[Participant-funded clinical trials on rare diseases]. / Ensayos clínicos en enfermedades raras financiados por los participantes.

The development of medicines for certain rare diseases can be frustrated by lack of funding. In certain cases the patients themselves, or their relatives, occasionally fund the clinical trial in which they will be treated with the investigational medicine. There are 3models of self-funded research: 2of them, "pay to try" and "pay to participate", have already been put into practice. The third, the "plutocratic" proposal, which has been recently put forward is still a theoretical model. In this work the scientific, social and ethical benefits and risks of the 2clinical research models, "pay to participate" and the "plutocratic" proposal, are reviewed. Patient-funded clinical trials are frequently performed through crowdfunding. The most controversial aspects of this funding modality are also addressed in this article from several perspectives. Finally, a future scenario that would allow the launching of self-funded clinical trials in Spain by the "plutocratic" proposal is proposed.

Evaluating and Valuing Drugs for Rare Conditions: No Easy Answers.

We find ourselves in an era of unprecedented growth in the development and use of so-called "orphan" drugs to treat rare diseases, which are poised to represent more than one-fifth of pharmaceutical expenditures by 2022. This widespread use has been facilitated by legislative and regulatory incentives in both the United States and abroad, yet US payers and health systems have not yet made a concerted effort to understand whether and how rare diseases require special considerations on their part and how to adapt traditional methods of health technology assessment and economic evaluation to accommodate these situations. In this article, we explore the general ethical dilemmas that rare diseases present, steps taken by health technology assessment bodies worldwide to define the level of rarity that would necessitate special measures and the modifications to their assessment and valuation processes needed, and the contextual components for rare-disease evaluation that lie outside of the assessment framework as a guide to US decision makers on constructing a formal and relevant process stateside.

Ethics and Medical Toxicology Research.

Optimizing care in medical toxicology necessitates designing and conducting ethical research. Nevertheless, the context of medical toxicology can make clinical research ethically challenging for a variety of reasons: medical toxicology is typified by relative rare conditions; making precise and rapid diagnoses is often fraught with uncertainty; emergent and urgent clinical exigencies make consent difficult or impossible; and some exposures are stigmatized or related to illegal activities that can compromise collecting accurate data from patients. In this paper, we examine some of the ethical issues in medical toxicology research that are especially salient in effort to promote optimal research in the field. The particular issues to be addressed are as follows: (1) rare conditions and orphan agents, (2) randomization and control arms, (3) inclusion and exclusion criteria, (4) outcome measures, (5) consent, (6) confidentiality, (7) registries, (8) oversight, and (9) transparency and reporting. Thinking about these ethical issues prospectively will help researchers and clinicians appropriately navigate them.

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.

Ethical, legal and social implications of rare diseases and orphan drugs in Europe: meeting report of a Brocher symposium.

Ethical, legal and social implications of rare diseases and orphan drugs in Europe (Brocher symposium) Geneva, Switzerland 18-19 April 2013 As part of the Scientific Program of the Fondation Brocher, a two-day symposium on orphan drugs and rare diseases was held on the shores of Lac Léman in Geneva. Specific focus was on the ethical, legal and social implications of rare diseases and orphan drugs in Europe. The symposium gathered about 30 international stakeholders and experts, representing different scientific disciplines, the pharmaceutical industry and patient representatives.

Ethical considerations in orphan drug approval and use.

The Orphan Drug Act seeks to meet a utilitarian goal of advancing therapeutic options for patients with rare diseases. However, data show that orphan drugs are often approved with more limited premarket testing than that carried out for nonorphan drugs and consequently expose patients to more risk and less certain efficacy. Therefore, the ethical principles of justice and beneficence may require attention to informed consent among patients receiving the drugs and greater investment in postmarket surveillance and confirmational testing.

The need for worldwide policy and action plans for rare diseases.

UNLABELLED: There are more than 6000 rare diseases (defined as affecting <5/10 000 individuals in Europe, <200 000 people in the United States). The rarity can create problems including: difficulties in obtaining timely, accurate diagnoses; lack of experienced healthcare providers; useful, reliable and timely information may be hard to find; research activities are less common; developing new medicines may not be economically feasible; treatments are sometimes very expensive; and in developing countries, the problems are compounded by other resource limitations. Emphasis is required to support appropriate research and development leading to better prevention, diagnosis and treatments of rare diseases. Notably, clinical trials using already existing drugs may result in new, affordable, treatment strategies. Moreover, rare diseases may teach us about common disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Countries are encouraged to implement specific research and development activities within their individual capabilities, so that patients worldwide have equal access to necessary interventions to maximize the potential of every individual.

Ethical issues related to the access to orphan drugs in Brazil: the case of mucopolysaccharidosis type I.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Mucopolysaccharidosis type I (MPS I) is a rare lysosomal storage disorder treated with bone marrow transplantation or enzyme replacement therapy with laronidase, a high-cost orphan drug. Laronidase was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency in 2003 and by the Brazilian National Health Surveillance Agency in 2005. Many Brazilian MPS I patients have been receiving laronidase despite the absence of a governmental policy regulating access to the drug. Epidemiological and treatment data concerning MPS I are scarce. This study aims to present a demographic profile of Brazilian patients with MPS I, describe the routes of access to laronidase in Brazil, and discuss associated ethical issues relating to public funding of orphan drugs. METHODS: In this cross-sectional observational study, data were collected nationwide between January and September 2008 from physicians, public institutions and non-governmental organisations involved with diagnosis and treatment of MPS I, using two data collection instruments specifically designed for this purpose. RESULTS: The minimum prevalence of MPS I in Brazil was estimated at 1/2,700,000. Most patients (69.8%) were younger than 15 years; 60 (88.2%) received laronidase. The most common route of access to the drug was through lawsuits (86.6%). CONCLUSIONS: In Brazil, MPS I is predominantly a paediatric illness. Even though the cost of laronidase treatment is not officially covered by the Brazilian government, most MPS I patients receive the drug, usually through litigation. This gives rise to major ethical conflicts concerning drug access in a low-resource context. The Brazilian health policy framework lacks evidence-based clinical protocols for the distribution of orphan drugs.

Ethical aspects on rare diseases.

In this chapter we discuss several of the most relevant subjects related to ethics on Rare Diseases. Some general aspects are discussed such as the socio-psychological problems that confront the patients and their families that finally lead to marginalization and exclusion of patients affected by these diseases from the health programs, even in wealthy countries. Then we address problems related to diagnosis and some ethical aspects of newborn screening, prenatal, pre-implantation diagnosis and reference centers, as well as some conditions that should be met by the persons and institutions performing such tasks. Alternatives of solutions for the most critical situations are proposed. Subsequently the orphan drugs subject is discussed not only from the availability point of view, prizes, industrial practices, and purchasing power in developed and developing societies. The research related to rare disease in children and other especially vulnerable conditions, the need for informed consent, review boards or ethics comities, confidentiality of the information, biobanks and pharmacogenetics are discussed.

The Health Impact Fund: a potential solution to inequity in global drug access.

Global health inequities persist despite significant increases in funding and a growing number of global health initiatives. Especially vulnerable to disease, the poor majority of the world's population currently cannot afford advanced medicines, and the diseases confined to the poor receive little attention from pharmaceutical research. As a complement to the existing intellectual property regime, we have proposed the Health Impact Fund (HIF) as a mechanism that would create incentives for the development and optimal promotion of new high-impact medicines sold at the cost of manufacture. In this article, we outline the HIF and its ethical significance.

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.