Rare Disease Drug Development Research Articles

A comprehensive study of the rare diseases and conditions targeted by orphan drug designations and approvals over the forty years of the Orphan Drug Act

BackgroundRare diseases affect more than 30 million Americans. The passage of the Orphan Drug Act (ODA) in the United States in 1983 represented a launching point for a rare disease drug development revolution for these patients. Financial incentives provided by the ODA through its Orphan Drug Designation Program, in addition to remarkable scientific advances over the past 40 years, have led to hundreds of drug approvals for rare diseases. Our research examines the rare diseases that have been targeted by orphan drug designations and subsequent approvals since the law was enacted.MethodsUsing an internal FDA database, we classified and analyzed all orphan drug designations and approvals from 1983 to 2022 by disease and therapeutic area.ResultsOver the 40 years of the ODA, 6,340 orphan drug designations were granted, representing drug development for 1,079 rare diseases. Additionally, 882 of those designations resulted in at least one FDA approval for use in 392 rare diseases. Much of this development has been concentrated in oncology as seven of the top ten most designated and approved diseases were rare cancers.ConclusionsResearchers have estimated that there may be 7000–10,000 rare diseases that have been identified and described. Based on our study, we can conclude that around 5% of rare diseases have an FDA-approved drug and up to 15% of rare diseases have at least one drug that has been developed and shown promise in their treatment, diagnosis or prevention. Funding of basic and translational science for rare disease drug development should continue in order to bring therapies to the millions of affected patients who remain without treatment options.

Achieving big with small: quantitative clinical pharmacology tools for drug development in pediatric rare diseases.

Pediatric populations represent a major fraction of rare diseases and compound the intrinsic challenges of pediatric drug development and drug development for rare diseases. The intertwined complexities of pediatric and rare disease populations impose unique challenges to clinical pharmacologists and require integration of novel clinical pharmacology and quantitative tools to overcome multiple hurdles during the discovery and development of new therapies. Drug development strategies for pediatric rare diseases continue to evolve to meet the inherent challenges and produce new medicines. Advances in quantitative clinical pharmacology research have been a key component in advancing pediatric rare disease research to accelerate drug development and inform regulatory decisions. This article will discuss the evolution of the regulatory landscape in pediatric rare diseases, the challenges encountered during the design of rare disease drug development programs and will highlight the use of innovative tools and potential solutions for future development programs.

The Impact of Artificial Intelligence in the Odyssey of Rare Diseases.

Emerging machine learning (ML) technologies have the potential to significantly improve the research and treatment of rare diseases, which constitute a vast set of diseases that affect a small proportion of the total population. Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms can help to quickly identify patterns and associations that would be difficult or impossible for human analysts to detect. Predictive modeling techniques, such as deep learning, have been used to forecast the progression of rare diseases, enabling the development of more targeted treatments. Moreover, AI has also shown promise in the field of drug development for rare diseases with the identification of subpopulations of patients who may be most likely to respond to a particular drug. This review aims to highlight the achievements of AI algorithms in the study of rare diseases in the past decade and advise researchers on which methods have proven to be most effective. The review will focus on specific rare diseases, as defined by a prevalence rate that does not exceed 1-9/100,000 on Orphanet, and will examine which AI methods have been most successful in their study. We believe this review can guide clinicians and researchers in the successful application of ML in rare diseases.

Aggregating genome sequencing and electronic health record data to accelerate rare disease drug development and market uptake

In the last 20 years, the cost and turnaround time for whole genome sequencing (WGS) has decreased dramatically, while the number of genetic diseases of known molecular basis has steadily increased, as has the number of investigational new drug applications for gene-targeted therapeutics (GTT). GTTs have the potential to transform outcomes in genetic disorders by directly targeting the causative molecular defect. The United States Congress and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have implemented policies that are accelerating GTT development through the Orphan Drug Act and recent guidelines for GTTs, real-world evidence, and surrogate endpoints.

Changing incentives to ACCELERATE drug development for paediatric cancer.

