Impact of restricted access to, and low awareness of, mexiletine on people with myotonia: a real-world European survey.

Although mexiletine effectively treats myotonia, supply disruptions affected Europe between 2008-2018. MyoPath was a mixed-methods, cross-sectional, market research survey conducted January-June 2018 to evaluate consequences of limited access to/awareness of mexiletine in people with myotonia. Part A: qualitative structured interviews (clinicians; advocates for adult patients); Part B: quantitative online questionnaire completed by people with self-reported history of myotonia. Part A: Interviews (clinicians, n=12; patient advocates, n=5; 12 countries) indicated poor mexiletine awareness among general neurologists. Patients chose between living with myotonia (other treatments were generally unsatisfactory) or importing mexiletine. Part B: Questionnaire respondents, myotonic dystrophy (DM)1, n=213; DM2, n=128; non-dystrophic myotonia (NDM), n=41; other n=8; (11 countries). Of the respondents, 76/390 (20%) people with awareness of/access to mexiletine described profound improvements in myotonia and health-related quality of life following treatment. Respondents with NDM had greatest mexiletine experience (n=28/41). Mexiletine was associated with fewer falls, less muscle stiffness, increased mobility. Treatment interruptions worsened myotonia and were associated with fatigue, pain, dysphagia, breathing difficulty, impaired digestion, poor sleep. However, 36/54 (67%) of currently treated people expressed anxiety about mexiletine's availability: this finding was expected (MyoPath was undertaken before mexiletine's approval in NDM). MyoPath provides the largest European exploration of patients' views regarding impact of mexiletine on myotonia. Anticipated effects of mexiletine differ between people with different myotonic disorders: myotonia is the main symptom in NDM but one of many potential symptoms affecting those with DM. Nevertheless, findings indicate substantial harm caused to people with myotonia when mexiletine awareness/access is limited.

Assessing the Preferences for Criteria in Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis in Treatments for Rare Diseases.

Background: Increasingly, multi-criteria decision analysis has gained importance as a method by which to assess the value of orphan drugs. However, very little attention has been given to the weight (relative preferences) of the individual criteria used in a framework. Aims: This study sought to gain an understanding of the preferential weights that should be allocated in a multi-criteria decision analysis framework for orphan drugs, from a multi-stakeholder perspective. Method: Using key MCDA criteria for orphan drugs reported in the literature, we developed an interactive web-based survey tool to capture preferences for different criteria from a general stakeholder sample who were requested to assign weights from a reimbursement perspective. Each criterion could be assigned a weight on a sliding scale from 0 to 100% as long as the sum of all the criteria was 100%. We subsequently used the interactive tool with an expert focus group, followed up with a group discussion regarding each criterion and their perspectives on the weight that each criterion should be allocated when assessing an orphan drug. The expert focus group participants were then able to adjust their weights, if the group discussion had changed their perspectives. Results: The interactive tool was completed by 120 general stakeholder sample from a wide range of countries and professional backgrounds and an expert focus group of ten members. The results showed the differences in perspectives on the importance of criteria. Both groups considered Treatment efficacy to be the most important criterion. The general stakeholder sample weighted Treatment safety at 12.03% compared to the expert focus group's average of 20%. The results also demonstrated the value of the group discussion, which provided additional insights into the perspectives on the importance of criteria in assessing orphan drugs. Conclusion: This study aimed to contribute to the important aspect of preferences for different criteria in MCDA. This study sheds light on the important aspect of the preferences of the different criteria. All respondents agreed on the relative importance of Treatment efficacy and Treatment safety, criteria that are captured in conventional cost-effectiveness studies, but they also expressed the view that in addition to those, several disease-related and drug-related criteria should be included in MCDA frameworks for assessing orphan drugs.

Metastatic Renal Cell Cancer: An Analysis of Reimbursement Decisions.

