When Everyone Is an Orphan: Against Adopting a U.S.-Styled Orphan Drug Policy in Canada

Accountability in Research

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 227-269

  Herder, Matthew ^a  

^a DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

health innovation policy; orphan drug; pharmaceutical industry; rare disease

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANADA; DRUG MANUFACTURE; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; MANAGEMENT; RARE DISEASE; THEORETICAL MODEL; UNITED STATES;

CANADA; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; ORPHAN DRUG PRODUCTION; POLICY MAKING; RARE DISEASES; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84880034374     PISSN: 08989621     EISSN: 15455815     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2013.793120     Document Type: Article

References (123)

1. Abraham, J. and Sheppard, J. 1999. Complacent and conflicting scientific expertise in British and American drug regulation: Clinical risk assessment of Triazolam.". Social Studies of Science, 29 (6): 803-843.
2. Anon. (2012). Tories chose patent protection over children's lives in defeating drug bill: Stephen Lewis. The Globe and Mail. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-chose-patent-protection-over-childrens-lives-in-defeating-drug-bill-stephen-lewis/article5827019/ (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-chose-patent-protection-over-childrens-lives-in-defeating-drug-bill-stephen-lewis/article5827019/) (Accessed: 8 December 2012).
3. Arno, P. S., Bonuck, K. and Davis, M. 1995. Rare diseases, drug development, and AIDS: The impact of the Orphan Drug Act. The Milbank Quarterly, 73 (2): 231-252.
4. Avard, D., Bucci, L., Burgess, M., Kaye, J., Heeney, C., Farmer, Y., and Cambon-Thomsen, A. (2009). Public Health Genomics (PHG) and public participation: Points to consider. Journal of Public Deliberation, 5(1). http://www.publicdeliberation.net/jpd/vol5/iss1/art7 (http://www.publicdeliberation.net/jpd/vol5/iss1/art7) (Accessed: 11 June 2013).
5. Baker, D. 2008. The benefits and savings from publicly funded clinical trials of prescription drugs. International Journal of Health Services: Planning, Administration, Evaluation, 38 (4): 731-750.
6. Banerjee, A., Hollis, A. and Pogge, T. 2010. The health impact fund: Incentives for improving access to medicines. The Lancet, 375 (9709): 166-169.
7. Baylis, F. (2012). Knowledge: The Best Return on Investment: The Mark News." http://www.themarknews.com/articles/8299-knowledge-the-best-return-on-investment/#.UPsL2OjNCt4 (http://www.themarknews.com/articles/8299-knowledge-the-best-return-on-investment/#.UPsL2OjNCt4) (Accessed: 19 January 2013).
8. Beltrame, J. Will Canada-EU Trade Deal Keep Generic Drugs Off Shelves?" The Huffington Post. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/09/16/canada-eu-trade-drug-patents_n_1888492.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/09/16/canada-eu-trade-drug-patents_n_1888492.html) (Accessed: 19 January 2013).
9. Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act., Pub. L. No. 111-148, § 7001, 124 Stat. 804, codified at 42 U.S.C. §262(k)(7)(A)2010
10. Bohrer, R. A. and Prince, J. T. 1999. A tale of two proteins: The FDA's uncertain interpretation of the Orphan Drug Act. Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, 12: 365-417.
11. Canada. April 14 2008. House of Commons April 14, 4847-4849. Debates 142, no. 078, 2d Session, 39th Parliament. 2008
12. Canadian Cancer Society. (2012). Breast cancer statistics at a glance. http://www.cancer.ca/~/media/cancer.ca/CW/cancer%20information/cancer%20101/Canadian%20cancer%20statistics/Canadian-Cancer-Statistics-2012-English.pdf (http://www.cancer.ca/~/media/cancer.ca/CW/cancer%20information/cancer%20101/Canadian%20cancer%20statistics/Canadian-Cancer-Statistics-2012-English.pdf) (Accessed: 11 June 2013).
13. Canadian Organization for Rare Disorders. (CORD). (2013). News and Events. http://raredisorders.ca/newsEvents.html (http://raredisorders.ca/newsEvents.html) (Accessed: 11 June 2013).
14. Canadian Organization for Rare Disorders. (CORD). (2005). Position Paper on Canada's Orphan Drug Policy. http://raredisorders.ca/currentIssues.html (http://raredisorders.ca/currentIssues.html) (Accessed: 11 June 2013).
15. Carey, K. 2012. Avastin loses breast cancer indication. Nat.Biotech., 30 (1): 6
16. Carey, K. 2011. Biosimilars encircle Rituxan, US debates innovator exclusivity. Nat.Biotech., 29 (3): 177-178.
17. Carpenter, D. and Fendrick, M. 2004. Accelerating approval times for new drugs in the U.S. The Regulatory Affairs Journal--Pharma, 15 (6): 411-417.
18. Cheung, R. Y., Cohen, J. C. and Illingworth, P. 2004. Orphan Drug Policies: Implications for the United States, Canada, and Developing Countries. Health Law Journal, 12: 183-200.
19. Coles, L. D. and Cloyd, J. C. 2012. The role of academic institutions in the development of drugs for rare and neglected diseases. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 92 (2): 193-202.
