The Health Benefits, Costs, and Cost-Effectiveness of Ultraorphan Drugs.

OBJECTIVES: To examine ultraorphan drugs in terms of incremental health, costs, and cost-effectiveness compared with more prevalent disease drugs. METHODS: We identified Food and Drug Administration drug approvals from 1999 to 2019. For drugs approved for multiple indications, we considered each drug-indication pair separately. Utilizing Food and Drug Administration's orphan drug designation and US disease prevalence, we categorized drug-indication pairs as: ultraorphan (<10 000 patients), "other" orphan (≥10 000 and <200 000), and nonorphan (≥200 000). We searched the PubMed database for cost-effectiveness analyses and comparative effectiveness studies. We excluded manufacturer-funded studies. We extracted estimates of incremental health gains in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental costs associated with drug-indication pairs compared with the standard of care at the time of their approval. We compared QALY gains, added costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) using the Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney U (MWU), and Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) tests. RESULTS: Median incremental QALYs, costs, and ICERs differed across nonorphan, "other" orphan, and ultraorphan categories (Kruskal-Wallis P < .01). Compared with nonorphan drugs, ultraorphan drugs had larger QALY gains (0.700 vs 0.050, MWU P < .01, KS P < .01), larger costs ($172 231 vs $3360, MWU P < .01, KS P < .01), and larger ICERs ($1 216 184/QALY vs $114 061/QALY, MWU P < .01, KS P <.01). Compared with "other" orphan drugs, ultraorphan drugs had larger QALY gains (0.700 vs 0.310, MWU P =.65, KS P =.32), larger costs ($172 231 vs $69 308, MWU P = .03, KS P = .03), and larger ICERs ($1 216 184/QALY vs $223 472/QALY, MWU P <.01, KS P <.01). CONCLUSIONS: Novel ultraorphan drugs typically offer larger incremental health gains than drugs for more prevalent diseases, but because of their substantial added costs, are typically less cost-effective.

Three Pillars of Support for Orphan Drug Programs: Individual Valuations, Societal Valuations, and Anonymous Altruism.

OBJECTIVES: To identify and describe potential societal and individual sources of support for orphan drug programs. METHODS: The Generalized Risk-Adjusted Cost-Effectiveness method shows that acute illness and disability severity increase individuals' willingness to pay for health gains. We develop a social welfare function (SWF) that incorporates individuals' own values, combined with politically or ethically determined weights. We introduce the concept of horizontal equity-that individuals in similar situations should be treated similarly-into the SWF. Finally, we introduce anonymous altruism into individuals' utility functions-the desire to help others, without knowing their identity. RESULTS: Combined with the empirical link between disease severity and rarity, the Generalized Risk-Adjusted Cost-Effectiveness method demonstrates heightened willingness to pay for health gains for people with rare diseases, leading rational individuals to support orphan drug programs, our first pillar of support. Adding horizontal equity to the SWF further increases societal support for orphan drug programs. Anonymous altruism, focusing most strongly on those in the most-dire circumstances, leads to altruistic support for those with severe disorders. Because innovators' economic incentives lead them to focus on larger markets, anonymous altruistic individuals will increasingly prefer public investments into rare diseases over time, as private markets systematically produce gains for common diseases. CONCLUSIONS: We identified 3 supporting pillars for orphan drug programs: (1) individuals' propensity to prefer treatments for severe diseases; (2) the preference for horizontal equity in our social welfare; (3) anonymous altruism, the desire to help strangers, coupled with market incentives that underserve strangers with rare diseases.

Utilization and affordability of health insurance coverage for rare disease drugs in a first-tier city in Northeast China from 2018 to 2021: a study based on the health insurance claims database.

