Search

Background: In response to activated patient communities' catalyzation, two significant efforts by the FDA to expedite treatments have now been in place for multiple decades. In 1983, the United States Congress passed the Orphan Drug Act to provide financial incentives for development of drugs for rare diseases. In 1992, partly in response to the HIV epidemic, the FDA implemented Accelerated Approval (AA) to expedite access to promising new therapies to treat serious conditions with unmet medical need based on surrogate marker efficacy while additional clinical data is confirmed. The uses of these regulatory approaches over time are assessed in this study., Methods: The following U.S. FDA CDER published lists were used in this analysis: 1. all orphan designations and approvals; 2. all AA and their details updated through December 31, 2022; new molecular entities (NMEs)., Results: Orphan drug designations and approvals have increased several-fold over the past four decades. The largest increase recently has been in therapies targeting oncological diseases (comprised of both oncology and malignant hematology). Although orphan drug approvals based on NMEs are the minority of orphan drug designations, the count of approved orphan drug NMEs has increased in recent years. The characteristics of orphan drug approvals show notable differences by disease area with rare diseases and medical genetics (49%) having a relatively large fraction of orphan drug approvals with NMEs compared to the oncological diseases (32%). Similar to the use of orphan drug designation, oncological disease therapies have been the largest utilizers of AA. Many therapies targeting these diseases address unmet medical need and can leverage surrogate markers that have previously been used in similar trials. The timings of conversion of AA (confirmed or withdrawn) were assessed and found to be consistent across decades and to have some dependency upon the broad disease area (when assessed by three large groups: HIV conversions were fastest; followed by oncology; followed by all others). By the end of 2022, 98% of the first 105 (approved in 2010 or earlier) AA had been converted to confirmed or withdrawn., Conclusions: Although the typical timings for AA to be confirmed or withdrawn has not changed significantly over the decades, the disease areas utilizing orphan drug designation and AA have changed significantly over time. Both programs have had increases in their use for therapies targeting oncological diseases. The re-use of surrogate markers for oncological diseases has been an advantage in a way that may not be scientifically feasible in many other disease areas that have greater differentiation across disease etiology. For non-oncological diseases, applicability of AA is, in part, dependent upon greater focus on characterization and acceptance of novel surrogate markers., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Despite regulatory changes designed to stimulate investment in therapies for rare diseases, many of these conditions lack government-approved treatments. Advanced regenerative medicines, which are therapies and clinical interventions aimed at healing or replacing damaged or defective human cells, tissues, and organs, offer great promise for addressing many rare diseases. A major challenge facing advanced regenerative medicines for rare diseases is securing financial support to assist in bringing a therapy to market. This paper describes the factors cited by pharmaceutical industry players globally for sponsoring the development of advanced regenerative medicines for rare diseases. The paper examines the motivations of 53 sponsors that meet the latter criteria. The motivations behind investments were broadly similar amongst sponsors and map closely onto regulatory requirements for clinical development and marketing authorization of advanced therapeutic products, including the presence of accelerated or attenuated pathways for regulatory approval, use for indications with high unmet medical needs, and/or that have advantages over existing therapies, and robust preclinical data. Other factors include availability of investment incentives and opportunities for off-label use in the post-approval stages., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Gene and RNA therapies have potential to transform the treatment of rare inherited diseases, but there are concerns about the evidence supporting their use and high costs., Objective: We analyze the evidence supporting Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of gene and RNA therapies for rare inherited diseases and discuss implications for clinical practice and policy., Methods: We conducted a qualitative analysis of FDA documents outlining the basis of approval for gene and RNA therapies approved for rare inherited diseases between 2016 and 2023. For each drug, we gathered five characteristics of the evidence supporting FDA approval (no phase 3 trial, nonrandomized, no clinical endpoint, lack of demonstrated benefit, and significant protocol deviation) and four characteristics of the FDA approval process (prior rejection or complete response, negative committee vote, discrepancy between label and trial population, and boxed warning). The main outcome was the number of drugs with each characteristic., Results: Between 2016 and 2023, 19 gene and RNA therapies received FDA approval to treat rare inherited diseases. The most common limitations in the evidence supporting approval of these drugs were nonrandomized studies (8/19, 42%), no clinical endpoint (7/19, 37%), lack of demonstrated benefit or inconsistent results (4/19, 21%), and no phase 3 trial (4/19, 21%). Half (3/6) of accelerated approvals and 57% (5/9) of drugs with breakthrough designation had nonrandomized trials, and gene therapies with one-time dosing were overrepresented (5/7, 71%) among the drugs with nonrandomized trials. Five of six accelerated approvals (83%) and five of nine pediatric drugs (56%), most of which were indicated for Duchenne muscular dystrophy, had no clinical endpoint. Four of nine (44%) pediatric drugs and four of six (67%) accelerated approvals failed to demonstrate benefit compared with none of the nonpediatric drugs and none of the traditional approvals. Five drugs, which all had different indications and represented a mix of RNA and gene therapies, did not have any of these evidence characteristics. Among drugs that received prior rejections or negative committee opinions, all four had nonrandomized trials and lacked a clinical endpoint, and 75% (3/4) lacked demonstrated benefit. Five of nine (56%) pediatric drugs were indicated for broader age groups according to the drug label compared with the trial populations. Of the three drugs with boxed warnings, two had pediatric indications and nonrandomized studies, and one had no phase 3 trial., Conclusions: Issues related to trial design, outcome, and data integrity in the evidence supporting FDA approval of rare inherited disease gene and RNA therapies raise questions about whether this evidence is adequate to inform prescribing decisions. Gene and RNA therapies with accelerated approval and pediatric indications were overrepresented among drugs lacking clinical endpoints or demonstrated benefit and should be the focus of efforts to reduce uncertainty in the evidence., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Objectives: This systematic literature review aimed to explore experiences worldwide of societal preferences integration into health technology assessments (HTAs) for rare diseases (RDs) and orphan drugs (ODs) through the implementation of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA), discrete choice experiments (DCEs), and person trade-off (PTO) methods, among others., Methods: A systematic search of the literature was conducted in April 2021 using PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Scopus databases. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach was used for the review phases. Finally, the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework was used to discuss the implementation of these instruments in the RD context., Results: A total of 33 articles met the inclusion criteria. The studies measured societal preferences for RD and OD as part of HTA using MCDA (n = 17), DCE (n = 8), and PTO (n = 4), among other methods (n = 4). These found that patients and clinicians do not prioritize funding based on rarity. The public is willing to allocate funds only if the OD demonstrates effectiveness and improves the quality of life, considering as relevant factors disease severity, unmet health needs, and quality of life. Conversely, HTA agency experts preferred their current approach, placing more weight on cost-effectiveness and evidence quality, even though they expressed concern about the fairness of the drug review process., Conclusions: MCDA, PTO, and DCE are helpful and transparent methods for assessing societal preferences in HTA for RD and OD. However, their methodological limitations, such as arbitrary criteria selection, subjective scoring methods, framing effects, weighting adaptation, and value measurement models, could make implementation challenging., Competing Interests: Author Disclosures Author disclosure forms can be accessed below in the Supplemental Material section., (Copyright © 2024 International Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the European Union, rare diseases are defined as diseases that affect maximum 5 in 10,000 citizens. These diseases are typically associated with a high unmet medical need. To stimulate development and authorisation of medicines for rare diseases ('orphan conditions'), the European Commission (EC) can grant orphan designations. In order to enable systematic evaluation and communication of the diseases for which designated orphan medicines have (not) been developed and authorised, we aimed to investigate the feasibility of important disease terminology systems for mapping orphan conditions and therapeutic indications., Methods: We selected all designated orphan medicines that were authorised by the EC during 2022-2023 from the EC's Union Register of medicinal products. For these medicines, we extracted orphan conditions and associated therapeutic indications at initial marketing authorisation. The orphan conditions and separate elements of therapeutic indications such as target disease or condition, severity criteria and target population were assessed for availability in six major disease terminology systems: ICD-10, ICD-11, MedDRA, MeSH, Orphanet nomenclature of rare diseases, and SNOMED CT. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the ability of each disease terminology system to map orphan conditions and elements of therapeutic indications., Results: During 2022-2023, 37 designated orphan medicines were authorised that were designated for 40 orphan conditions (of which 37 unique) and granted 39 therapeutic indications (of which 37 unique). Overall, SNOMED CT covered most descriptions of orphan conditions (33/37, 89 %) and target diseases or conditions within therapeutic indications (28/37, 76 %). However, when allowing descriptions to be partly included and/or complemented by additional words, SNOMED CT, the Orphanet nomenclature, ICD-11 and MedDRA all had high coverage (92-97 %). Other elements than target diseases or conditions within therapeutic indications were mostly lacking., Conclusions: Regulatory data concerning orphan conditions and therapeutic indications of designated orphan medicines seem to be best covered by SNOMED CT. However, which disease terminology system best facilitates systematic evaluation and communication about development and authorisation of designated orphan medicines also depends on the specific use case. Given the frequent use of SNOMED CT in healthcare settings, it may also facilitate interoperability between regulatory and healthcare data, while for example ICD-11 may be better suited to generate statistics concerning drug development for rare diseases., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declared no competing interests for this work., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: This study aimed to establish a suitable value assessment framework for orphan medicinal products in China based on the multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) method., Methods: First, a draft framework of the MCDA criteria was built based on a systematic literature evaluation and the EVIDEM framework tools. Second, stakeholder groups were formed and expert opinions were collected through the brainstorming and expert consultation methods. Third, from the perspective of stakeholders, the five-point weighting method and a two-step percentile distribution method were employed to weigh the quantitative criteria in the framework for orphan drug value evaluation. Meanwhile, from the public perspective, a survey was conducted on a sample of 71 people to obtain the scoring scale of the framework for orphan drugs through a two-step percentile distribution method. Finally, based on the synthetization and comparison of all evidence and methods, we developed the framework criteria and scoring scale for the orphan medicinal products., Results: Combined with the stakeholder selection and suggestions in the stakeholder workshop, the framework criteria for the evaluation were constructed based on China's national conditions, which included 11 quantitative and 8 qualitative criteria. The two-step percentile distribution method was selected as the weighting method., Conclusions: MCDA is feasible for the value assessment of orphan drugs in China and can be used as a supplementary tool for drug access decisions in medical insurance. It is suggested to further improve the value assessment framework of orphan medicinal products, scientifically evaluate the MCDA framework weighting method, explore a framework system suitable for China's national conditions., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma is an ultra-rare cancer driven by YAP-CAMTA1 fusion. Based on the link of the fusion to the MEK pathway, SARC33 was performed. It is a phase 2 trial examining trametinib that missed its primary objective by RECIST but demonstrated patient-reported outcome benefits in improved pain. See related article by Schuetze et al., p. 4584., (©2024 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Rare diseases and conditions have thus far received relatively less attention in the field of precision/personalized medicine than common chronic diseases. There is a dire need for orphan drug discovery and therapeutics in ways that are informed by the precision/personalized medicine scholarship. Moreover, people with rare conditions, when considered collectively across diseases worldwide, impact many communities. In this overarching context, Activin A Receptor Type 1 (ACVR1) is a transmembrane kinase from the transforming growth factor-β superfamily and plays a critical role in modulating the bone morphogenetic protein signaling. Missense variants of the ACVR1 gene result in modifications in structure and function and, by extension, abnormalities and have been predominantly linked with two rare conditions: fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva and diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma. We report here an extensive bioinformatic analyses assessing the pool of 50,951 variants and forecast seven highly destabilizing mutations (R206H, G356D, R258S, G328W, G328E, R375P, and R202I) that can significantly alter the structure and function of the native protein. Protein-protein interaction and ConSurf analyses revealed the crucial interactions and localization of highly deleterious mutations in highly conserved domains that may impact the binding and functioning of the protein. cBioPortal, CanSAR Black, and existing literature affirmed the association of these destabilizing mutations with posterior fossa ependymoma, uterine corpus carcinoma, and pediatric brain cancer. The current findings suggest these deleterious nonsynonymous single nucleotide polymorphisms as potential candidates for future functional annotations and validations associated with rare conditions, further aiding the development of precision medicine in rare diseases.