More effective incentives are needed to motivate paediatric oncology drug development, uncoupling it from dependency on adult drug development. Although the current European and North-American legislations aim to promote drug development for paediatrics and rare diseases, children and adolescents with cancer have not benefited as expected from these initiatives and cancer remains the first cause of death by disease in children older than one. Drug development for childhood cancer remains dependent on adult cancer indications and their potential market. The balance between the investment needed to execute a Paediatric Investigation Plan (PIP) in Europe and an initial Paediatric Study Plan (iPSP) in the US, coupled with the potential financial reward has not been sufficiently attractive to incite the pharmaceutical industry to develop drugs for rare indications such as childhood cancer. We propose changes in the timing and nature of the rewards within the European Paediatric Medicine Regulation (PMR) and Regulation on Orphan Medicinal Products (both currently under review), which would drive earlier initiation of paediatric oncology studies and provide incentives for drug development specifically for childhood indications. We suggest modifying the PMR to ensure mechanism-of-action driven mandatory PIP and reorganization of incentives to a stepwise and incremental approach. Interim and final deliverables should be defined within a PIP or iPSP, each attracting a reward on completion. A crucial change would be the introduction of the interim deliverable requiring production of paediatric data that inform the go/no-go decisions on whether to take a drug forward to paediatric efficacy trials. Additionally, to address the critical gap in the current framework where there is a complete lack of incentives to promote paediatric-specific cancer drug development, we propose the introduction of early rewards in the Orphan Regulation, with a variant on the US-Creating Hope Act and its priority review vouchers.

Bayesian Strategies in Rare Diseases.

Bayesian strategies for planning and analyzing clinical trials have become a viable choice, especially in rare diseases where drug development faces many challenges and stakeholders are interested in innovations that may help overcome them. Disease natural history and clinical outcomes occurrence and variability are often poorly understood. Standard trial designs are not optimized to obtain adequate safety and efficacy data from small numbers of patients. Bayesian methods are well-suited for adaptive trials, with an accelerated learning curve. Using Bayesian statistics can be advantageous in that design choices and their consequences are considered carefully, continuously monitored, and updated where necessary, which ultimately provides a natural and principled way of seamlessly combining prior clinical information with data, within a solid decision theoretical framework. In this article, we introduce the Bayesian option in the rare disease context to support clinical decision-makers in selecting the best choice for their drug development project. Many researchers in drug development show reluctance to using Bayesian statistics, and the top-two reported barriers are insufficient knowledge of Bayesian approaches and a lack of clarity or guidance from regulators. Here we introduce concepts of borrowing, extrapolation, adaptation, and modeling and illustrate them with examples that have been discussed or developed with regulatory bodies to show how Bayesian strategies can be applied to drug development in rare diseases.

Improving Access to Rare Disease Treatments: Subsidy, Pricing, and Payment Schemes

There are more than 7,000 known rare diseases, but pharmaceutical manufacturers developed treatments for only 500 of them. To improve the availability and accessibility of treatments for rare diseases, governments have introduced several programs including subsidies, exogenous pricing, and outcome-based payment schemes in recent years. What kind of subsidy programs and pricing mechanisms can improve patient access? Inspired by various pilot programs, we present a multistage game theoretic model to analyze different subsidy schemes proposed for rare diseases. In addition to the traditional setting in which the manufacturer sets the price, we consider an “exogenous pricing scheme” under which an independent consortium sets the price. We also examine an outcome-based payment scheme, which offers the drug for free if it is not efficacious. We formulate a four-stage Stackelberg game to determine whether it is optimal to subsidize the pharmaceutical manufacturer, the patients, or both. Our results offer several insights. First, we find that government subsidies are crucial to entice new drug development for rare diseases. Also, we find that the pricing scheme matters: The exogenous pricing scheme can improve patient welfare, but it reduces the manufacturer’s expected profit. We find that this result is robust even when an outcome-based payment scheme is used. This paper was accepted by Jayashankar Swaminathan, operations management. Funding: This work was supported by the Dutch Science Foundation [Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek VENI Talent Scheme]. Supplemental Material: The data files and online appendices are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4634 .

Regulatory Framework for Drug Development in Rare Diseases.

