing options, including MAPs.
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.