Department of Health Sciences, University Medical Center, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Department of Economics, Econometrics and Finance, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2022 Apr 5;17(1):157. doi: 10.1186/s13023-022-02283-z.
Conventional cost-effectiveness analysis-i.e., assessing pharmaceuticals through a cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) framework-originated from a societal commitment to maximize population health given limited resources. This "extra-welfarist" approach has produced pricing and reimbursement systems that are not well- aligned with the unique considerations of orphan drugs. This framework has been slow to evolve along with our increased understanding of the impact of rare diseases, which in turn has complicated the assessment of orphan drugs meant to treat rare diseases. Herein, we (i) discuss the limitations of conventional cost-effectiveness analysis as applied to assessing access to, as well as the pricing and reimbursement of, orphan drugs, (ii) critically appraise alternative and supplemental approaches, and (iii) offer insights on plausible steps forward.
传统的成本效益分析——即通过成本效益调整生命年(QALY)框架来评估药品——源于社会为在有限资源下最大化人口健康所做出的承诺。这种“超福利主义”方法产生的定价和报销系统与孤儿药的独特考虑因素并不完全一致。随着我们对罕见病影响的理解不断加深,这一框架的发展一直较为缓慢,而这反过来又使评估用于治疗罕见病的孤儿药变得更加复杂。在此,我们(i)讨论了传统成本效益分析在评估孤儿药的可及性、定价和报销方面的局限性,(ii)批判性地评价了替代和补充方法,以及(iii)提供了关于可行步骤的见解。