Decision-making in clinical medicine ideally is based upon evidence from randomized, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) and subsequent systematic reviews and meta-analyses. However, for orphan diseases, the expectation of having one or multiple RCTs that inform clinical guidelines or justify specific treatments can be unrealistic and subsequent therapeutic nihilism can be detrimental to patients. This article discusses the benefits of therapeutic decision-making in the context of orphan diseases, focusing on primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) as an example of an orphan disease with poor clinical outcomes. PSC is a rare disorder characterized by inflammation and progressive fibrosis of the bile ducts. It carries a high risk of liver failure, malignancies, and debilitating symptoms that impair quality of life. Liver transplantation is currently the only life-prolonging intervention for PSC, but it is not a curative option. The article highlights the potential benefits of treating PSC patients with oral vancomycin (OV), which has shown significant clinical responses and improved quality of life in some cases. However, access to OV therapy is limited due to the lack of RCTs supporting its use. The standard requirement of having evidence from RCTs may result in withholding potentially life-altering and/or life-saving treatments for patients with orphan diseases. Conducting RCTs is challenging in these patient populations due to difficulties in recruiting the required patient cohorts and limited commercial returns. A standardized 'adaptive treatment strategy' is proposed to address this. This approach leverages the best available evidence for specific treatments, considers individual clinical responses, and adjusts treatment over time., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Patients diagnosed with rare diseases and their and families search desperately to organize drug discovery campaigns. Alternative models that differ from default paradigms offer real opportunities. There are, however, no clear guidelines for the development of such models, which reduces success rates and raises costs. We address the main challenges in making the discovery of new preclinical treatments more accessible, using rare hereditary paraplegia as a paradigmatic case. First, we discuss the necessary expertise, and the patients' clinical and genetic data. Then, we revisit gene therapy, de novo drug development, and drug repurposing, discussing their applicability. Moreover, we explore a pool of recommended in silico tools for pathogenic variant and protein structure prediction, virtual screening, and experimental validation methods, discussing their strengths and weaknesses. Finally, we focus on successful case applications., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Context: The European Union (EU) governs global health through its constituent laws, institutions, actors, and policies. However, it is unclear whether or how these political factors interact to position the EU as a political determinant of global health., Methods: The authors conduct a case study of the political factors influencing the adoption of the EU's Biotechnology Directive 98/44/EC and Orphan Medicines Regulation 141/2000., Findings: The European Commission (EC) generally framed both of its proposals around economical and biomedical paradigms aligned with the needs of the EU's industry and patients, whereas the European Parliament (EP) contested some of these frames and proposed amendments supporting global access to medical products. The political factors influencing the adoption (in the Biotechnology Directive) or rejection (in the Orphan Regulation) of the EP's amendments include the complementarity between the EP and EC proposals, the EP's power in the intra- and interinstitutional negotiating process, the existence and support of civil society, and the alignment with member state priorities in the Council., Conclusions: In the late 1990s, the EU was an internally fragmented and politicized player concerning global health matters. These political factors should be considered for a coherent post-2022 EU strategy on global health., (Copyright © 2024 by Duke University Press.)

Background: An increasing number of orphan medicinal products (OMPs) are being included in social health insurance schemes, significantly improving access to medicines for patients with rare diseases. However, high-priced OMPs are still not covered, primarily due to health equity controversies and inadequate data systems required for economic evaluation. The aim of this study was to estimate the burden of drug expenditures and the size of the reimbursement budget required for high-priced OMPs from the perspectives of society and healthcare payers., Methods: The study performed a budget impact analysis using data from multiple sources to estimate the reimbursement budget for high-priced OMPs in Chengdu, a densely populated metropolis in China. The budget analysis consisted of three main elements: the number of patients, the price of drugs, and the simulated policy scenario. By adjusting the combinations of these elements, the budget fluctuations for payers were estimated. Furthermore, the study predicted the budget trend for the next three years to validate its sustainability., Results: The analysis indicated that 98 rare disease patients in Chengdu required high-priced OMPs in 2019. This suggested a projected budget of CNY 179 million for these patients without reimbursement policies, from a societal perspective. Under six assumed policy scenarios, this budget ranged from CNY 32 million to CNY 156 million. Over the next three years, the annual budget was estimated to range from CNY 200 million to CNY 1.303 billion., Conclusion: Integration of multi-source data helps to obtain more scientifically reliable results on budget impacts. The study found that the budgetary impacts of high-priced OMPs on society and payers are relatively limited. Health policymakers can choose appropriate reimbursement strategies based on financial affordability among a diverse mix of elements. The results of related studies provided insights for optimizing the allocation of health resources and improving patient access to medications., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia (JMML) is a rare pediatric hematologic malignancy with a high relapse rate and a poor prognosis hallmarked by RAS pathway mutations. Stieglitz and colleagues conducted a phase II clinical trial using the MEK inhibitor trametinib to treat patients with relapsed and refractory juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia and observed an objective response rate of 50% and an overall survival of 80% after 4 years. See related article by Stieglitz et al., p. 1590 (4) ., (©2024 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Characterization analysis of 87 pivotal clinical trials for 72 novel orphan drugs (76 orphan indications) approved by the FDA from 2017 to 2023 revealed that the clinical trial evidence supporting FDA orphan drug approvals often lacked high-quality designs, which frequently did not incorporate randomization, blinding, placebo or no treatment control, or clinical endpoint-driven methodologies. Additionally, regulatory flexibility was observed in the quantity of clinical trial evidence required, which included choices such as a single trial plus confirmatory evidence, one large multicenter trial or at least two trials. Furthermore, the overall strength of the clinical trial evidence exhibited variations across different orphan drugs and indications, influenced by features such as the therapeutic area and whether the orphan drug was granted accelerated approvals., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by pervasive personality and behavioural disturbances with severe impact on patients and caregivers. In current clinical practice, treatment is based on nonpharmacological and pharmacological approaches. Unfortunately, trial-based evidence supporting symptomatic pharmacological treatment for the behavioural disturbances in FTD is scarce despite the significant burden this poses on the patients and caregivers., Method: The study examined drug management decisions for several behavioural disturbances in patients with FTD by 21 experts across European expert centres affiliated with the European Reference Network for Rare Neurological Diseases (ERN-RND)., Results: The study revealed the highest consensus on drug treatments for physical and verbal aggression, impulsivity and obsessive delusions. Antipsychotics (primarily quetiapine) were recommended for behaviours posing safety risks to both patients and caregivers (aggression, self-injury and self-harm) and nightly unrest. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors were recommended for perseverative somatic complaints, rigidity of thought, hyperphagia, loss of empathy and for impulsivity. Trazodone was specifically recommended for motor unrest, mirtazapine for nightly unrest, and bupropion and methylphenidate for apathy. Additionally, bupropion was strongly advised against in 10 out of the 14 behavioural symptoms, emphasizing a clear recommendation against its use in the majority of cases., Conclusions: The survey data can provide expert guidance that is helpful for healthcare professionals involved in the treatment of behavioural symptoms. Additionally, they offer insights that may inform prioritization and design of therapeutic studies, particularly for existing drugs targeting behavioural disturbances in FTD., (© 2024 The Author(s). European Journal of Neurology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Neurology.)

