Gammie Todd, Lu Christine Y, Babar Zaheer Ud-Din
University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 9;10(10):e0140002. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140002. eCollection 2015.
To review existing regulations and policies utilised by countries to enable patient access to orphan drugs.
A review of the literature (1998 to 2014) was performed to identify relevant, peer-reviewed articles. Using content analysis, we synthesised regulations and policies for access to orphan drugs by type and by country.
Fifty seven articles and 35 countries were included in this review. Six broad categories of regulation and policy instruments were identified: national orphan drug policies, orphan drug designation, marketing authorization, incentives, marketing exclusivity, and pricing and reimbursement. The availability of orphan drugs depends on individual country's legislation and regulations including national orphan drug policies, orphan drug designation, marketing authorization, marketing exclusivity and incentives such as tax credits to ensure research, development and marketing. The majority of countries (27/35) had in place orphan drug legislation. Access to orphan drugs depends on individual country's pricing and reimbursement policies, which varied widely between countries. High prices and insufficient evidence often limit orphan drugs from meeting the traditional health technology assessment criteria, especially cost-effectiveness, which may influence access.
Overall many countries have implemented a combination of legislations, regulations and policies for orphan drugs in the last two decades. While these may enable the availability and access to orphan drugs, there are critical differences between countries in terms of range and types of legislations, regulations and policies implemented. Importantly, China and India, two of the largest countries by population size, both lack national legislation for orphan medicines and rare diseases, which could have substantial negative impacts on their patient populations with rare diseases.
回顾各国为使患者能够获得孤儿药而采用的现有法规和政策。
对1998年至2014年的文献进行综述,以确定相关的、经过同行评审的文章。通过内容分析,我们按类型和国家综合了获取孤儿药的法规和政策。
本综述纳入了57篇文章和35个国家。确定了六大类法规和政策工具:国家孤儿药政策、孤儿药认定、上市许可、激励措施、市场独占权以及定价和报销。孤儿药的可及性取决于各个国家的法律法规,包括国家孤儿药政策、孤儿药认定、上市许可、市场独占权以及诸如税收抵免等激励措施,以确保研发和上市。大多数国家(27/35)已制定了孤儿药立法。获取孤儿药取决于各个国家的定价和报销政策,各国之间差异很大。高价格和证据不足常常限制孤儿药符合传统的卫生技术评估标准,尤其是成本效益,这可能影响其可及性。
总体而言,在过去二十年里,许多国家已针对孤儿药实施了一系列法律法规和政策。虽然这些措施可能使孤儿药能够供应并可及,但各国在实施的法律法规和政策的范围和类型方面存在重大差异。重要的是,中国和印度这两个人口大国均缺乏针对孤儿药和罕见病的国家立法,这可能对其患有罕见病的患者群体产生重大负面影响。