OBJECTIVE: The accessibility issue of orphan drugs in China is prominent. Based on real-world data from a tier-one city in Northeast China, this study aims to analyze the current usage and affordability of orphan drugs for rare diseases. METHODS: The data was sourced from the health insurance claims data of a certain city from 2018 to 2021, including a total of 16 orphan drugs. The utilization of orphan drugs is assessed using four indicators: frequency of medical insurance claims, medication cost, defined daily doses (DDDs), and defined daily drug cost (DDDc). Affordability is measured using the concept of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE). RESULTS: Between January 2018 and December 2021, there were a total of 2,851 medical insurance claims in the city, with a total medication costs of $3.08 million. Overall, during the study, there was a year-on-year increase in the utilization frequency of individual rare disease drugs in the city, with DDDs rising from 140.22 in 2018 to 3983.63 in 2021. Additionally, the annual medication costs of individual drugs showed a consistent upward trend, increasing from $10,953.53 in 2018 to $120,491.36 in 2021. However, the DDDc of individual drugs decreased from $398.12 in 2018 to $96.65 in 2021.The number of sales and the amount of sales for orphan drugs in community pharmacies have significantly increased. Prior to medical insurance coverage, out of the 16 orphan drugs, 9 drugs had annual treatment costs exceeding CHE for urban residents, and 15 drugs had annual treatment costs exceeding CHE for rural residents. After medical insurance coverage, there were no drugs with out-of-pocket costs exceeding CHE for urban residents, while 8 drugs had out-of-pocket costs exceeding CHE for rural residents. Furthermore, both before and after medical insurance coverage, the four treatment drugs for idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension were more affordable compared to the four treatment drugs for multiple sclerosis. CONCLUSION: The usage frequency of orphan drugs in a certain city increased gradually, but the disease burden remained heavy. More policy support should be provided to the priority rare disease populations, and the rare disease medical security and diagnosis and treatment systems should be improved.

Strengths and limitations of new artificial intelligence tool for rare disease epidemiology.

The recent paper by Kariampuzha et al. describes an exciting application of artificial intelligence to rare disease epidemiology. The authors' AI model appears to offer a major leap over Orphanet, the resource which is often a "first stop" for basic epidemiological data on rare diseases. To ensure appropriate use of this exciting tool, it is important to consider its strengths and weaknesses in context. The tool currently incorporates only PubMed abstracts, so key information located in the full text of articles is absent. Such missing information may include incidence and prevalence values, as well as important elements of study design and context. Additionally, results from the public version of the tool differ from those described in the original article, including obsolete values for prevalence and the use of non-prevalence studies in place of those listed in the article. At present, it would be appropriate to utilize the AI tool much like Orphanet: a helpful "first stop" which should be manually checked for completeness and accuracy. Users should understand the benefits of this exciting technology, and that it is not yet a panacea for the challenges of analyzing rare disease epidemiology.

Do Reimbursement Recommendations by the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health Translate Into Coverage Decisions for Orphan Drugs in the Canadian Province of Ontario?

OBJECTIVES: Unlike other high-income countries, Canada has no national policy for drugs treating rare diseases (orphan drugs). Nevertheless, in 2022, the Canadian government committed to creating a national strategy to make access to these drugs more consistent. Our aim was to study whether recommendations made by the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health (CADTH) translated into coverage decisions for orphan drugs in Ontario, the largest Canadian province. This study is the first to look at this question for orphan drugs, which are at the center of policy attention. METHODS: We included 155 orphan drug-indication pairs approved and marketed in Canada between October 2002 and April 2022. Cohen's kappa was used to test the agreement across health technology assessment (HTA) recommendations and coverage decisions in Ontario. Logistic regression was used to test which factors, relevant to decision-makers, might be associated with funding in Ontario. RESULTS: We found only fair agreement between CADTH's recommendations and coverage decisions in Ontario. Although a positive and statistically significant association between favorable HTA recommendations and coverage was found, more than half of the drugs with a negative HTA recommendation were available in Ontario, predominately through specialized funds. Successful pan-Canadian pricing negotiations were a strong predictor of coverage in Ontario. CONCLUSIONS: Despite efforts to harmonize access to drugs across Canada, considerable room for improvement remains. Introducing a national strategy for orphan drugs could help increase transparency, consistency, promote collaborations, and make access to orphan drugs a national priority.

Novel approach to decision making for orphan drugs.

