ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2026
Investigator-Initiated Trials as a Clinical Development Approach for Orphan Drugs Compared with Industry-Sponsored Trials in Japan.
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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Orphan drug development faces substantial economic and operational challenges, particularly in small patient populations where conventional industry-sponsored trials (ISTs) may be difficult to conduct. In Japan, investigator-initiated trials (IITs) have been used to support the development of treatments for rare diseases and other areas of high unmet medical need; however, the characteristics of orphan drug approvals supported by IITs compared with those supported by ISTs have not been fully evaluated. This study analyzed pivotal trials supporting orphan drug approvals in Japan between 2015 and 2024 and compared the trial and regulatory characteristics of IIT- and IST-supported approvals. Among 1,269 drugs approved, 260 orphan drugs were included in the final analysis. IITs were used as pivotal trials in 11.2% of approvals. All IITs were Japan-only trials, whereas 52.4% of ISTs involved global trials. The Japanese patient population coverage ratio was higher for IIT-supported than IST-supported approvals in the overall comparison (median 2.2% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.003). However, the difference was attenuated when the comparison was restricted to Japan-only ISTs. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified additional indications, Phase II trials, and smaller estimated target populations in Japan (100-999 patients) as characteristics associated with IIT-supported approvals. When the number of study sites was modeled continuously in a sensitivity analysis, fewer study sites were associated with IIT-supported approvals. Among orphan drugs approved in Japan, IIT-supported approvals showed distinct trial characteristics compared with IST-supported approvals. These findings describe characteristics of approved IIT-supported medicines and may inform future academia-led orphan drug development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42909798What 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.