ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2026
Contribution of Real-World Evidence for the Orphan Medicines Approvals in the European Union Between 2000 and 2025.
Article in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 2026. 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
purposeWe aimed to assess the role of real-world data (RWD)/real-world evidence (RWE) for regulatory decision-making of the marketing authorisation approvals of orphan medicinal products (OMPs) in the European Union (EU) between 2000 and 2025.
methodsAll European public assessment reports (EPAR) of the OMPs approved in the EU between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2025 were screened for RWD/RWE submitted by the applicant in the initial application (pre-authorisation phase) and classified as 'main', 'supportive' or 'not known'. Post-authorisation measures foreseen, described in Annex II conditions or additional pharmacovigilance activities required to address specific safety concerns were checked and were included if RWD/RWE was present.
resultsRWD/RWE were present in about 80% of the marketing authorisation applications analysed. RWD had a supportive role in the benefit-risk assessment in 68% of cases and contributed to the main evidence in 21% of the cases. The RWE in the pre-authorisation phase comes from data from early access programs (36%), case reports and natural history studies used as historical controls (24%), clinical data from electronic health records (17%), and safety data from post-marketing experience in other geographic regions (11%). RWD sources in the post-authorisation phase were most commonly registries (67%), followed by electronic health records (19%).
conclusionsOur findings confirm that RWD/RWE have become an essential component of the regulatory evaluation of orphan medicinal products. In the period studied, more than 80% of the marketing authorisation approvals of OMPs contained RWD/RWE. The prevalence of RWD/RWE was higher in the post-authorisation phase (72%) than in the pre-authorisation phase (66%). In the pre-authorisation phase, the role of RWD was mainly (68%) supportive. The RWE studies in the post-authorisation phase intended to investigate specific safety concerns, including collecting long-term safety data, and evaluate effectiveness in real-world conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42717180What 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.