Cargando…
Systematic review of available evidence on 11 high-priced inpatient orphan drugs
BACKGROUND: Attention for Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) is growing, but evidence for orphan drugs is argued to be limited and inferior. This study systematically reviews the available evidence on clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and budget impact for orphan drugs. METHODS: A systematic rev...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3751719/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23947946 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1750-1172-8-124 |
_version_ | 1782281654186803200 |
---|---|
author | Kanters, Tim A de Sonneville-Koedoot, Caroline Redekop, W Ken Hakkaart, Leona |
author_facet | Kanters, Tim A de Sonneville-Koedoot, Caroline Redekop, W Ken Hakkaart, Leona |
author_sort | Kanters, Tim A |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Attention for Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) is growing, but evidence for orphan drugs is argued to be limited and inferior. This study systematically reviews the available evidence on clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and budget impact for orphan drugs. METHODS: A systematic review was performed in PubMed, Embase, NHS EED and HTA databases for 11 inpatient orphan drugs listed on the Dutch policy rule on orphan drugs. For included studies, we determined the type of study and various study characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 338 studies met all inclusion criteria. Almost all studies (96%) focused on clinical effectiveness of the drug. Of these studies, most studies were case studies (41%) or observational studies (39%). However, for all orphan diseases at least one experimental or quasi-experimental study was found, and a randomized clinical trial was available for 60% of the orphan drugs. Eight studies described the cost-effectiveness of an orphan drug; an equal number described an orphan drug’s budget impact. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the often heard claim that RCTs are not feasible for orphan drugs, we found that an RCT was available in 60% of orphan drugs investigated. Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses for orphan drugs are seldom published. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3751719 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-37517192013-08-24 Systematic review of available evidence on 11 high-priced inpatient orphan drugs Kanters, Tim A de Sonneville-Koedoot, Caroline Redekop, W Ken Hakkaart, Leona Orphanet J Rare Dis Research BACKGROUND: Attention for Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) is growing, but evidence for orphan drugs is argued to be limited and inferior. This study systematically reviews the available evidence on clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and budget impact for orphan drugs. METHODS: A systematic review was performed in PubMed, Embase, NHS EED and HTA databases for 11 inpatient orphan drugs listed on the Dutch policy rule on orphan drugs. For included studies, we determined the type of study and various study characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 338 studies met all inclusion criteria. Almost all studies (96%) focused on clinical effectiveness of the drug. Of these studies, most studies were case studies (41%) or observational studies (39%). However, for all orphan diseases at least one experimental or quasi-experimental study was found, and a randomized clinical trial was available for 60% of the orphan drugs. Eight studies described the cost-effectiveness of an orphan drug; an equal number described an orphan drug’s budget impact. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the often heard claim that RCTs are not feasible for orphan drugs, we found that an RCT was available in 60% of orphan drugs investigated. Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses for orphan drugs are seldom published. BioMed Central 2013-08-16 /pmc/articles/PMC3751719/ /pubmed/23947946 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1750-1172-8-124 Text en Copyright © 2013 Kanters 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 Kanters, Tim A de Sonneville-Koedoot, Caroline Redekop, W Ken Hakkaart, Leona Systematic review of available evidence on 11 high-priced inpatient orphan drugs |
title | Systematic review of available evidence on 11 high-priced inpatient orphan drugs |
title_full | Systematic review of available evidence on 11 high-priced inpatient orphan drugs |
title_fullStr | Systematic review of available evidence on 11 high-priced inpatient orphan drugs |
title_full_unstemmed | Systematic review of available evidence on 11 high-priced inpatient orphan drugs |
title_short | Systematic review of available evidence on 11 high-priced inpatient orphan drugs |
title_sort | systematic review of available evidence on 11 high-priced inpatient orphan drugs |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3751719/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23947946 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1750-1172-8-124 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kanterstima systematicreviewofavailableevidenceon11highpricedinpatientorphandrugs AT desonnevillekoedootcaroline systematicreviewofavailableevidenceon11highpricedinpatientorphandrugs AT redekopwken systematicreviewofavailableevidenceon11highpricedinpatientorphandrugs AT hakkaartleona systematicreviewofavailableevidenceon11highpricedinpatientorphandrugs |