BACKGROUND: Out of 185 orphan medicinal products (OMPs) registered in 2015-2021, a mere 110 (59 percent) were available to Czech patients, and only 54 (29 percent) were officially reimbursed. Moreover, this proportion has steadily decreased over time. After years of public debate induced by this unsatisfactory OMP patient access, the national viewpoint shifted toward creating a special pathway for the reimbursement of OMP. Thus, a rigorous pricing and reimbursement procedure with strict timelines and elaborated methodology has been recently adopted in Czechia. METHODOLOGY: The innovative legislation follows the recommendations for value assessment and funding processes for rare diseases and incorporates additional elements of value, such as the societal perspective. First, the application with clinical evidence, cost-effectiveness, and budget impact analyses is submitted to the governmental health technology assessment (HTA) agency by the Marketing Authorization Holder or a Health Insurance Fund. Moreover, professional associations and patients' organizations are rightful participants in the proceeding, providing evidence and comments. Then, the HTA agency performs the assessment/appraisal of the evidence. It subsequently publishes the assessment report summarizing available information. The report is then forwarded to the Ministry of Health and its advisory body consisting of patients, clinical experts, health insurance funds, and the State. They critically evaluate the documents and issue a binding opinion following prespecified decision-making criteria. Based on this binding opinion, the decision is issued by the HTA agency. Thus, the role of the advisory body in this process is crucial. CONCLUSION: We believe that this novel approach may offer satisfactory patient access to orphan drugs. Moreover, it serves as a real-world example of "value-based" decision making.

Top Selling (2026) Small Molecule Orphan Drugs: A Journey into Their Chemistry.

This review describes, from a chemical point of view, the top "blockbuster" small molecule orphan drugs according to their forecasted sales in 2026. Orphan drugs are intended for the treatment, prevention, or diagnosis of a rare disease or condition. These molecules are mostly addressed to the treatment of rare forms of cancer. The respiratory and central nervous systems represent other common therapeutic subcategories. This work will show how the orphan drugs market has significantly grown and will account for a consistent part of prescriptions by 2026.

Deferiprone and Iron-Maltol: Forty Years since Their Discovery and Insights into Their Drug Design, Development, Clinical Use and Future Prospects.

The historical insights and background of the discovery, development and clinical use of deferiprone (L1) and the maltol-iron complex, which were discovered over 40 years ago, highlight the difficulties, complexities and efforts in general orphan drug development programs originating from academic centers. Deferiprone is widely used for the removal of excess iron in the treatment of iron overload diseases, but also in many other diseases associated with iron toxicity, as well as the modulation of iron metabolism pathways. The maltol-iron complex is a recently approved drug used for increasing iron intake in the treatment of iron deficiency anemia, a condition affecting one-third to one-quarter of the world's population. Detailed insights into different aspects of drug development associated with L1 and the maltol-iron complex are revealed, including theoretical concepts of invention; drug discovery; new chemical synthesis; in vitro, in vivo and clinical screening; toxicology; pharmacology; and the optimization of dose protocols. The prospects of the application of these two drugs in many other diseases are discussed under the light of competing drugs from other academic and commercial centers and also different regulatory authorities. The underlying scientific and other strategies, as well as the many limitations in the present global scene of pharmaceuticals, are also highlighted, with an emphasis on the priorities for orphan drug and emergency medicine development, including the roles of the academic scientific community, pharmaceutical companies and patient organizations.

[The rare diseases and orphan medications: Placement in health care of the Russian Federation].

The rare diseases are characterized both by relatively small prevalence in population and complexity of medical care support of patients. In this particular case, the legal regulation of medical care takes its particular placement in health care. The uniqueness of rare diseases requires development of special normative legal acts, definitions and treating approaches. One of such approaches are orphan drugs that also are unique, complicated in development and require special legislative regulation. The article presents corresponding legislative terminology in modern Russian health care, actual listings of rare diseases and orphan drugs. The directions to improve current terminology and normative legal regulation are proposed.