INTRODUCTION: Metastatic renal cell carcinoma is a complex cancer for which several drugs have been developed over the years. More recently, drugs that target the specific cancer cell mutations have been developed for metastatic cell carcinoma. However, even with the recent influx of targeted therapy options, significant unmet needs exist in around half of treated renal cell carcinoma patients following the failure of first-line therapy. The aim of this study was to review the health technology appraisals of renal cell carcinoma treatments in several countries to establish what factors might affect the reimbursement decisions. METHODS: The reimbursement data for 10 drugs in several countries were collated from the health technology assessment bodies for each country. The data included information on clinical trials used in the submission documents for the health technology assessment, the reimbursement decisions and the reasons for those decisions, as well as any specific restrictions for use of any of the included drugs. RESULTS: Of the 10 drugs reviewed, only everolimus received a positive reimbursement decision by all the health technology assessment bodies included in the study. The most common reason for a negative reimbursement decision was lack of demonstration of cost-effectiveness of the drugs. Another frequently cited reason was unproven clinical efficacy and poor impact on overall survival. CONCLUSION: Despite the many treatment guidelines and current treatment options that are available for renal cell carcinoma, there remains an unmet need in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. On the basis of this analysis, the key reason for a drug not obtaining a positive reimbursement decision is due to poor efficacy or uncertainty of the drug's efficacy. FUNDING: Eisai, Inc.

Toxoplasmic encephalitis relapse rates with pyrimethamine-based therapy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Toxoplasmic encephalitis (TE) is caused by Toxoplasma gondii infection and can be a life-threatening disease in immunocompromised patients. This study evaluated the rate of relapse associated with pyrimethamine-based maintenance therapy (i.e. secondary prophylaxis) in patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or AIDs treated prior to and after the common use (i.e. 1996) of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) (pre-HAART and post-HAART, respectively). PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases were searched to 6 June 2016 using search terms: pyrimethamine, Daraprim, Fansidar, Metakelfin, Fansimef, 5-(4-chlorophenyl)-6-ethyl-2,4-pyrimidinediamine, encephalitis, cerebral, toxoplasmosis, toxoplasmic, and gondii. Single-arm cohort, retrospective, and randomized studies were included. Twenty-six studies with 1,596 patients were included in the analysis; twenty pre-HAART (n = 1,228) studies and six post-HAART (n = 368) were performed. Pooled proportions test for pyrimethamine-based therapy from pre-HAART studies indicated a relapse rate of 19.2% and 18.9% from the fixed-effects and random-effects models, respectively. The relapse rate in the post-HAART studies was 11.1% (fixed and random effects). Continuous therapy was suggestive of lower incidence of relapse compared with intermittent therapy in the pre-HAART era (range, 18.7 to 17.3% vs. 20.9 to 25.6%, respectively). These findings indicate that the likelihood of relapse associated with pyrimethamine-based therepy in patients with HIV and TE decreased after the introduction of HAART to approximately 11%. The findings have important implications as relapse may affect a patient's disease severity and prognosis, increase utilization of health care resources, and result in additional health care expenditure.

Estimating the budget impact of orphan drugs in Sweden and France 2013-2020.

BACKGROUND: The growth in expenditure on orphan medicinal products (OMP) across Europe has been identified as a concern. Estimates of future expenditure in Europe have suggested that OMPs could account for a significant proportion of total pharmaceutical expenditure in some countries, but few of these forecasts have been well validated. This analysis aims to establish a robust forecast of the future budget impact of OMPs on the healthcare systems in Sweden and France. METHODS: A dynamic forecasting model was created to estimate the budget impact of OMPs in Sweden and France between 2013 and 2020. The model used historical data on OMP designation and approval rates to predict the number of new OMPs coming to the market. Average OMP sales were estimated for each year post-launch by regression analysis of historical sales data. Total forecast sales were compared with expected sales of all pharmaceuticals in each country to quantify the relative budget impact. RESULTS: The model predicts that by 2020, 152 OMPs will have marketing authorization in Europe. The base case OMP budget impacts are forecast to grow from 2.7% in Sweden and 3.2% in France of total drug expenditure in 2013 to 4.1% in Sweden and 4.9% in France by 2020. The principal driver of expenditure growth is the number of new OMPs obtaining OMP designation. This is tempered by the slowing success rate for new approvals and the loss of intellectual property protection on existing orphan medicines. Given the forward-looking nature of the analysis, uncertainty exists around model parameters and sensitivity analysis found peak year budget impact varying between 2% and 11%. CONCLUSION: The budget impact of OMPs in Sweden and France is likely to remain sustainable over time and a relatively small proportion of total pharmaceutical expenditure. This forecast could be affected by changes in the success rate for OMP approvals, average cost of OMPs, and the type of companies developing OMPs.

