Search

The European Commission (EC) has proposed to redefine 'unmet medical need' to steer pharmaceutical innovation and link the definition to incentives and regulatory tools and procedures. A multistakeholder meeting of the Regulatory Science Network Netherlands (RSNN) discussed the impact of this proposal. Four principles were highlighted (flexibility, feasibility, fairness, and sensitivity to risk) that were not considered sufficiently addressed. Concerns were raised about whether innovation would be incentivised, given the diverse and complex reasons why areas of unmet medical need may remain unaddressed. A more high-level definition of unmet medical need that gives guidance but allows for specification for specific uses throughout the medicine lifecycle was generally preferred. As the legislative process unfolds, stakeholder engagement will be essential to refine the definition to achieve the intended policy goals., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

In many countries, β-thalassemia (β-THAL) is not uncommon; however, it qualifies as a rare disease in the US and in European Union (EU), where thalassemia drugs are eligible for Orphan Drug Designation (ODD). In this paper, we evaluate all 28 ODDs for β-THAL granted since 2001 in the US and the EU: of these, ten have since been discontinued, twelve are pending, and six have become licensed drugs available for clinical use. The prime mover for these advances has been the increasing depth of understanding of the pathophysiology of β-THAL; at the same time, and even though only one-fifth of β-THAL ODDs have become licensed drugs, the ODD legislation has clearly contributed substantially to the development of improved treatments for β-THAL., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

There is a growing trend for pharmaceutical companies to seek scientific advice on drug development from a Health Technology Assessment (HTA) perspective, to improve the efficiency of their studies, enable better trial design, and support the goals of positive HTA recommendation for reimbursement. This study uses information collected directly from companies on individual products to assess their strategies and practices for seeking HTA-related scientific advice in terms of which stakeholders to engage and for what purpose, when to seek scientific advice, and whether to implement that advice within global clinical development., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

To maintain orphan drug status at the time of market authorization, orphan medicinal products (OMPs) need to be assessed for all criteria, including significant benefit, by the Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products (COMP) of the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Subsequently, health technology assessment (HTA) organizations evaluate the same OMPs in their relative effectiveness assessments (REAs). This review investigates the similarities and differences between the two frameworks for six HTA organizations, including the European Network for HTA. We discuss differences between both assessment frameworks within five domains (clinical evidence used, patient population, intervention, comparators, and outcome measures) for all drugs. Five illustrative cases studies were selected for a qualitative review., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

A comparative analysis of assessment procedures for authorization of all European Union (EU) applications for advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) shows that negative opinions were associated with a lack of clinical efficacy and identified severe safety risks. Unmet medical need was often considered in positive opinions and outweighed scientific uncertainties. Numerous quality issues illustrate the difficulties in this domain for ATMP development. Altogether, it suggests that setting appropriate standards for ATMP authorization in Europe, similar to elsewhere, is a learning experience. The experimental characteristics of authorized ATMPs urge regulators, industry, and clinical practice to pay accurate attention to post-marketing risk management to limit patient risk. Methodologies for ATMP development and regulatory evaluations need to be continuously evaluated for the field to flourish., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)