Drug development is a highly regulated industry. Therapeutic options for rare diseases must meet the same high standards for the demonstration of safety and efficacy as do those for more common diseases. The approval of the Orphan Drug Act in 1983 has resulted in many more resources for preclinical research, the standardization of patient registries, and the use of real-world data, among other measures, that, along with the advances in drug development, has resulted in the approval of therapies for some of the most unusual diseases. Increased attention to the diagnosis and treatment of rare diseases has also accelerated the development of gene therapies that may offer significant amelioration and even cures for such diseases in the near future. Rare diseases disproportionately affect children, with severe and debilitating effects. Few effective treatments are available for most rare diseases. To avoid the unnecessary waste of data collected in studies of these patients, and to promote efficient drug development, there is a growing collaboration among patient communities, investigators, clinicians, sponsors, and regulatory authorities. All interested parties are working together to identify the most appropriate research questions and move quickly to make available safe and effective treatments. This article is a survey of the most commonly used regulatory remedies that have been put in place to serve as a framework for drug development in rare diseases.

Think Rare, Think Inside and Out: Simple Question-Based Approach to Complex Rare Disease Drug Development.

Think Rare, Think Inside and Out: Simple Question-Based Approach to Complex Rare Disease Drug Development.

Research advances in treatment methods and drug development for rare diseases.

As the incidence of rare diseases increases each year, the total number of rare disease patients worldwide is nearly 400 million. Orphan medications are drugs used to treat rare diseases. Orphan drugs, however, are rare and patients often struggle to utilize them and expensive medications during treatment. Orphan drugs have been the focus of new drug research and development for both domestic and international pharmaceutical companies as a result of the substantial investment being made in the field of rare diseases. Clinical breakthroughs have been made in every field, from traditional antibodies and small molecule drugs to gene therapy, stem cell therapy and small nucleic acid drugs. We here review the therapeutic means of rare diseases and drug development of rare diseases to show the progress of treatment of rare diseases in order to provide a reference for clinical use and new drug development of rare diseases in China.

Influence Diagnostics of a Region of Interest in Multi-regional Clinical Trials.

Multi-regional clinical trials (MRCTs) are an efficient way to enable recruitment of the planned number of subjects within a reasonable timeframe in drug development for rare diseases. One of the aim of MRCTs is to evaluate the applicability of overall trial results to a region of interest. Various statistical methods proposed for this purpose are primarily relying on regional estimates from subgroup analyses of a region of interest, thus they may not work well for studies with small sample size in rare diseases. This paper, instead, presented how to apply influence diagnostics to assessing influence of a region of interest on the overall results in MRCTs and showed this approach could be an analysis option for MRCTs in rare diseases through Monte Carlo simulation and analysis of an MRCT.

Natural history comparison study to assess the efficacy of elamipretide in patients with Barth syndrome

BackgroundNatural history studies are increasingly recognized as having an important role in drug development for rare diseases. A phase 3, observational, retrospective, and non-interventional study was designed to establish a natural history control (NHC) cohort of patients with Barth syndrome (BTHS) to provide further analysis of the efficacy of elamipretide observed in an open-label extension (OLE) phase of the TAZPOWER trial, a clinical trial that tested the efficacy of 40 mg daily of elamipretide in patients with BTHS.MethodsThis was a retrospective, non-interventional study. A propensity score model was used to compare elamipretide-treated patients and NHCs. The analysis included 8 patients from the TAZPOWER OLE and 19 untreated NHCs (including 12 with serial echocardiographic assessments).ResultsFor the 6-min walk test (6MWT, primary endpoint), the least squares (LS) mean difference between groups was 79.7 m (P = 0.0004) at week 64 and 91.0 m (P = 0.0005) at week 76 in favor of elamipretide. Significant improvements in muscle strength (secondary endpoint), as assessed by handheld dynamometry (HHD) were also observed with elamipretide, with LS mean differences of 40.8 Newtons at 64 weeks (P = 0.0002) and 56.7 Newtons at 76 weeks (P = 0.0005). Patients continuously treated with elamipretide also experienced statistically significant improvements in other secondary endpoints (i.e., 5 times sit-to-stand [5XSST], multi-domain responder index [MDRI]). The functional improvements were robust to sensitivity analyses. Left ventricular stroke volume increased from baseline in patients with elamipretide but decreased in NHCs.ConclusionsOverall, the study established a NHC for use in assessing the efficacy of therapeutic interventions in patients with BTHS and the results suggest that elamipretide may improve natural history of BTHS at least in part by attenuating the natural decline in heart function and provide meaningful improvements in heart function and functional capacity in patients with BTHS compared to NHCs.HighlightsA matched Natural History Control (NHC) was used to evaluate elamipretide in BTHSElamipretide may improve natural history of BTHS by attenuating natural decline in heart functionElamipretide was associated with meaningful clinical improvements in skeletal muscle and cardiovascular parameters that were not observed in NHCsThe study established a NHC for use in assessing the efficacy of therapeutic interventions in BTHS

Bayesian modeling and simulation to inform rare disease drug development early decision-making: Application to Duchenne muscular dystrophy.