Methods and criteria for the assessment of orphan drugs: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify different criteria for priority setting of rare diseases to help policy makers in making evidence-informed decisions. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted to comprehensively examine the existing various methods and criteria for prioritizing orphan drugs and rare diseases. We performed searching in Scopus, PubMed, Embase, and websites of health technology assessment (HTA) agencies, 2000-21, and data were extracted. RESULTS: From the 1,580 identified publications, eleven articles were included. Multicriteria decision analysis was the most frequent method (seven out of eleven studies) used for priority setting. The extracted criteria for priority setting of orphan products were analyzed based on six main categories as follows: health outcomes and clinical implications (six subsets which showed clinical implications), economic aspects (four subsets that indicated the economic effects of orphan drugs and rare diseases), disease and population characteristics (six subsets that included the characteristics of the rare diseases), therapeutic alternatives and uniqueness of orphan technologies (two subsets which discussed the alternatives and uniqueness of orphan technologies), evidence (three subsets which regarded the quality and availability of evidence), and other criteria (three subsets dealing with social and organizational criteria). Cost-effectiveness, budget impact, and disease severity were the most frequent criteria in the studies. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the high price of orphan drugs and limitations of using HTA for reimbursement of them, it is critical to explore them by precise technical methods like multiple criteria decision making in priority setting.

The challenge of institutionalised complicity: Researching the pharmaceutical industry in the era of impact and engagement.

The pharmaceutical industry plays a central role in the production of the drugs we use to treat most illnesses. It is immensely powerful and has received sustained attention from sociologists of health and illness, who have provided a critique of its influence and sometimes unethical behaviour. However, in recent years, funders are increasingly expecting researchers to engage and collaborate with stakeholders, including industry. This raises important questions about the institutionalisation of complicity and the different forms this might take. This article asks: How can sociologists engage with the pharmaceutical industry in a positive and constructive manner, whilst remaining independent, principled and critical? It will draw on my experience of establishing a major project on high-priced drugs for rare diseases and the literature on collaboration, stakeholder engagement and responsible research to propose a methodological framework to address this challenge. This is based on six PRIMES: (normative) Principles, Reflection and Independence, (field) Mapping, (careful) Engagement and Strategic intervention that have broad applications to many other areas of contemporary social science research.

Systematic Review: Drug Repositioning for Congenital Disorders of Glycosylation (CDG).

Advances in research have boosted therapy development for congenital disorders of glycosylation (CDG), a group of rare genetic disorders affecting protein and lipid glycosylation and glycosylphosphatidylinositol anchor biosynthesis. The (re)use of known drugs for novel medical purposes, known as drug repositioning, is growing for both common and rare disorders. The latest innovation concerns the rational search for repositioned molecules which also benefits from artificial intelligence (AI). Compared to traditional methods, drug repositioning accelerates the overall drug discovery process while saving costs. This is particularly valuable for rare diseases. AI tools have proven their worth in diagnosis, in disease classification and characterization, and ultimately in therapy discovery in rare diseases. The availability of biomarkers and reliable disease models is critical for research and development of new drugs, especially for rare and heterogeneous diseases such as CDG. This work reviews the literature related to repositioned drugs for CDG, discovered by serendipity or through a systemic approach. Recent advances in biomarkers and disease models are also outlined as well as stakeholders' views on AI for therapy discovery in CDG.

[Evidence-based health care with pharmaceuticals for rare diseases: the role of digitalisation]. / Evidenzbasierte Arzneimittelversorgung bei Seltenen Erkrankungen: die Rolle der Digitalisierung.

Knowledge generation in the field of drug development for people with rare diseases (RDs) faces particular difficulties. This paper will show what improvements are expected from increasing digitalisation from the perspective of three healthcare institutions: the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care and the Federal Joint Committee.First, the potential of digitalisation to increase the efficiency of clinical development and regulatory decision-making through earlier collaboration of all stakeholders is proposed. Subsequently, it is argued that digitalisation should be used to reduce barriers to the implementation of care-associated randomised controlled trials, including those based on registries. High-quality registry studies should not only be started after approval but during the approval process, so that the evidence necessary for therapy decisions is available promptly after approval. Finally, it is stated that improving the evidence base through qualitative improvement of the data sources and their linkages directly benefits patients. Usable evidence that can be generated over a longer period of time - also beyond approval - and contribute to decisions within healthcare system ensures effective drug provision.The institutions agree that high-quality indication registries should be developed as product-independent, standing infrastructures so that high-quality data can be accessed early in the development of medicines for RD.

Financing of Rare Diseases and Orphan Drugs in A Sanctioned Country: A Qualitative Study.

