Abstract
BackgroundIn case of orphan drugs applicability of the standard health technology assessment (HTA) process is limited due to scarcity of good clinical and health economic evidence. Financing these premium priced drugs is more controversial in the Central and Eastern European (CEE) region where the public funding resources are more restricted, and health economic justification should be an even more important aspect of policy decisions than in higher income European countries.ObjectivesTo explore and summarize the recent scientific evidence on value drivers related to the health technology assessment of ODs with a special focus on the perspective of third party payers in CEE countries. The review aims to list all potentially relevant value drivers in the reimbursement process of orphan drugs.MethodsA systematic literature review was performed; PubMed and Scopus databases were systematically searched for relevant publications until April 2015. Extracted data were summarized along key HTA elements.ResultsFrom the 2664 identified publications, 87 contained relevant information on the evaluation criteria of orphan drugs, but only 5 had direct information from the CEE region. The presentation of good clinical evidence seems to play a key role especially since this should be the basis of cost-effectiveness analyses, which have more importance in resource-constrained economies. Due to external price referencing of pharmaceuticals, the relative budget impact of orphan drugs is expected to be higher in CEE than in Western European (WE) countries unless accessibility of patients remains more limited in poorer European regions. Equity principles based on disease prevalence and non-availability of alternative treatment options may increase the price premium, however, societies must have some control on prices and a rationale based on multiple criteria in reimbursement decisions.ConclusionsThe evaluation of orphan medicines should include multiple criteria to appropriately measure the clinical added value of orphan drugs. The search found only a small number of studies coming from CEE, therefore European policies on orphan drugs may be based largely on experiences in WE countries. More research should be done in the future in CEE because financing high-priced orphan drugs involves a greater burden for these countries.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13023-016-0455-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Highlights
In case of orphan drugs applicability of the standard health technology assessment (HTA) process is limited due to scarcity of good clinical and health economic evidence
Due to external price referencing of pharmaceuticals, the relative budget impact of orphan drugs is expected to be higher in Central and Eastern European (CEE) than in Western European (WE) countries unless accessibility of patients remains more limited in poorer European regions
Equity principles based on disease prevalence and non-availability of alternative treatment options may increase the price premium, societies must have some control on prices and a rationale based on multiple criteria in reimbursement decisions
Summary
In case of orphan drugs applicability of the standard health technology assessment (HTA) process is limited due to scarcity of good clinical and health economic evidence. Financing these premium priced drugs is more controversial in the Central and Eastern European (CEE) region where the public funding resources are more restricted, and health economic justification should be an even more important aspect of policy decisions than in higher income European countries. The Orphan Drug Act in the United States [6] and the Orphan Drugs Regulation in Europe [7] ( the legislation in Japan and Australia) seem to be a great success These legislations have generated incentives for the private sector to develop innovative drugs for rare and serious diseases that have had no treatment yet. There is a need for an adequate, transparent evaluation process to judge the clinical added value of ODs and to provide a consistent decision support tool for policymakers [9]
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have