Rare disease clinical trials are constrained to small sample sizes and may lack placebo-control, leading to challenges in drug development. This paper proposes a Bayesian model-based framework for early go/no-go decision making in rare disease drug development, using Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) as an example. Early go/no-go decisions were based on projections of long-term functional outcomes from a Bayesian model-based analysis of short-term trial data informed by prior knowledge based on 6MWT natural history literature data in DMD patients. Frequentist hypothesis tests were also applied as a reference analysis method. A number of combinations of hypothetical trial designs, drug effects and cohort comparison methods were assessed. The proposed Bayesian model-based framework was superior to the frequentist method for making go/no-go decisions across all trial designs and cohort comparison methods in DMD. The average decision accuracy rates across all trial designs for the Bayesian and frequentist analysis methods were 45.8 and 8.98%, respectively. A decision accuracy rate of at least 50% was achieved for 42 and 7% of the trial designs under the Bayesian and frequentist analysis methods, respectively. The frequentist method was limited to the short-term trial data only, while the Bayesian methods were informed with both the short-term data and prior information. The specific results of the DMD case study were limited due to incomplete specification of individual-specific covariates in the natural history literature data and should be reevaluated using a full natural history dataset. These limitations aside, the framework presented provides a proof of concept for the utility of Bayesian model-based methods for decision making in rare disease trials.

Randomized Controlled Trial Data for New Drug Application for Rare Diseases in Japan.

High-quality evidence is often not obtained in the clinical trials of rare diseases because these trials tend to be smaller in size and non-controlled. We investigated the potential factors associated with the need for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the clinical data package for new drug applications for rare diseases in Japan. This study focused on 130 drugs with orphan drug designation approved in Japan between April 2004 and March 2020. Multivariable regression analysis showed that the prevalence (odds ratio [OR] 3.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-8.6) and the type of primary endpoint (OR 6.66, 95% CI 2.41-18.37) were associated with the need for RCTs in the clinical data package in Japan. Our findings highlight the importance of adequate understanding of the target disease in new drug development for rare diseases.

Global Regulatory and Public Health Initiatives to Advance Pediatric Drug Development for Rare Diseases.

The literature thoroughly describes the challenges of pediatric drug development for rare diseases. This includes (1) generating interest from sponsors, (2) small numbers of children affected by a particular disease, (3) difficulties with study design, (4) lack of definitive outcome measures and assessment tools, (5) the need for additional safeguards for children as a vulnerable population, and (6) logistical hurdles to completing trials, especially with the need for longer term follow-up to establish safety and efficacy. There has also been an increasing awareness of the need to engage patients and their families in drug development processes and to address inequities in access to pediatric clinical trials. The year 2020 ushered in yet another challenge—the COVID-19 pandemic. The pediatric drug development ecosystem continues to evolve to meet these challenges. This article will focus on several key factors including recent regulatory approaches and public health policies to facilitate pediatric rare disease drug development, emerging trends in product development (biologics, molecularly targeted therapies), innovations in trial design/endpoints and data collection, and current efforts to increase patient engagement and promote equity. Finally, lessons learned from COVID-19 about building adaptable pediatric rare disease drug development processes will be discussed.

