Cargando…

Does market exclusivity hinder the development of Follow-on Orphan Medicinal Products in Europe?

BACKGROUND: We determined whether the market exclusivity incentive of the European Orphan Drug Regulation results in a market monopoly or that absence of another Orphan Medicinal Product (OMP) for the same rare disorder, a so-called follow-on OMP, is a matter of time or market size. In the interest...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brabers, Anne EM, Moors, Ellen HM, van Weely, Sonja, de Vrueh, Remco LA
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3185263/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21892964
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1750-1172-6-59
_version_ 1782213197018693632
author Brabers, Anne EM
Moors, Ellen HM
van Weely, Sonja
de Vrueh, Remco LA
author_facet Brabers, Anne EM
Moors, Ellen HM
van Weely, Sonja
de Vrueh, Remco LA
author_sort Brabers, Anne EM
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We determined whether the market exclusivity incentive of the European Orphan Drug Regulation results in a market monopoly or that absence of another Orphan Medicinal Product (OMP) for the same rare disorder, a so-called follow-on OMP, is a matter of time or market size. In the interest of rare disorder patients better understanding of the effect of the market exclusivity incentive on follow-on OMP development is warranted. METHODS: First, the impact of various market-, product- and disease-related characteristics on follow-on OMP development in the EU was determined by comparing rare disorders with an approved OMP and at least one follow-on OMP (N = 26), with rare disorders with an approved OMP and no follow-on OMP (N = 18). Next, we determined whether manufacturers continued development of a follow-on OMP upon approval of the first OMP for the intended rare disorder. Since in the EU significant benefit of an OMP has to be established, we determined for each follow-on OMP for which development was continued on what grounds significant benefit was assumed by the sponsor. Data were collected from the public domain only. RESULTS: The likelihood of a rare disorder with an approved OMP to obtain at least one follow-on OMP development was strongly associated with disease prevalence, turnover of the first OMP, disease class, disease-specific scientific output and age of onset. Out of a total of 120 follow-on OMPs only one follow-on OMP could be identified for which development was discontinued upon approval of the first OMP for the same rare disorder. Only a substantial level of discontinuation of follow-on OMP development would have indicated the existence of a market monopoly. Moreover, sponsors that continued development of a follow-on OMP predominantly assumed that their product had an improved efficacy compared to the first approved OMP. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that absence of follow-on OMP development is a matter of time or market size, rather than that the market exclusivity incentive of the European Orphan Drug Regulation creates a market monopoly.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3185263
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31852632011-10-05 Does market exclusivity hinder the development of Follow-on Orphan Medicinal Products in Europe? Brabers, Anne EM Moors, Ellen HM van Weely, Sonja de Vrueh, Remco LA Orphanet J Rare Dis Research BACKGROUND: We determined whether the market exclusivity incentive of the European Orphan Drug Regulation results in a market monopoly or that absence of another Orphan Medicinal Product (OMP) for the same rare disorder, a so-called follow-on OMP, is a matter of time or market size. In the interest of rare disorder patients better understanding of the effect of the market exclusivity incentive on follow-on OMP development is warranted. METHODS: First, the impact of various market-, product- and disease-related characteristics on follow-on OMP development in the EU was determined by comparing rare disorders with an approved OMP and at least one follow-on OMP (N = 26), with rare disorders with an approved OMP and no follow-on OMP (N = 18). Next, we determined whether manufacturers continued development of a follow-on OMP upon approval of the first OMP for the intended rare disorder. Since in the EU significant benefit of an OMP has to be established, we determined for each follow-on OMP for which development was continued on what grounds significant benefit was assumed by the sponsor. Data were collected from the public domain only. RESULTS: The likelihood of a rare disorder with an approved OMP to obtain at least one follow-on OMP development was strongly associated with disease prevalence, turnover of the first OMP, disease class, disease-specific scientific output and age of onset. Out of a total of 120 follow-on OMPs only one follow-on OMP could be identified for which development was discontinued upon approval of the first OMP for the same rare disorder. Only a substantial level of discontinuation of follow-on OMP development would have indicated the existence of a market monopoly. Moreover, sponsors that continued development of a follow-on OMP predominantly assumed that their product had an improved efficacy compared to the first approved OMP. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that absence of follow-on OMP development is a matter of time or market size, rather than that the market exclusivity incentive of the European Orphan Drug Regulation creates a market monopoly. BioMed Central 2011-09-05 /pmc/articles/PMC3185263/ /pubmed/21892964 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1750-1172-6-59 Text en Copyright ©2011 Brabers et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Brabers, Anne EM
Moors, Ellen HM
van Weely, Sonja
de Vrueh, Remco LA
Does market exclusivity hinder the development of Follow-on Orphan Medicinal Products in Europe?
title Does market exclusivity hinder the development of Follow-on Orphan Medicinal Products in Europe?
title_full Does market exclusivity hinder the development of Follow-on Orphan Medicinal Products in Europe?
title_fullStr Does market exclusivity hinder the development of Follow-on Orphan Medicinal Products in Europe?
title_full_unstemmed Does market exclusivity hinder the development of Follow-on Orphan Medicinal Products in Europe?
title_short Does market exclusivity hinder the development of Follow-on Orphan Medicinal Products in Europe?
title_sort does market exclusivity hinder the development of follow-on orphan medicinal products in europe?
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3185263/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21892964
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1750-1172-6-59
work_keys_str_mv AT brabersanneem doesmarketexclusivityhinderthedevelopmentoffollowonorphanmedicinalproductsineurope
AT moorsellenhm doesmarketexclusivityhinderthedevelopmentoffollowonorphanmedicinalproductsineurope
AT vanweelysonja doesmarketexclusivityhinderthedevelopmentoffollowonorphanmedicinalproductsineurope
AT devruehremcola doesmarketexclusivityhinderthedevelopmentoffollowonorphanmedicinalproductsineurope