Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37962724›Full record

ReviewThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2024

Special FDA designations for drug development: orphan, fast track, accelerated approval, priority review, and breakthrough therapy.

Daniel Tobias Michaeli, Thomas Michaeli, Sebastian Albers, Tobias Boch, Julia Caroline Michaeli

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
53.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 94 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Drug repurposing in hereditary ataxia.npj drug discovery · 2026
    Review
  6. Fluid and Imaging Biomarkers in Huntington's Disease.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Daniel Tobias MichaeliDepartment of Medical Oncology, National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 460, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. danielmichaeli@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2913-1867
Thomas MichaeliDepartment of Personalized Oncology, University Hospital Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0293-9401
Sebastian AlbersDepartment of Orthopaedics and Sport Orthopaedics, School of Medicine, Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6688-764X
Tobias BochDepartment of Personalized Oncology, University Hospital Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8588-4180
Julia Caroline MichaeliDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6484-7161
German Cancer Research Center · DEHeidelberg University · DELMU Klinikum · DETUM Klinikum · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver the past decades, US Congress enabled the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to facilitate and expedite drug development for serious conditions filling unmet medical needs with five special designations and review pathways: orphan, fast track, accelerated approval, priority review, and breakthrough therapy.

objectivesThis study reviews the FDA's five special designations for drug development regarding their safety, efficacy/clinical benefit, clinical trials, innovation, economic incentives, development timelines, and price.

methodsWe conducted a keyword search to identify studies analyzing the impact of the FDA's special designations (orphan, fast track, accelerated approval, priority review, and breakthrough therapy) on the safety, efficacy/clinical benefit, trials, innovativeness, economic incentives, development times, and pricing of new drugs. Results were summarized in a narrative overview.

resultsExpedited approval reduces new drugs' time to market. However, faster drug development and regulatory review are associated with more unrecognized adverse events and post-marketing safety revisions. Clinical trials supporting special FDA approvals frequently use small, non-randomized, open-label designs. Required post-approval trials to monitor unknown adverse events are often delayed or not even initiated. Evidence suggests that drugs approved under special review pathways, marketed as "breakthroughs", are more innovative and deliver a higher clinical benefit than those receiving standard FDA approval. Special designations are an economically viable strategy for investors and pharmaceutical companies to develop drugs for rare diseases with unmet medical needs, due to financial incentives, expedited development timelines, higher clinical trial success rates, alongside greater prices. Nonetheless, patients, physicians, and insurers are concerned about spending money on drugs without a proven benefit or even on drugs that turn out to be ineffective. While European countries established performance- and financial-based managed entry agreements to account for this uncertainty in clinical trial evidence and cost-effectiveness, the pricing and reimbursement of these drugs remain largely unregulated in the US.

conclusionSpecial FDA designations shorten clinical development and FDA approval times for new drugs treating rare and severe diseases with unmet medical needs. Special-designated drugs offer a greater clinical benefit to patients. However, physicians, patients, and insurers must be aware that special-designated drugs are often approved based on non-robust trials, associated with more unrecognized side effects, and sold for higher prices.

Indexed as

Drug ApprovalDrug DevelopmentOrphan Drug ProductionUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationClinical Trials as TopicHumansTime FactorsUnited StatesAccelerated approvalBreakthrough therapyClinical trialDrug developmentDrug priceEfficacyEuropean medicines agencyFast trackHealthcare policyInnovationOrphan designationPharmaceutical policyPriority reviewSafetySpecial designationUS food and drug administration

Identifiers

PMID37962724
PMCPMC11283430
OpenAlexW4388653243

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.