Estimating the budget impact of orphan medicines in Europe: 2010 - 2020.

BACKGROUND: Orphan drugs are a growing issue of importance to European healthcare policy makers. The success of orphan drug legislation in Europe has resulted in an increasing number of licensed medicines for rare diseases, and many more yet unlicensed products have received orphan drug designation. Increasingly the concerns amongst policy makers relate to issues of patient access and affordability, yet few studies have sought to estimate the future budget impact of orphan drugs. The aim of this study was to predict the total cost of orphan medicines in Europe between 2010 and 2020 as a percentage of total European pharmaceutical expenditure. METHODS: A disease-based epidemiological model was created based upon trends in the designation and approval of new orphan medicines, prevalence estimates for orphan diseases, and historical price and sales data for orphan drugs in Europe (defined as Eurozone + UK). The analysis incorporated two stages: 1) Predicting the number of diseases for which new orphan drugs will be approved over the next decade, based on an analysis of trends from the EU registry of orphan medicines; 2) Estimating the average ex-factory drug cost across an orphan disease life cycle, from the year in which the first orphan medicine is launched to the point where the first medicine loses marketing exclusivity. The two sets of information were combined to quantify the annual cost of orphan drugs from 2010 through 2020. RESULTS: The results from the model predicted a steady increase in the cumulative number of diseases for which an orphan drug is approved, averaging just over 5 new diseases per year over the next 10 years. The annual per patient cost of existing orphan drugs was seen to vary between €1,251 and €407,631, with the median cost being €32,242 per year. The share of the total pharmaceutical market represented by orphan drugs is predicted to increase from 3.3% in 2010 to a peak of 4.6% in 2016 after which it is expected to level off through 2020, as growth falls into line with that in the wider pharmaceutical market. In sensitivity analysis peak-year orphan drug budget impact ranged between 3% - 6.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Although European orphan drug legislation has led to an increase in the number of approved orphan drugs, the growth in cost, as a proportion of total pharmaceutical expenditure, is likely to plateau over the next decade as orphan growth rates converge on those in the broader pharmaceutical market. Given the assumptions and simplifications inherent in such a projection, there is uncertainty around the base case forecast and further research is needed to monitor how trends develop. However, fears that growth in orphan drug expenditure will lead to unsustainable cost escalation do not appear to be justified. Furthermore, based on the results of this budget impact forecast, the European orphan drug legislation is not leading to a disproportionate impact on pharmaceutical expenditure.

A review of anemia as a cardiovascular risk factor in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Anemia is an important cause of morbidity in MDS patients, principally through increased cardiovascular disease. Transfusion status has been seen to be a significant prognostic factor for disease progression and mortality, yet the relationship between anemia levels and cardiovascular disease is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to review the published literature on the effect of anemia on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with MDS. METHODS: A systematic literature review was undertaken to identify studies that investigated the relationship between anemia (as defined by hemoglobin levels) and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with MDS (all subtypes). RESULTS: Three studies were identified that explicitly evaluated the relationship between anemia and cardiovascular outcomes in MDS, and another study reported the relationship between hemoglobin levels and survival. The four studies consistently showed a strong relationship between lower hemoglobin levels and worse cardiovascular outcomes, including cardiac remodeling, congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, heart valve disease, and cardiovascular mortality. Anemia was seen to be an independent predictor of cardiovascular disease outcomes in patients with MDS, beyond transfusion status and IPSS. CONCLUSION: Based upon a relatively small body of evidence, there appears to be a strong and clinically significant association between anemia and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in MDS. While further research is needed, clinicians should seek to actively manage hemoglobin levels in MDS patients before the point of transfusion dependency is reached.