Ethical imperatives of timely access to orphan drugs: is possible to reconcile economic incentives and patients' health needs?

BACKGROUND: More than 6,800 rare diseases and conditions have been identified in the US, which affect 25-30 million Americans. In 1983, the US Congress enacted the Orphan Drug Act (ODA) to encourage the development and marketing of drugs to treat rare diseases and conditions. This study analyzed all orphan designations and FDA approvals since 1983 through 2015, discussed the effectiveness of incentives for the development of treatments for rare diseases, and reflected on the ethical imperatives for timely access to orphan drugs. METHODS: Study data were derived from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Orange Book and the Office of Orphan Drugs Development. A search was conducted to assess literature on the ethical principles and economic incentives for the development of orphan drugs. RESULTS: In the period 1983-2015, the FDA granted 3,647 orphan drug designations and 554 orphan drug approvals. The orphan drug approvals corresponded to 438 different brand names. Cancer was the therapeutic area with the highest number of approvals. The increased number of patients with rare diseases and the growth in the cost of orphan drugs pose a significant economic burden for patients, public programs and private third party payers. Regulatory differences to qualify for orphan designation and various population thresholds employed by the FDA and the European Medicines Agency lead to further unmet health needs for patients with rare diseases and aggravate health inequities. There is no societal consensus on the population and economic thresholds, the drug effectiveness indicator(s), or the societal value to be placed for the approval and reimbursement of orphan drugs. CONCLUSION: Orphan drug development and marketing in the US concentrate in few therapeutic areas. Despite the increase in the number of FDA approved orphan drugs, the unmet needs of patients with rare diseases evidence that the current incentives are not efficiently stimulating orphan drug development. There is need to balance economic incentives to stimulate the development and marketing of orphan drugs without jeopardizing patients' access to treatment. Thus, aligning pharmaceutical companies' incentives with societal budgetary constraints is necessary and the ethical imperatives of timely access to orphan drugs need to be agreed upon.

Orphan drug policies and use in pediatric nephrology.

Orphan drugs designed to treat rare diseases are often overpriced per patient. Novel treatments are sometimes even more expensive for patients with ultra-rare diseases, in part due to the limited number of patients. Pharmaceutical companies that develop a patented life-saving drug are in a position to charge a very high price, which, at best, may enable these companies to further develop drugs for use in rare disease. However, is there a limit to how much a life-saving drug should cost annually per patient? Government interventions and regulations may opt to withhold a life-saving drug solely due to its high price and cost-effectiveness. Processes related to drug pricing, reimbursement, and thereby availability, vary between countries, thus having implications on patient care. These processes are discussed, with specific focus on three drugs used in pediatric nephrology: agalsidase beta (for Fabry disease), eculizumab (for atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome), and cysteamine bitartrate (for cystinosis). Access to and costs of orphan drugs have most profound implications for patients, but also for their physicians, hospitals, insurance policies, and society at large, particularly from financial and ethical standpoints.

The US Orphan Drug Act: rare disease research stimulator or commercial opportunity?

OBJECTIVES: This study investigates issues associated with the United States Orphan Drug Act. METHODS: A comprehensive orphan drug database was compiled from FDA data and corporate annual reports of major pharmaceutical companies. Analysis allowed the generation of a descriptive orphan drug portrait as well as documentation of orphan drugs along their lifecycle. RESULTS: Currently, 2002 products have obtained orphan drug designation with 352 drugs obtaining FDA approval. Approximately 33% of orphan drugs are oncology products. On average, products obtain 1.7 orphan designations with approximately 70% obtaining a single designation. At least 9% of orphan drugs have reached blockbuster status with two-thirds having two or more designations. An additional 25 orphan drugs had sales exceeding US$ 100 million in 2008 alone. Since 1983, at least 14 previously discontinued products have been recycled as orphan drugs. CONCLUSIONS: The United States Orphan Drug Act has created issues which, in some cases, have led to commercial and ethical abuses. Orphan Drug Act reform is necessary but current incentives, including 7 year market exclusivity, should be maintained in order to favour patients as well as economic prosperity. Suggested reforms include price regulation, subsidy paybacks for profitable drugs and the establishment of an International Orphan Drug Office.

[Principle of protection and treatment of rare genetic diseases in Brazil: the case of lysosomal storage disorders]. / Bioética da proteção e tratamento de doenças genéticas raras no Brasil: o caso das doenças de depósito lisossomal.

This study aimed to discuss the morality of public funding for highly expensive orphan drugs for treatment of rare genetic diseases, using tools from bioethics, especially the principle of protection, applicable to vulnerable individuals and populations. Based on this principle, and considering the provisions of the Unified National Health System (SUS), the article argues for the state's moral obligation to provide public policies to ensure care for individuals with genetic diseases like lysosomal storage disorders, who can thus be viewed as 'injured', besides suggesting measures to implement and ensure the sustainability of policies with an emphasis on resource allocation, targeting, and equity.