Rare diseases, affecting millions globally, present significant drug development challenges. This is due to the limited patient populations and the unique pathophysiology of these diseases, which can make traditional clinical trial designs unfeasible. Quantitative Systems Pharmacology (QSP) models offer a promising approach to expedite drug development, particularly in rare diseases. QSP models provide a mechanistic representation of the disease and drug response in virtual patients that can complement routinely applied empirical modeling and simulation approaches. QSP models can generate digital twins of actual patients and mechanistically simulate the disease progression of rare diseases, accounting for phenotypic heterogeneity. QSP models can also support drug development in various drug modalities, such as gene therapy. Impactful QSP models case studies are presented here to illustrate their value in supporting various aspects of drug development in rare indications. As these QSP model applications continue to mature, there is a growing possibility that they could be more widely integrated into routine drug development steps. This integration could provide a robust framework for addressing some of the inherent challenges in rare disease drug development., (© 2024 The Author(s). Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics © 2024 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Regulators increasingly rely on real-world evidence generated from routine-care health data to evaluate novel therapies. Particularly, external control arms are increasingly used to supplement and contextualize efficacy and safety claims of single arm clinical trials for rare disease therapies. However, there are a number of methodological issues that may affect the validity of results derived from such comparisons. In this mini-review, we briefly summarize frequently used approaches and outline some of the most important criticisms and paths forward., (© 2024 The Author(s). Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics © 2024 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Many new opportunities surround rare pediatric disease drug development, thanks to key advances in regulatory thinking and in the scientific community. As rare disease drug development brings challenges to the developers in terms of limited understanding of natural history, heterogeneity in drug response, as well as difficulty recruiting patients in pivotal trials, there has never been a greater need for quantitative integration. To understand how International Consortium for Innovation and Quality in Pharmaceutical Development (IQ) member companies approach pediatric rare disease drug development, the rare pediatric subteam of the Clinical Pharmacology Leadership Group (CPLG) sponsored Pediatrics Working Group conducted a baseline survey to assess the four main pillars of this quantitative innovation, namely, biomarkers and surrogate end points, statistical methodologies, model-informed drug development, as well as public-private partnerships. The survey was administered by IQ and yielded 13 evaluable responders from represented companies. This article presents the key findings from this baseline identifying survey, highlighting the key blind spots, and providing insightful expert opinions to address those gaps. In summary, we call an urgent attention to the community on the opportunities to enhance integration and within-industry learnings from this analysis on aspects related to platform studies, end-to-end quantitative integration, and sharing of trial-level placebo data for better understanding of disease progression and more efficient trial designs. We collectively hope that these findings will stimulate discussion and debate around cross-industry sharing and collaboration to better delineate principles and further enhance the efficiency of rare pediatric disease drug development., (© 2024 The Author(s). Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics © 2024 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

In the relentless pursuit of optimizing drug development, the intricate process of determining the ideal dosage unfolds. This involves "dose-finding" studies, crucial for providing insights into subsequent registration trials. However, the challenges intensify when tackling rare diseases. The complexity arises from poorly understood pathophysiologies, scarcity of appropriate animal models, and limited natural history understanding. The inherent heterogeneity, coupled with challenges in defining clinical end points, poses substantial challenges, hindering the utility of available data. The small affected population, low disease awareness, and restricted healthcare access compound the difficulty in conducting dose-finding studies. This white paper delves into critical dose selection aspects, focusing on key therapeutic areas, such as oncology, neurology, hepatology, metabolic rare diseases. It also explores dose selection challenges posed by pediatric rare diseases as well as novel modalities, including enzyme replacement therapies, cell and gene therapies, and oligonucleotides. Several examples emphasize the pivotal role of clinical pharmacology in navigating the complexities associated with these diseases and emerging treatment modalities., (© 2024 The Author(s). Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics © 2024 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) oversee pharmaceutical regulations, including orphan drugs targeting rare diseases with limited patient populations. Post-marketing studies are crucial for monitoring safety and efficacy, with post-marketing requirements (PMRs) mandated by the regulatory agencies to ensure compliance. This study aims to compare PMR statuses, objectives, and pivotal trial characteristics of orphan drugs approved by the FDA (n = 154) and EMA (n = 79) from 2008 to 2018, shedding light on regulatory differences and their impact on drug development. Contrary to expectations, our analysis found no significant disparity in the proportion of orphan drugs with and without PMRs approved by both the FDA (48.1%) and EMA (55.7%). Safety concerns surrounding orphan drugs post-approval, attributed partly to pivotal trial design, underscore the need for robust post-marketing surveillance. While the FDA primarily focuses on post-marketing safety (36.1%), the EMA places a higher emphasis on both efficacy and safety (47.1%), reflecting distinct approaches to PMR management between the two regulatory bodies. The observed trend of delayed PMRs at the EMA (47.1%) highlights the importance of effective cooperation between regulators and pharmaceutical companies to ensure the timely completion of PMRs and enhance drug safety., (© 2024 The Author(s). Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Model-informed approaches provide a quantitative framework to integrate all available nonclinical and clinical data, thus furnishing a totality of evidence approach to drug development and regulatory evaluation. Maximizing the use of all available data and information about the drug enables a more robust characterization of the risk-benefit profile and reduces uncertainty in both technical and regulatory success. This offers the potential to transform rare diseases drug development, where conducting large well-controlled clinical trials is impractical and/or unethical due to a small patient population, a significant portion of which could be children. Additionally, the totality of evidence generated by model-informed approaches can provide confirmatory evidence for regulatory approval without the need for additional clinical data. In the article, applications of novel quantitative approaches such as quantitative systems pharmacology, disease progression modeling, artificial intelligence, machine learning, modeling of real-world data using model-based meta-analysis and strategies such as external control and patient-reported outcomes as well as clinical trial simulations to optimize trials and sample collection are discussed. Specific case studies of these modeling approaches in rare diseases are provided to showcase applications in drug development and regulatory review. Finally, perspectives are shared on the future state of these modeling approaches in rare diseases drug development along with challenges and opportunities for incorporating such tools in the rational development of drug products., (© 2024 Kura Oncology Inc. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics © 2024 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Objective: To determine the clinical benefit of drugs that earned or redeemed rare pediatric disease priority review vouchers (PRVs) from 2017 through 2023, and the revenues generated by such drugs., Study Design: In this cohort study, Federal Register documents, publicly available health technology agency (HTA) assessments, and financial filings were used to identify drugs that were issued or redeemed using a rare pediatric disease PRV from 2017 through 2023, and to assess their added therapeutic benefit and drug-specific global revenues., Results: Among the 36 drugs whose approval resulted in issuance of a rare pediatric PRV, therapeutic benefit ratings were available for 17 (47%), with 9 (53%) rated as high by at least 1 organization. Mean annual global revenues were $363 million (year 1), $621 million (year 2), and $850 million (year 3). The median annual list price for drugs issued a voucher was $788,705. Vouchers were then redeemed for 15 different drugs; out of 13 drugs with therapeutic benefit ratings, 4 (31%) were high value., Conclusions: Drugs that treat rare pediatric diseases generate similar revenues compared with other brand drugs, and drugs with high therapeutic benefit tend to generate more revenue than those with low therapeutic benefit. Drugs that earned the rare pediatric disease PRV for their manufacturer generate significant revenues and the voucher may not be necessary to incentivize drug development in the rare pediatric disease space., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest This study received funding from Arnold Ventures. A.K. reports serving as an expert witness on behalf of a class of individual plaintiffs against Gilead related to its tenofovir-containing products, and having served as an expert with the FTC in the Amgen-Horizon merger case (now settled). The other author declares no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The introduction of safe and effective rare/ultra-rare disease treatments is a focus of many biotherapeutic enterprises. Despite this increased activity, a significant unmet need remains, and the responsibility to meet this need is augmented by enhanced genomic, biologic, medical, analytical, and informatic tools. It is recognized that the development of an effective and safe rare/ultra-rare disease therapeutic faces a number of challenges with an important role noted for clinical pharmacology. Clinical pharmacology is foundationally an integrative discipline which must be embedded in and is interdependent upon understanding the pathogenic biology, clinical presentation, disease progression, and end-point assessment of the disease under study. This manuscript presents an overview and two case examples of this integrative approach, the development of C5-targeted therapeutics for the treatment of generalized myasthenia gravis and asfotase alpha for the treatment of hypophosphatasia. The two presented case examples show the usefulness of understanding the biological drivers and clinical course of a rare disease, having relevant animal models, procuring informative natural history data, importing assessment tools from relevant alternative areas, and using integrated applied clinical pharmacology to inform target engagement, dose, and the cascade of pharmacodynamic and clinical effects that follow. Learnings from these programs include the importance of assuring cross-validation of assays throughout a development program and continued commitment to understanding the relationship among the array of Pd end points and clinical outcomes. Using an integrative approach, substantive work remains to be done to meet the unmet needs of patients with rare/ultra-rare disease., (© 2024 The Author(s). Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics © 2024 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Purpose: Health-system pharmacists play a crucial role in monitoring the pharmaceutical pipeline to manage formularies, allocate resources, and optimize clinical programs for new therapies. This article aims to support pharmacists by providing periodic updates on new and anticipated novel drug approvals., Summary: Selected drug approvals anticipated in the 12-month period covering the second quarter of 2024 through the first quarter of 2025 are reviewed. The analysis emphasizes drugs expected to have significant clinical and financial impact in hospitals and clinics, as selected from 52 novel drugs awaiting US Food and Drug Administration approval. New cellular and gene therapies for cancers continued to strengthen the pipeline, in addition to new drugs targeting previously untreatable conditions. Several novel drugs are being developed for rare and ultra-rare diseases such as hemophilia, Niemann-Pick disease type C, hereditary angioedema, and aromatic l-amino acid decarboxylase deficiency., Conclusion: The current drug pipeline includes new drugs with various indications for cancers and rare diseases as well as diabetes, acute coronary syndrome, chronic skin disorder, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease., (© American Society of Health-System Pharmacists 2024. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The number of expensive drugs for rare diseases (EDRDs) approved by Health Canada and their contribution to healthcare costs have been rapidly increasing. The federal government has announced a three-year funding commitment of $1.4 billion for EDRDs, but principles need to be developed for how that funding will be allocated, especially in cases where insufficient data are available to guide decision making. Here, we review the role of evidence quality in making choices and draw on the experience from other countries to put forward five principles about how the money should be spent., (Copyright © 2024 Longwoods Publishing.)

Effective translation of rare disease diagnosis knowledge into therapeutic applications is achievable within a reasonable timeframe; where mutations are amenable to current antisense oligonucleotide technology. In our study, we identified five distinct types of abnormal splice-causing mutations in patients with rare genetic disorders and developed a tailored antisense oligonucleotide for each mutation type using phosphorodiamidate morpholino oligomers with or without octa-guanidine dendrimers and 2'-O-methoxyethyl phosphorothioate. We observed variations in treatment effects and efficiencies, influenced by both the chosen chemistry and the specific nature of the aberrant splicing patterns targeted for correction. Our study demonstrated the successful correction of all five different types of aberrant splicing. Our findings reveal that effective correction of aberrant splicing can depend on altering the chemical composition of oligonucleotides and suggest a fast, efficient, and feasible approach for developing personalized therapeutic interventions for genetic disorders within short time frames., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: The accessibility issue of orphan drugs in China is prominent. Based on real-world data from a tier-one city in Northeast China, this study aims to analyze the current usage and affordability of orphan drugs for rare diseases., Methods: The data was sourced from the health insurance claims data of a certain city from 2018 to 2021, including a total of 16 orphan drugs. The utilization of orphan drugs is assessed using four indicators: frequency of medical insurance claims, medication cost, defined daily doses (DDDs), and defined daily drug cost (DDDc). Affordability is measured using the concept of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE)., Results: Between January 2018 and December 2021, there were a total of 2,851 medical insurance claims in the city, with a total medication costs of $3.08 million. Overall, during the study, there was a year-on-year increase in the