Background: Rare diseases-related services, care, and drugs (Orphan Drugs) in a lower-middle-income country such as Iran with international limitations due to the sanctions is a challenging issue in terms of their financing and providing. This study aims to address financing issues related to rare diseases in a lower-middle-income country that is under international sanctions. Methods: This is a qualitative study that has been conducted through 14 interviews with experts from different stakeholders in the country to find the challenges of financing rare diseases and orphan drugs in Iran through a content analysis according to Mayring's approach. We accomplished this study based on the World Health Organization's universal health coverage model. Results: We achieved four themes and 12 sub-themes. The themes are the unstable and sanctioned economy including 4 sub-themes; extending the covered population by the social security net in the country including 2 sub-themes; reducing the cost-sharing for the covered population including 4 sub-themes; including more orphan drugs and services including 2 sub-themes. Conclusion: The financing of rare diseases and orphan drugs in Iran is challenged by several contextual and internal factors. The political issues seem to have the main contribution of the challenge to develop an efficient and effective financing mechanism for rare diseases and orphan drugs. This is especially can be related to the politicians' commitments and pursuing an effective plan to allocate the financial resources to rare diseases. However, the country's economic situation, especially at the macro level because of international limitations, has intensified the problem.

The role of new medical treatments for the management of developmental and epileptic encephalopathies: Novel concepts and results.

Developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEEs) are among the most challenging of all epilepsies to manage, given the exceedingly frequent and often severe seizure types, pharmacoresistance to conventional antiseizure medications, and numerous comorbidities. During the past decade, efforts have focused on development of new treatment options for DEEs, with several recently approved in the United States or Europe, including cannabidiol as an orphan drug in Dravet and Lennox-Gastaut syndromes and everolimus as a possible antiepileptogenic and precision drug for tuberous sclerosis complex, with its impact on the mammalian target of rapamycin pathway. Furthermore, fenfluramine, an old drug, was repurposed as a novel therapy in the treatment of Dravet syndrome. The evolution of new insights into pathophysiological processes of various DEEs provides possibilities to investigate novel and repurposed drugs and to place them into the context of their role in future management of these patients. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of these new medical treatment options for the DEEs and to discuss the clinical implications of these results for improved treatment.

Comparison of the United Kingdom and United States approaches to approval of new neuromuscular therapies.

Many novel therapies are now available for rare neuromuscular conditions that were previously untreatable. Hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis and spinal muscular atrophy are two examples of diseases with new medications that have transformed our field. The United States and the United Kingdom have taken disparate approaches to the approval and coverage of medications, despite both providing incentives to develop therapies targeting rare diseases. The US requires less evidence for approval when compared with medications for common diseases and does not have a mechanism to ensure or even encourage cost-effectiveness. The Institute of Clinical and Economic Review provides in-depth cost-effectiveness analyses in the US, but does not have the authority to negotiate drug costs. In contrast, the UK has maintained a similar scientific threshold for approval of all therapies, while requiring negotiation with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence to ensure that medications are cost-effective for rare diseases. These differences have led to approval of medications for rare diseases in the US that have less evidence than required for common diseases. Importantly, these medications have not been approved in the UK. Even when medications meet traditional scientific thresholds, they uniformly arrive with high list prices in the US, whereas they are available at cost-effective prices in the UK. The main downsides to the UK approach are that cost-effective medications are often available months later than in the US, and some medications remain unavailable.

Developments in evidence creation for treatments of inborn errors of metabolism.

Inborn errors of metabolism (IEM) represent the first group of genetic disorders, amenable to causal therapies. In addition to traditional medical diet and cofactor treatments, new treatment strategies such as enzyme replacement and small molecule therapies, solid organ transplantation, and cell-and gene-based therapies have become available. Inherent to the rare nature of the single conditions, generating high-quality evidence for these treatments in clinical trials and under real-world conditions has been challenging. Guidelines developed with standardized methodologies have contributed to improve the practice of care and long-term clinical outcomes. Adaptive trial designs allow for changes in sample size, group allocation and trial duration as the trial proceeds. n-of-1 studies may be used in small sample sized when participants are clinically heterogeneous. Multicenter observational and registry-based clinical trials are promoted via international research networks. Core outcome and standard data element sets will enhance comparative analysis of clinical trials and observational studies. Patient-centered outcome-research as well as patient-led research initiatives will further accelerate the development of therapies for IEM.

