Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Research

Estimating the clinical cost of drug development for orphan versus non-orphan drugs

Authors: Kavisha Jayasundara, Aidan Hollis, Murray Krahn, Muhammad Mamdani, Jeffrey S. Hoch, Paul Grootendorst

Published in: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

High orphan drug prices have gained the attention of payers and policy makers. These prices may reflect the need to recoup the cost of drug development from a small patient pool. However, estimates of the cost of orphan drug development are sparse.

Methods

Using publicly available data, we estimated the differences in trial characteristics and clinical development costs with 100 orphan and 100 non-orphan drugs.

Results

We found that the out-of-pocket clinical costs per approved orphan drug to be $166 million and $291 million (2013 USD) per non-orphan drug. The capitalized clinical costs per approved orphan drug and non-orphan drug were estimated to be $291 million and $412 million respectively. When focusing on new molecular entities only, we found that the capitalized clinical cost per approved orphan drug was half that of a non-orphan drug.

Conclusions

More discussion is needed to better align on which cost components should be included in research and development costs for pharmaceuticals.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kumar Kakkar A, Dahiya N. The evolving drug development landscape: from blockbusters to niche busters in the orphan drug space. Drug Dev Res. 2014;75(4):231–4.CrossRef Kumar Kakkar A, Dahiya N. The evolving drug development landscape: from blockbusters to niche busters in the orphan drug space. Drug Dev Res. 2014;75(4):231–4.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Field MJ, B.T., editors, Rare Diseases and Orphan Products: Accelerating Research and Development. 2010, Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US). Field MJ, B.T., editors, Rare Diseases and Orphan Products: Accelerating Research and Development. 2010, Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US).
3.
go back to reference Simoens S. Pricing and reimbursement of orphan drugs: the need for more transparency. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2011;6:42.CrossRef Simoens S. Pricing and reimbursement of orphan drugs: the need for more transparency. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2011;6:42.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference EvaluatePharma, Orphan Drug Report 2017. 2017. EvaluatePharma, Orphan Drug Report 2017. 2017.
5.
go back to reference Haffner ME, Torrent-Farnell J, Maher PD. Does orphan drug legislation really answer the needs of patients? Lancet. 2008;371(9629):2041–4.CrossRef Haffner ME, Torrent-Farnell J, Maher PD. Does orphan drug legislation really answer the needs of patients? Lancet. 2008;371(9629):2041–4.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Meekings KN, Williams CS, Arrowsmith JE. Orphan drug development: an economically viable strategy for biopharma R&D. Drug Discov Today. 2012;17(13-14):660–4.CrossRef Meekings KN, Williams CS, Arrowsmith JE. Orphan drug development: an economically viable strategy for biopharma R&D. Drug Discov Today. 2012;17(13-14):660–4.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference O'Sullivan BP, Orenstein DM, Milla CE. Pricing for orphan drugs: will the market bear what society cannot? Jama. 2013;310(13):1343–4.CrossRef O'Sullivan BP, Orenstein DM, Milla CE. Pricing for orphan drugs: will the market bear what society cannot? Jama. 2013;310(13):1343–4.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Levy M, Rizansky Nir A. The pricing of breakthrough drugs: theory and policy implications. PLoS One. 2014;9(11):e113894.CrossRef Levy M, Rizansky Nir A. The pricing of breakthrough drugs: theory and policy implications. PLoS One. 2014;9(11):e113894.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Hollis A. Drugs for Rare Diseases: Paying for Innovation. In: Health services restructuring in Canada: new evidence and new directions. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press; 2006. p. 155–77. Hollis A. Drugs for Rare Diseases: Paying for Innovation. In: Health services restructuring in Canada: new evidence and new directions. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press; 2006. p. 155–77.
10.
go back to reference (ASPE), O.o.t.A.S.f.P.a.E., Prescription Drugs: Innovation, Spending and Patient Access. 2016. (ASPE), O.o.t.A.S.f.P.a.E., Prescription Drugs: Innovation, Spending and Patient Access. 2016.
11.
go back to reference DiMasi JA, Grabowski HG, Hansen RW. Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: New estimates of R&D costs. J Health Econ. 2016;47:20–33.CrossRef DiMasi JA, Grabowski HG, Hansen RW. Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: New estimates of R&D costs. J Health Econ. 2016;47:20–33.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Prasad V, Mailankody S. Research and Development Spending to Bring a Single Cancer Drug to Market and Revenues After Approval. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(11):1569–75.CrossRef Prasad V, Mailankody S. Research and Development Spending to Bring a Single Cancer Drug to Market and Revenues After Approval. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(11):1569–75.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Practice BTP. Biopharmaceutical Industry-Sponsored Clinical Trials: Impact on State Economies; 2015. Practice BTP. Biopharmaceutical Industry-Sponsored Clinical Trials: Impact on State Economies; 2015.
16.
go back to reference EvaluatePharma, Orphan Drug Report 2015. 2015. EvaluatePharma, Orphan Drug Report 2015. 2015.
17.
go back to reference Hay M, et al. Clinical development success rates for investigational drugs. Nat Biotechnol. 2014;32(1):40–51.CrossRef Hay M, et al. Clinical development success rates for investigational drugs. Nat Biotechnol. 2014;32(1):40–51.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Bell SA, Tudur Smith C. A comparison of interventional clinical trials in rare versus non-rare diseases: an analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2014;9:170.CrossRef Bell SA, Tudur Smith C. A comparison of interventional clinical trials in rare versus non-rare diseases: an analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2014;9:170.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Mitsumoto J, et al. Pivotal Studies of Orphan Drugs Approved for Neurological Diseases. Annals of neurology. 2009;66(2):184–90.CrossRef Mitsumoto J, et al. Pivotal Studies of Orphan Drugs Approved for Neurological Diseases. Annals of neurology. 2009;66(2):184–90.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Tambuyzer E. Rare diseases, orphan drugs and their regulation: questions and misconceptions. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2010;9(12):921–9.CrossRef Tambuyzer E. Rare diseases, orphan drugs and their regulation: questions and misconceptions. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2010;9(12):921–9.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Sharma A, et al. Orphan drug: Development trends and strategies. J Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences. 2010;2(4):290–9.CrossRef Sharma A, et al. Orphan drug: Development trends and strategies. J Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences. 2010;2(4):290–9.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Califf RM, et al. Characteristics of clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, 2007-2010. JAMA. 2012;307(17):1838–47.CrossRef Califf RM, et al. Characteristics of clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, 2007-2010. JAMA. 2012;307(17):1838–47.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Estimating the clinical cost of drug development for orphan versus non-orphan drugs
Authors
Kavisha Jayasundara
Aidan Hollis
Murray Krahn
Muhammad Mamdani
Jeffrey S. Hoch
Paul Grootendorst
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1750-1172
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-018-0990-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 1/2019 Go to the issue