CORE
CO
nnecting
RE
positories
Services
Services overview
Explore all CORE services
Access to raw data
API
Dataset
FastSync
Content discovery
Recommender
Discovery
OAI identifiers
OAI Resolver
Managing content
Dashboard
Bespoke contracts
Consultancy services
Support us
Support us
Membership
Sponsorship
Research partnership
About
About
About us
Our mission
Team
Blog
FAQs
Contact us
Community governance
Governance
Advisory Board
Board of supporters
Research network
Innovations
Our research
Labs
research
Application of a policy framework for the public funding of drugs for rare diseases
Authors
Christine Seager
D Coyle
+9 more
Doug Coyle
E Winquist
Eric Winquist
Gerald A. Evans
Janet Martin
Joe T. R. Clarke
N Daniels
R Cookson
Winnie Chan
Publication date
17 July 2014
Publisher
'Springer Science and Business Media LLC'
Doi
Cite
View
on
PubMed
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In many countries, decisions about the public funding of drugs are preferentially based on the results of randomized trials. For truly rare diseases, such trials are not typically available, and approaches by public payers are highly variable. In view of this, a policy framework intended to fairly evaluate these drugs was developed by the Drugs for Rare Diseases Working Group (DRDWG) at the request of the Ontario Public Drug Programs. OBJECTIVE: To report the initial experience of applying a novel evaluation framework to funding applications for drugs for rare diseases. METHODS: Retrospective observational cohort study. MEASURES: Clinical effectiveness, costs, funding recommendations, funding approval. KEY RESULTS: Between March 2008 and February 2013, eight drugs were evaluated using the DRDWG framework. The estimated average annual drug cost per patient ranged from 28,000 to 1,200,000 Canadian dollars (CAD). For five drugs, full evaluations were completed, specific funding recommendations were made by the DRDWG, and funding was approved after risk-sharing agreements with the manufacturers were negotiated. For two drugs, the disease indications were determined to be ineligible for consideration. For one drug, there was insufficient natural history data for the disease to provide a basis for recommendation. For the five drugs fully evaluated, 32 patients met the predefined eligibility criteria for funding, and five were denied based on predefined exclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The framework improved transparency and consistency for evaluation and public funding of drugs for rare diseases in Ontario. The evaluation process will continue to be iteratively refined as feedback on actual versus expected clinical and economic outcomes is incorporated. © 2014 Society of General Internal Medicine
Similar works
Full text
Open in the Core reader
Download PDF
Available Versions
Brunel University Research Archive
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:bura.brunel.ac.uk:2438/126...
Last time updated on 27/07/2016
Crossref
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
info:doi/10.1007%2Fs11606-014-...
Last time updated on 27/03/2019