Uptake of orphan drugs in the WHO essential medicines lists.

Objective: We evaluated the uptake of medicines licensed as orphan drugs by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or European Medicines Agency (EMA) into the WHO Model list of essential medicines and the WHO Model list of essential medicines for children from 1977 to 2021. Methods: We collated and analysed data on drug characteristics, reasons for adding or rejecting medicines, and time between regulatory approval and inclusion in the lists. We compared trends in listing orphan drugs before and after revisions to the inclusion criteria of the essential medicines lists in 2001, as well as differences in trends for listing orphan and non-orphan drugs, respectively. Findings: The proportion of orphan drugs in the essential medicines lists increased from 1.9% (4/208) in 1977 to 14.6% (70/478) in 2021. While orphan drugs for communicable diseases have remained stable over time, we observed a considerable shift towards more orphan drugs for noncommunicable diseases, particularly for cancer. The median period for inclusion in the essential medicines lists after either FDA or EMA first approval was 13.5 years (range: 1-28 years). Limited clinical evidence base and uncertainty about the magnitude of net benefit were the most frequent reasons to reject proposals to add new orphan drugs to the essential medicines lists. Conclusion: Despite lack of a global definition of rare diseases, the essential medicines lists have broadened their scope to include medicines for rare conditions. However, the high costs of many listed orphan drugs pose accessibility and reimbursement challenges in resource-constrained settings.

The impact of scheduling ketamine as an internationally controlled substance on anaesthesia care in Sub-Saharan Africa: a case study and key informant interviews.

BACKGROUND: Access to anaesthesia and surgical care is a major problem for people living in Sub-Saharan Africa. In this region, ketamine is critical for the provision of anaesthesia care. However, efforts to control ketamine internationally as a controlled substance may significantly impact its accessibility. This research therefore aims to estimate the importance of ketamine for anaesthesia and surgical care in Sub-Saharan Africa and assess the potential impact on access to ketamine if it were to be scheduled. METHODS: This research is a mixed-methods study, comprising of a cross-sectional survey at the hospital level in Rwanda, and key informant interviews with experts on anaesthesia care in Sub-Saharan Africa. Data on availability of four anaesthetic agents were collected from hospitals (n = 54) in Rwanda. Semi-structured interviews with 10 key informants were conducted, collecting information on the importance of ketamine, the potential impact of scheduling ketamine internationally, and opinions on misuse of ketamine. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: The survey conducted in Rwanda found that availability of ketamine and propofol was comparable at around 80%, while thiopental and inhalational agents were available at only about half of the hospitals. Significant barriers impeding access to anaesthesia care were identified, including a general lack of attention given to the specialty by governments, a shortage of anaesthesiologists and migration of trained anaesthesiologists, and a scarcity of medicines and equipment. Ketamine was described as critical for the provision of anaesthesia care as a consequence of these barriers. Misuse of ketamine was not believed to be an issue by the informants. CONCLUSION: Ketamine is critical for the provision of anaesthesia care in Sub-Saharan Africa, and its scheduling would have a significantly negative impact on its availability for anaesthesia care.

Navigating the path towards successful implementation of the EU HTA Regulation: key takeaways from the 2023 Spring Convention of the European Access Academy.

BACKGROUND: The European Regulation on Health Technology Assessment (EU HTA R), effective since January 2022, aims to harmonize and improve the efficiency of common HTA across Member States (MS), with a phased implementation from January 2025. At "midterms" of the preparation phase for the implementation of the Regulation our aim was to identify and prioritize tangible action points to move forward. METHODS: During the 2023 Spring Convention of the European Access Academy (EAA), participants from different nationalities and stakeholder backgrounds discussed readiness and remaining challenges for the Regulation's implementation and identified and prioritized action points. For this purpose, participants were assigned to four working groups: (i) Health Policy Challenges, (ii) Stakeholder Readiness, (iii) Approach to Uncertainty and (iv) Challenges regarding Methodology. Top four action points for each working group were identified and subsequently ranked by all participants during the final plenary session. RESULTS: Overall "readiness" for the Regulation was perceived as neutral. Prioritized action points included the following: Health Policy, i.e. assess adjustability of MS laws and health policy processes; Stakeholders, i.e. capacity building; Uncertainty, i.e. implement HTA guidelines as living documents; Methodology, i.e. clarify the Population, Intervention, Comparator(s), Outcomes (PICO) identification process. CONCLUSIONS: At "midterms" of the preparation phase, the focus for the months to come is on executing the tangible action points identified at EAA's Spring Convention. All action points centre around three overarching themes: harmonization and standardization, capacity building and collaboration, uncertainty management and robust data. These themes will ultimately determine the success of the EU HTA R in the long run.

Monitoring Access to Child Medicines: Introducing a Standardized Set of Age-Appropriate Medicines.

Monitoring access to pediatric medicines as part of the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) agenda for 2030 requires surveying age-appropriate medicines. This study aimed to develop tracer sets of essential age-appropriate medicines for use in SDG indicator 3.b.3 or in conjunction with other methodologies for monitoring access to medicines. Two sets of medicines were developed, one for young children (1 month to 5 years) and one for school-aged children (5-12 years). Priority diseases were selected based on the global burden of disease and linked to active ingredients of first choice according to treatment guidelines and the World Health Organization (WHO) Model List of Essential Medicines for Children (EMLc). To ensure clinical relevance, the Delphi technique was employed to identify areas of (dis)agreement among clinical pediatric experts. During two consultation rounds, experts were invited to indicate (dis)agreement. Five experts per age group were largely in agreement with the initial selections, but various therapeutic alternatives were suggested for addition. A second consultation round with five experts did not lead to major adjustments. The final sets included 26 treatment options for both groups. Specific age-appropriate formulations were selected from the WHO EMLc 2023. These two globally representative tracer sets of medicines consider the particular needs of children and could aid countries in the critical monitoring of accessibility to pediatric medicines.

Access to childhood cancer medicines in South Africa: a health systems analysis of barriers and enablers.

Background: We sought to identify what barriers and facilitators determine current perceived access to childhood cancer care in South Africa through in-depth interviews with stakeholders in South Africa's public and private sectors. Methods: Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 key health system stakeholders, including policy-makers and regulators, medical insurance scheme informants, medicine suppliers, healthcare providers and civil society stakeholders. Identified barriers and facilitators in access to medicines and broader care were structured according to the pharmaceutical value chain (PVC). Results: Barriers and facilitators were identified across all components of the PVC. Key barriers included (1) a lack of political commitment to childhood cancers, (2) discontinuation of essential chemotherapeutics, (3) incomplete insurance coverage for childhood cancers, (4) stock-outs of essential medicines, (5) the inability to access care, including travel to healthcare facilities and (6) low awareness on childhood cancers among primary healthcare (PHC) workers. Proposed priority interventions included pricing flexibilities, increased transparency and consistency in decision-making and healthcare spending, and improved training of PHC staff, nurses and pharmacists on childhood cancers. Conclusion: This first comprehensive study of determinants of access to medicines used in childhood cancer in South Africa provides context-specific evidence for targeted policy development.