utilization frequency of individual rare disease drugs in the city, with DDDs rising from 140.22 in 2018 to 3983.63 in 2021. Additionally, the annual medication costs of individual drugs showed a consistent upward trend, increasing from $10,953.53 in 2018 to $120,491.36 in 2021. However, the DDDc of individual drugs decreased from $398.12 in 2018 to $96.65 in 2021.The number of sales and the amount of sales for orphan drugs in community pharmacies have significantly increased. Prior to medical insurance coverage, out of the 16 orphan drugs, 9 drugs had annual treatment costs exceeding CHE for urban residents, and 15 drugs had annual treatment costs exceeding CHE for rural residents. After medical insurance coverage, there were no drugs with out-of-pocket costs exceeding CHE for urban residents, while 8 drugs had out-of-pocket costs exceeding CHE for rural residents. Furthermore, both before and after medical insurance coverage, the four treatment drugs for idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension were more affordable compared to the four treatment drugs for multiple sclerosis., Conclusion: The usage frequency of orphan drugs in a certain city increased gradually, but the disease burden remained heavy. More policy support should be provided to the priority rare disease populations, and the rare disease medical security and diagnosis and treatment systems should be improved., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Clinical development for orphan drugs presents significant difficulties and challenges. There is no unique or standard design, conduct, and outcome assessment methodology and it is sometimes impractical to fit design models of rare disease trials in any practiced and well-known framework. In the European Union (EU) these challenges encompass a broad array of subjects, including trial design, study outcomes, patient recruitment, trial conduct ethics, trial cost, and chances of success. This literature-based review study aims to provide a thorough overview of the critical aspects of rare disease trials in the EU by analyzing the current landscape of rare disease trials, highlighting key challenges, delving into regulatory and research initiatives and innovation in trial designs, and proposing multi-faceted solutions to implement effective rare disease clinical trials in the region., Discussion: Traditional clinical trial designs, validation, and evaluation methodologies used for nonorphan drugs often prove unsuitable for orphan drugs, given the small patient populations, sometimes fewer than 1000 cases. There is an increasing need for accessible therapies and both regulators as well as industry are trying to develop affordable and effective drugs to address this need. Despite several steps that have been taken, the timely development of drugs remains a challenge. One of the reasons behind the long development timeline is the recruitment, retention, and conduct of rare disease trials. To optimize the development timelines of orphan drugs in the EU, it is important to ensure that the safety and efficacy of the product is not compromised. Industry and regulatory agencies must implement innovative trial designs, devise flexible policies, and incorporate real-world data for assessing clinical outcomes., Conclusion: Collaboration among academic institutions, pharmaceutical companies (both small and major), patient groups, and health authorities is crucial in overcoming obstacles related to clinical trials and providing assistance and creative ideas. The ultimate objective of granting rare disease patients timely and affordable access to medications with a positive balance between benefits and risks is to be met., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Rare eosinophil-associated disorders (EADs), including hypereosinophilic syndrome, eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, and eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders, are a heterogeneous group of conditions characterized by blood and/or tissue hypereosinophilia and eosinophil-related clinical manifestations. Although the recent availability of biologic therapies that directly and indirectly target eosinophils has the potential to dramatically improve treatment options for all EADs, clinical trials addressing their safety and efficacy in rare EADs have been relatively few. Consequently, patient access to therapy is limited for many biologics, and the establishment of evidence-based treatment guidelines has been extremely difficult. In this regard, multicenter retrospective collaborative studies focusing on disease manifestations and treatment responses in rare EADs have provided invaluable data for physicians managing patients with these conditions and helped identify important questions for future translational research. During the Clinical Pre-Meeting Workshop held in association with the July 2023 biennial meeting of the International Eosinophil Society in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, the successes and limitations of pivotal multicenter retrospective studies in EADs were summarized and unmet needs regarding the establishment of guidelines for use of biologics in rare EADs were discussed. Key topics of interest included (1) clinical outcome measures, (2) minimally invasive biomarkers of disease activity, (3) predictors of response to biologic agents, and (4) long-term safety of eosinophil depletion. Herein, we report a summary of these discussions, presenting a state-of-the-art overview of data currently available for each of these topics, the limitations of the data, and avenues for future data generation through implementation of multidisciplinary and multicenter studies., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement. F.R. receives consultancy and/or speaker fees from GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, Menarini, and Merck. F.L.K. receives research funding from AstraZeneca and speaker fees from both AstraZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline. S.J.A. is the Chief Scientific Officer and an Executive Board member of EnteroTrack, LLC; a co-inventor and holds patents on the Esophageal String Test; and a consultant for Areteia Pharmaceuticals. P.A. has received consulting fees and research support from AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, and Sanofi and research support from Regeneron. B.S.B. receives remuneration for serving on the scientific advisory board of Allakos, Inc.; owns stock in Allakos; currently serves as a consultant for Third Harmonic Bio and Sanofi/Regeneron; receives publication-related royalty payments from Elsevier and UpToDate; is a co-inventor on existing Siglec-8–related patents and thus may be entitled to a share of royalties received by Johns Hopkins University during development and potential sales of such products; and is a co-founder of Allakos, which makes him subject to certain restrictions under university policy (the terms of this arrangement are being managed by Johns Hopkins University and Northwestern University in accordance with their conflict-of-interest policies). M.W.J. has received research funding from F. Hoffmann-La Roche. S.K.M. has received consulting, advisory, or speaking honoraria from AstraZeneca, Amgen, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, and Sanofi/Regeneron. P.O.B. receives research funding from GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, Blueprint, and DBV Technologies; and serves on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Genentech, and Kalvista. M.E.W. has received consulting, advisory, or speaking honoraria from Amgen, Areteia Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Avalo Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celldex, Cellergy Pharma, Cerecor, Cytoreason, Eli Lilly, Equillium, Glaxosmithkline, Incyte, Kinaset, Merck, Novartis, Om Pharma, Overtone Therapeutics/Foresite Labs, Phylaxis, Pulmatrix, Rapt Therapeutics, Regeneron, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi/Genzyme, Sentien, Sound Biologics, Tetherex Pharmaceuticals, Teva, Upstream Bio, and Verona Pharma. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Society for Leukocyte Biology 2024.)

Diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) are foundational principles for clinical trials and medical research. In rare diseases clinical research, where numbers of participants are already challenged by rarity itself, maximizing inclusion is of particular importance to clinical trial success, as well as ensuring the generalizability and relevance of the trial results to the people affected by these diseases. In this article, we review the medical and gray literature and cite case examples to provide insights into how DEIA can be proactively integrated into rare diseases clinical research. Here, we particularly focus on genetic diversity. While the rare diseases DEIA literature is nascent, it is accelerating as many patient advocacy groups, professional societies, training and educational organizations, researcher groups, and funders are setting intentional strategies to attain DEIA goals moving forward, and to establish metrics to ensure continued improvement. Successful examples in underserved and underrepresented populations are available that can serve as case studies upon which rare diseases clinical research programs can be built. Rare diseases have historically been innovation drivers in basic, translational, and clinical research, and ultimately, all populations benefit from data diversity in rare diseases populations that deliver novel insights and approaches to how clinical research can be performed., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

An increasing number of novel genomic therapies are expected to become available for patients with rare or ultra-rare diseases. However, the primary obstacle to equal patient access to these orphan genomic therapies are currently very high prices charged by manufacturers in the context of limited healthcare budgets. Taking into account ethical pricing theories, the paper proposes the implementation of a pricing infrastructure covering all European member states, which has the potential to promote distributive justice while maintaining the attractiveness of genomic therapy development., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The process of developing therapies to treat rare diseases is fraught with financial, regulatory, and logistical challenges that have limited our ability to build effective treatments. Recently, a novel type of therapy called antisense therapy has shown immense potential for the treatment of rare diseases, particularly through single-patient N-of-1 trials. Several N-of-1 antisense therapies have been developed recently for rare diseases, including the landmark study of milasen. In response to the success of N-of-1 antisense therapy, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has developed unique guidelines specifically for the development of antisense therapy to treat N-of-1 rare diseases. This policy change establishes a strong foundation for future therapy development and addresses some of the major limitations that previously hindered the development of therapies for rare diseases.

Summary: Advances in cancer biology and diagnostics have led to the recognition of a multitude of rare cancer subtypes, emphasizing the pressing need for strategies to accelerate drug development for patients with these cancers. This paper addresses the unique challenges of dose finding in trials that accrue small numbers of patients with rare cancers; strategies for dose optimization are proposed, in line with evolving approaches to dose determination in the age of the US Food and Drug Administration's Project Optimus., (©2024 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Established treatment options for rare cancers are limited by the small number of patients. The current comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) testing might not fully exploit opportunities for precision oncology in patients with rare cancers. Therefore, we aimed to explore the factors associated with CGP testing utility in rare cancers and identify barriers to implementing precision oncology. Patients who underwent CGP testing at our institution between September 2019 and June 2021 were enrolled in this retrospective study. Based on their results, the patients received molecularly targeted drugs or immune checkpoint inhibitors. Univariate and multivariate analyses evaluated the association between patient characteristics and the proportion of patients receiving molecularly targeted drugs. Overall, 790 patients underwent CGP testing. Among them, 333 patients with rare cancers were identified, of whom 278 (83.5%) had actionable genomic alterations, 127 (38.1%) had druggable genomic alterations, and 25 (7.5%) received genomically matched therapy. The proportion of patients receiving molecularly targeted drugs was significantly higher among those with treatment options with evidence levels A-D (8.7%) than those without treatment options with evidence levels A-D (2.9%). A potential barrier to CGP testing utility in rare cancers is the limited number of molecularly targeted drugs with clinical evidence. We propose that CGP testing be performed in patients with rare cancers who have treatment options with evidence levels A-D to maximize CGP testing utility in real-world practice., (© 2024 The Authors. Cancer Science published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Cancer Association.)

Access to drugs for rare diseases constitutes a challenge to healthcare systems, especially those with public funding. This study aimed to map and summarize the criteria used by HTA agencies in different healthcare systems to evaluate reimbursement recommendations for orphan drugs. A comprehensive literature search was performed on the databases PubMed, LILACS, Scopus, and Embase and the gray literature (Google Scholar and websites of HTA agencies). Publications addressing the criteria used by HTA agencies in countries with public healthcare systems when evaluating reimbursement recommendations for orphan drugs were included. This scoping review included 23 studies published between 2014 and 2023, mostly consisting of reviews of HTA reports, guidance documents, and original articles. The criteria were mapped from 19 countries and ranked within three models of healthcare systems (National Health System, National Health Insurance, and Social Health Insurance). All models shared concerns about unmet needs and disease nature. In addition, NHS countries (e.g., United Kingdom, Sweden, and Italy) prioritized innovation and system-level impact, while SHI countries (e.g., Germany, France, the Netherlands) usually valued budget impact and employed expedited evaluation processes. This review provides a comprehensive understanding of the general tendencies of each healthcare system model in establishing differentiated criteria to address the challenges posed by the limited evidence and investment in the field of rare diseases., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Rare diseases have become an increasingly important public health priority due to their collective prevalence and often life-threatening nature. Incentive programs, such as the Orphan Drug Act have been introduced to increase the development of rare disease therapeutics. While the approval of these therapeutics requires supportive data from stringent pre-market studies, these data lack the ability to describe the causes of treatment response heterogeneity, leading to medications often being more harmful or less effective than predicted. If a Goal Line were to be used to describe the multifactorial continuum of phenotypic variations occurring in response to a medication, the 'Goal Posts', or the two defining points of this continuum, would be (1) Super-Response, or an extraordinary therapeutic effect; and (2) Serious Harm. Investigation of the pharmacogenomics behind these two extreme phenotypes can potentially lead to the development of new therapeutics, help inform rational use criteria in drug policy, and improve the understanding of underlying disease pathophysiology. In the context of rare diseases where cohort sizes are smaller than ideal, 'small data' and 'big data' approaches to data collection and analysis should be combined to produce the most robust results. This paper presents the importance of studying drug response in parallel to other research initiatives in rare diseases, as well as the need for international collaboration in the area of rare disease pharmacogenomics., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Background and Objectives: There are significant challenges when obtaining clinical and economic evidence for health technology assessments of rare diseases. Many of them have been highlighted in previous systematic reviews but they have not been summarised in a comprehensive manner. For all stakeholders working with rare diseases, it is important to be aware and understand these issues. The objective of this review is to identify the main challenges for the economic evaluation of orphan drugs in rare diseases., Methods: An umbrella review of systematic reviews of economic studies concerned with orphan and ultra-orphan drugs was conducted. Studies that were not systematic reviews, or on advanced therapeutic medicinal products, personalised medicines or other interventions that were not considered orphan drugs were excluded. The database searches included publications from 2010 to 2023, and were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane library using filters for systematic reviews, and economic evaluations and models. These filters were combined with search terms for rare diseases and orphan drugs. A hand search supplemented the literature searches. The findings were