ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences
Orphan Drugs and Diseases: A Systematic Review.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rare diseases, though individually infrequent, collectively affect over 300 million people worldwide. The development of orphan drugs to treat these conditions is hampered by regulatory inconsistencies, high costs, and limited clinical trial populations. To systematically review the current landscape of orphan drugs and rare diseases, focusing on definitions, therapeutic approaches, health economic evaluations, and stakeholder perspectives. A systematic review was conducted using 70 reference-screened articles, out of which 10 were selected based on relevance to rare diseases or orphan drug policy, economics, or clinical management. Study types included systematic and scoping reviews, observational studies, and health economic evaluations. Data extraction focused on definitions, healthcare roles, cost analyses, and clinical outcomes. Definitions of rare diseases varied globally, impacting drug approval processes. Economic evaluations revealed disparities in funding orphan drugs. Studies emphasized the growing role of pharmacists and stakeholders in therapeutic access. High-cost burdens, ethical considerations, and diagnostic advancements were recurring themes. Pediatric and syndromic rare conditions, like Duchenne muscular dystrophy and Turner syndrome, were notably covered. Effective rare disease care requires harmonized definitions, ethical pricing models, interdisciplinary healthcare roles, and evidence-based policies to ensure equitable access and sustainability.
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.