Quantitative retrospective natural history modeling for orphan drug development.

The natural history of most rare diseases is incompletely understood and usually relies on studies with low level of evidence. Consistent with the goals for future research of rare disease research set by the International Rare Diseases Research Consortium in 2017, the purpose of this paper is to review the recently developed method of quantitative retrospective natural history modeling (QUARNAM) and to illustrate its usefulness through didactically selected analyses examples in an overall population of 849 patients worldwide with seven (ultra-) rare neurogenetic disorders. A quantitative understanding of the natural history of the disease is fundamental for the development of specific interventions and counseling afflicted families. QUARNAM has a similar relationship to a published case study as a meta-analysis has to an individual published study. QUARNAM relies on sophisticated statistical analyses of published case reports focusing on four research questions: How long does it take to make the diagnosis? How long do patients live? Which factors predict disease severity (eg, genotypes, signs/symptoms, biomarkers)? Where can patients be recruited for studies? Useful statistical techniques include Kaplan-Meier estimates, cluster analysis, regression techniques, binary decisions trees, word clouds, and geographic mapping. In comparison to other natural history study methods (prospective studies or retrospective studies such as chart reviews), QUARNAM can provide fast information on hard clinical endpoints (ie, survival, diagnostic delay) with a lower effort. The choice of method for a particular drug development program may be driven by the research question and may encompass combinatory approaches.

Haemophilia, state of the art and new therapeutic opportunities, a regulatory perspective.

Haemophilia A and B are rare bleeding disorders. Over the past decades, they have been transformed from debilitating diseases to manageable conditions in the Western world. However, optimizing haemophilia care remains challenging in developing countries. Several challenges and unmet needs remain in the treatment of the haemophilia limiting the QoL of patients. These challenges are now being addressed by extended half-life recombinant factors, rebalancing and substitution therapies. Gene therapy and genome editing show promise for a definite clinical cure. Here, we provide an overview of new therapeutic opportunities for haemophilia and their advances and limitations from a regulatory perspective. The database on human medicines from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) was used and data from rare disease (orphan) designations and EPARs were retrieved for the analysis. Clinical trial databases were used to query all active studies on haemophilia. Gene therapy medicinal products based on AAV and lentiviral vectors are in development and clinical trials have reported substantial success in ameliorating bleeding tendency in haemophilia patients. The prospect of gene editing for correction of the underlying mutation is on the horizon and has considerable potential. With regard to the benefit of the gene therapy medicinal products, more long-term efficacy and safety data are awaited. We are entering an era of innovation and abundance in treatment options for those affected by bleeding disorders, but issues remain about the affordability and accessibility to patients.

Removal of the EMA orphan designation upon request of the sponsor: cui prodest?

PURPOSE: Various incentives are provided by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to facilitate the development and marketing of orphan drugs. A 10-year period of market exclusivity is reserved to an orphan medicinal product. Sometimes, the sponsor renounces the designation before the expiration of that standard period. Our aim was to focus on these premature withdrawals. METHODS: We retrieved all the molecules included in the Community Register of Orphan Medicinal Products for Human Use from 2000 to November 2020. We considered the active substance, therapeutic indication, sponsor, year of designation, year of approval of the corresponding medicinal product, and that of the withdrawal of the orphan designation, if occurred. RESULTS: Overall, 2350 orphan designations were approved from 2000 to November 2020. Of these, 141 have been marketed. Premature withdrawal of orphan designation concerned 23 drugs (20 being antineoplastic agents), corresponding to 16 medicinal products. These withdrawals occurred after almost 2 years (range <1-7 years). CONCLUSIONS: A not negligible fraction of marketed orphan medicinal products underwent premature removal of their orphan designation. No motivation is requested by the EMA for this renouncement, although the peculiarity of the orphan medicinal products would need a greater transparency. We can only speculate about possible compensations in support of this decision, for instance in terms of commercial agreements between pharmaceutical companies, giving way to alternative products, as a couple of examples suggest. An open debate on this topic among members of academia, regulatory bodies, price and reimbursements committees, and pharmaceutical industry representatives will be welcome.