Dose-finding studies in drug development for rare genetic diseases

BackgroundThe small patient populations inherent to rare genetic diseases present many challenges to the traditional drug development paradigm. One major challenge is generating sufficient data in early phase studies to inform dose selection for later phase studies and dose optimization for clinical use of the drug. However, optimizing the benefit-risk profile of drugs through appropriate dose selection during drug development is critical for all drugs, including those being developed to treat rare diseases. Recognizing the challenges of conducting dose finding studies in rare disease populations and the importance of dose selection and optimization for successful drug development, we assessed the dose-finding studies and analyses conducted for drugs recently approved for rare genetic diseases.ResultsOf the 40 marketing applications for new molecular entity (NME) drugs and biologics approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for rare genetic diseases from 2015 to 2020, 21 (53%) of the development programs conducted at least one dedicated dose-finding study. In addition, the majority of drug development programs conducted clinical studies in healthy subjects and included population pharmacokinetic and exposure–response analyses; some programs also conducted clinical studies in patient populations other than the disease for which the drug was initially approved. The majority of primary endpoints utilized in dedicated dose-finding studies were biomarkers, and the primary endpoint of the safety and efficacy study matched the primary endpoint used in the dose finding study in 9 of 13 (69%) drug development programs where primary study endpoints were assessed.ConclusionsOur study showed that NME drug development programs for rare genetic diseases utilize multiple data sources for dosing information, including studies in healthy subjects, population pharmacokinetic analyses, and exposure–response analyses. In addition, our results indicate that biomarkers play a key role in dose-finding studies for rare genetic disease drug development programs. Our findings highlight the need to develop study designs and methods to allow adequate dose-finding efforts within rare disease drug development programs that help overcome the challenges presented by low patient prevalence and other factors. Furthermore, the frequent reliance on biomarkers as endpoints for dose-finding studies underscores the importance of biomarker development in rare diseases.

The economics of moonshots: Value in rare disease drug development.

The economics of moonshots: Value in rare disease drug development.

Innovative Methods for Rare Disease Drug Development

Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society)Early View BOOK REVIEW Innovative methods for rare disease drug development , Chow, Shein-Chung, 2020 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC, CRC Press, 305 pages, ISBN 9780367502102 Min-Hua Jen, Corresponding Author Min-Hua Jen M.jen@lilly.com Principal research scientist/group lead oncology international statistics, Eli Lilly, Bracknell, UKSearch for more papers by this author Min-Hua Jen, Corresponding Author Min-Hua Jen M.jen@lilly.com Principal research scientist/group lead oncology international statistics, Eli Lilly, Bracknell, UKSearch for more papers by this author First published: 15 February 2022 https://doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12828Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Early ViewOnline Version of Record before inclusion in an issue RelatedInformation

Building cross-border collaborations to increase diversity and accelerate rare disease drug development - meeting report from the inaugural IndoUSrare Annual Conference 2021.

IndoUSrare held its inaugural Annual Conference from 29 November to 2 December 2021. It was focused on the theme of cross-border collaborations for rare disease drug development, with each day dedicated to a specific patient-focused discussion topic, ranging from patient-led advocacy (Advocacy Day), research (Research Day), rare disease community support and engagement (Patients Alliance Day), to industry collaborations (Industry Day). The 4-day conference was held in virtual mode and attracted over 250 attendees from across the globe. This meeting report provides the key highlights of the event and summarizes learnings and future directions encouraging cross-border collaborations to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in rare disease research and clinical trials.

Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development for Rare Diseases in Neurology: Contributions and Opportunities.

Several challenges are associated with rare disease drug development in neurology. In this article, we summarize the US Food and Drug Administration's experience with clinical drug development for rare neurological diseases and discuss clinical pharmacology's critical contributions to drug development for rare diseases. We used publicly available information to identify and screen drug products approved for rare neurological indications between 1983 and 2019. We highlighted cases in which clinical pharmacology contributed to the evidence of drug efficacy, dose selection for pivotal clinical trials, dose optimization based on intrinsic and extrinsic factors, pharmacokinetic bridging for formulations, and efficacy bridging across different racial groups. Fifty-one approved drug products were identified since the introduction of the Orphan Drug Act in 1983. Interestingly, the number of approvals in the last few years increased significantly, probably due to advances in genomic research and targeted drug modalities. Evaluation of dose selection in patient populations showed that in 52% of cases, the sponsors did not evaluate efficacy for more than one or two dose levels throughout the development program. Clinical pharmacology studies to evaluate the effect of intrinsic or extrinsic factors were adequately characterized in most of the applications. With the expansion of model informed drug development applications, (e.g., quantitative systems pharmacology and deep learning neural network models), the role and impact of clinical pharmacology is expected to grow exponentially in the next decade and enhance the development of novel treatment modalities for neurological rare diseases.