Assessing the economic challenges posed by orphan drugs

Historically, patients with rare diseases have been underserved by commercial drug development. In several jurisdictions, specific legislation has been enacted to encourage the development of drugs for rare diseases (orphan drugs), which would otherwise not be commercially viable. However, because of the small market, these drugs are often very expensive. Under the standard methods of health technology assessment (HTA) incorporating economic evaluation, orphan drugs do not usually prove to be cost-effective and this, coupled with their high cost, means that funding and patient access may be limited. However, these restrictions may not be in line with societal preferences. Therefore, this study discusses whether the standard methods of HTA are adequate for assisting decisions on patient access to and funding of orphan drugs and outlines a research agenda to help understand the societal value of orphan drugs and issues surrounding their development, funding, and use.

[1]  David Parkin,et al.  Does NICE have a cost-effectiveness threshold and what other factors influence its decisions? A binary choice analysis. , 2004, Health economics.

[2]  Anthony J Culyer,et al.  National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgments , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[3]  Clare McGrath,et al.  Framework for describing and classifying decision-making systems using technology assessment to determine the reimbursement of health technologies (fourth hurdle systems) , 2006, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[4]  C. McCabe,et al.  Orphan drugs and the NHS: should we value rarity? , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[5]  M. Haffner Adopting orphan drugs--two dozen years of treating rare diseases. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  E. Nord The trade-off between severity of illness and treatment effect in cost-value analysis of health care. , 1993, Health policy.

[7]  G. Loewenstein,et al.  Distributing scarce livers: the moral reasoning of the general public. , 1996, Social science & medicine.

[8]  F. Rutten,et al.  Cost utility analysis of sildenafil compared with papaverine-phentolamine injections , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[9]  A. Harris,et al.  Cost-effectiveness analysis and the consistency of decision making: evidence from pharmaceutical reimbursement in australia (1991 to 1996). , 2001, PharmacoEconomics.

[10]  P. Ubel,et al.  LIFE-SAVING TREATMENTS AND DISABILITIES , 1999, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[11]  H S Shannon,et al.  Economic aspects of risk assessment in chemical safety. , 1986, The Science of the total environment.