reported by a compliant Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram., Results: Two hundred and eighty-two records were identified from the literature searches, of which 64 were duplicates, whereas five reviews were identified from the hand search. A total of 36 reviews were included after screening against inclusion/exclusion criteria, 35 from literature searches and one from hand searching. Of those studies 1, 27 and 8 were low, moderate and high quality, respectively. The reviews highlight the scarcity of evidence for health economic parameters, for example, clinical effectiveness, costs, quality of life and the natural history of disease. Health economic evaluations such as cost-effectiveness and budget-impact analyses were scarce, and generally low-to-moderate quality. The causes were limited health economic parameters, together with publications bias, especially for cost-effectiveness analyses., Conclusions: The results highlighted issues around a considerable paucity of evidence for economic evaluations and few cost-effectiveness analyses, supporting the notion that a paucity of evidence makes economic evaluations of rare diseases more challenging compared with more prevalent diseases. Furthermore, we provide recommendations for more sustainable approaches in economic evaluations of rare diseases., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Rare diseases are infrequent, but together they affect up to 6-10 % of the world's population, mainly children. Patients require precise doses and strict adherence to avoid metabolic or cardiac failure in some cases, which cannot be addressed in a reliable way using pharmaceutical compounding. 3D printing (3DP) is a disruptive technology that allows the real-time personalization of the dose and the modulation of the dosage form to adapt the medicine to the therapeutic needs of each patient. 3D printed chewable medicines containing amino acids (citrulline, isoleucine, valine, and isoleucine and valine combinations) were prepared in a hospital setting, and the efficacy and acceptability were evaluated in comparison to conventional compounded medicines in six children. The inclusion of new flavours (lemon, vanilla and peach) to obtain more information on patient preferences and the implementation of a mobile app to obtain patient feedback in real-time was also used. The 3D printed medicines controlled amino acid levels within target levels as well as the conventional medicines. The deviation of citrulline levels was narrower and closer within the target concentration with the chewable formulations. According to participants' responses, the chewable formulations were well accepted and can improve adherence and quality of life. For the first time, 3DP enabled two actives to be combined in the same formulation, reducing the number of administrations. This study demonstrated the benefits of preparing 3D printed personalized treatments for children diagnosed with rare metabolic disorders using a novel technology in real clinical practice., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Abdul W. Basit reports a relationship with FABRX Ltd. that includes: employment and equity or stocks. Alvaro Goyanes reports a relationship with FABRX Ltd. that includes: employment and equity or stocks. If there are other authors, they 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 © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Rare diseases are characterized by substantial unmet need mostly because the majority have limited, or no treatment options and a large number also affect children. Since the inception of EU orphan regulation in 2000 the European Medicines Agency Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products has received several applications for paediatric rare neuromuscular diseases (PERAN) however treatment options remain limited. Here we discuss the results form an observational, retrospective, cross-sectional study to characterize the currently authorised orphan medicinal products (OMP) and orphan designations (OD) given to products for PERAN in the last two decades. In the EU about half of PERAN diseases have at least one active OD approved since 2000, and about half of these are for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). The large majority of PERAN diseases do not have an authorised medicine with only 6 OMP currently authorised for Spinal muscular atrophy (3); DMD (1) and Myasthenia gravis (2). One in five products have inactive or discontinued regulatory development but clinical trials are ongoing for the vast majority of PERAN diseases, and more than half are in the final stage of clinical research with significantly more products with medical plausibility based in clinical data reaching advanced stages in clinical development., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Pyruvate kinase M2 (PKM2) is a key glycolytic enzyme that regulates proliferating cell metabolism. The role of PKM2 in common diseases has been well established, but its role in rare diseases (RDs) is less understood. Over the past few years, PKM2 has emerged as a crucial player in RDs, including, neoplastic, respiratory, metabolic, and neurological disorders. Herein, we summarize recent findings and developments highlighting PKM2 as an emerging key player in RDs. We also discuss the current status of PKM2 modulation in RDs with particular emphasis on preclinical and clinical studies in addition to current challenges in the field., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Due to the low number of patients, rare genetic diseases are a special challenge for the development of therapies, especially for diseases that result from numerous, patient-specific pathogenic variants. Precision medicine makes use of various kinds of molecular information about a specific variant, so that the possibilities for an effective therapy based on the molecular features of the variants can be elucidated. The attention to personalized precision therapies has increased among scientists and clinicians, since the "single drug for all patients" approach does not allow the classification of individuals in subgroups according to the differences in the disease genotype or phenotype. This review article summarizes some approaches of personalized precision medicine that can be used for a cost-effective and fast development of therapies, even for single patients. We have focused on specific examples on inborn errors of metabolism, with special attention on drug repurposing. Furthermore, we provide an overview of cell culture models that are suitable for precision medicine approaches., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of SSIEM.)

Rare diseases (RD) affect a small number of people compared to the general population and are mostly genetic in origin. The first clinical signs often appear at birth or in childhood, and patients endure high levels of pain and progressive loss of autonomy frequently associated with short life expectancy. Until recently, the low prevalence of RD and the gatekeeping delay in their diagnosis have long hampered research. The era of nucleic acid (NA)-based therapies has revolutionized the landscape of RD treatment and new hopes arise with the perspectives of disease-modifying drugs development as some NA-based therapies are now entering the clinical stage. Herein, we review NA-based drugs that were approved and are currently under investigation for the treatment of RD. We also discuss the recent structural improvements of NA-based therapeutics and delivery system, which overcome the main limitations in their market expansion and the current approaches that are developed to address the endosomal escape issue. We finally open the discussion on the ethical and societal issues that raise this new technology in terms of regulatory approval and sustainability of production., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Context: Clinical endocrinology encompasses many diseases requiring long-term drug therapy. Prohibitive pricing of some endocrine drugs classified as essential by the World Health Organization has created suboptimal care of patients with endocrine disorders., Evidence Acquisition: This review is based on evidence obtained from several databases and search engines including PubMed, Google, and Google Scholar; reference searches; manual searching for web pages of international regulatory bodies; and the authors' experience from different healthcare settings., Evidence Synthesis: After the expiry of a patent, generic versions with the opportunity for increased availability and a price reduction are expected. There are access barriers worldwide for many off-patent endocrine drugs. The high price is the main issue for several medicines including insulin, hydrocortisone, testosterone, and gonadotropins. This is caused by several factors including the market monopoly due to the lack of registered generics or suppliers limiting the benefit of competition and a complex supply chain. Additionally, the lack of some medicines has been concerning due to market factors such as the relatively small number of patients, making it less attractive for the manufacturers. Commissioning of nonprofit manufacturers and state manufacturing as well as strict price control measures could alleviate this situation., Conclusion: Lack of availability and disproportionate price inflation affecting essential off-patent endocrine therapies is common due to several interrelated factors. Global collaboration among healthcare organizations with the support of policymaking bodies might be needed to mitigate this., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Endocrine Society.)