20. Coté, T. R., Xu, K. and Pariser, A. R. 2010. Accelerating orphan drug development. Nature Reviews.Drug Discovery, 9 (12): 901-902.
21. Coté, T., Kelkar, A., Xu, K., Braun, M. M. and Phillips, M. I. 2010. Orphan products: An emerging trend in drug approvals. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 9 (1): 84-84.
22. Daniels, N. 2000. Accountability for reasonableness. BMJ, 321 (7272): 1300-1301.
23. Daniels, N. and Sabin, J. 1997. Limits to health care: Fair procedures, democratic deliberation, and the legitimacy problem for insurers. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 26 (4): 303-350.
24. Davis, J. C., Furstenthal, L., Desai, A. A., Norris, T., Sutaria, S., Fleming, E. and Ma, P. 2009. The microeconomics of personalized medicine: Today's challenge and tomorrow's promise. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 8 (4): 279-286.
25. Deverka, P. A., Vernon, J. and McLeod, H. L. 2010. Economic opportunities and challenges for pharmacogenomics. Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology, 50 (1): 423-437.
26. Directive 2004/27/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 31 March 2004 amending Directive 2001/83/EC on the Community Code relating to medicinal products for human use. Office Journal of the European Union L136, 30/4/2004, P.0034-0057.
27. Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act United States 98th Congress, P.L. 98-417, 98 Stat. 1585 1984.
28. Drummond, M., Evans, B., LeLorier, J., Karakiewicz, P., Martin, D., Tugwell, P. and MacLeod, S. 2009. Evidence and values: Requirements for public reimbursement of drugs for rare diseases: A case study in oncology. The Canadian Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (Journal Canadien De Pharmacologie Clinique), 16 (2 -): 282-284. e273-e281. discussion
29. Drummond, M. F., Wilson, D. A., Kanavos, P., Ubel, P. and Rovira, J. 2007. Assessing the economic challenges posed by orphan drugs. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 23 (1): 36-42.
30. Dunkle, M., Pines, W. and Saltonstall, P. L. 2010. Advocacy groups and their role in rare diseases research. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, 686: 515-525.
31. Elliott, R. 2007. Delivering on the pledge: Global access to medicines, WTO rules, and reforming Canada's Law on Compulsory Licensing for Export. McGill International Journal of Sustainable Development Law and Policy, 3: 23-67.
32. European Commission. (EC). (2000a). Regulation 141/2000, 2000 O.J. (L18) 1-5 (EC) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1999 on Orphan Medicinal Products
33. European Commission. (EC). (2000b). Regulation 847/2000, 2000 O.J. (L103) 5-8 (EC)
34. European Patent Convention, 5 October 1973, 1065 U.N.T.S. 199, art. 63(2)(b)
35. Feick, K. (2010). Frost & Sullivan: Orphan Drugs to Create Paradigm Shift in the Pharmaceutical Industry! http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/press-release.pag?docid=197715735 (http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/press-release.pag?docid=197715735) (Accessed: 23 January 2013).
36. Fernandez, C. V. 2007. Our moral obligations in caring for patients with orphan cancers. CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal, 176 (3): 297
37. Flood, C. M. and Dyke, P. 2012. The data divide: Managing the misalignment in Canada's evidentiary requirements for drug regulation and funding. UBC Law Review, 45 (2): 283-328.
38. Food and Drug Administration. (FDA). (2013). Designating an Orphan Product: Drugs and Biologics: Common EMEA/FDA Application for Orphan Medicinal Product Designation. WebContent. http://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/DevelopingProductsforRareDiseasesConditions/HowtoapplyforOrphanProductDesignation/ucm124795.htm (http://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/DevelopingProductsforRareDiseasesConditions/HowtoapplyforOrphanProductDesignation/ucm124795.htm) (Accessed: 23 January 2013).
39. Food and Drug Administration. (FDA). (2012). Research, Center for Drug Evaluation and "Biosimilars" WebContent. http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/HowDrugsareDevelopedandApproved/ApprovalApplications/TherapeuticBiologicApplications/Biosimilars/default.htm (http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/HowDrugsareDevelopedandApproved/ApprovalApplications/TherapeuticBiologicApplications/Biosimilars/default.htm) (Accessed: 31 December 2012).
40. Food and Drug Administration. (FDA). (2011). Orphan Drug Regulations: Proposed Rules, 76 Fed. Reg. 64868-64879
41. Food and Drug Administration. (FDA). (1986). Policy of Eligibility of Drugs for Orphan Designation, 51 Fed. Reg. 4505
42. Food and Drug Regulations. (Canada). (1985). C.R.C., c. 870, C.08.004.1
43. Galloway, G. (2012). Tories block bid to make cheaper medicines for poor nations. The Globe and Mail. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-block-bid-to-make-cheaper-medicines-for-poor-nations/article5759286/ (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-block-bid-to-make-cheaper-medicines-for-poor-nations/article5759286/) (Accessed: 29 December 2012).
44. Gericke, C.A., Riesberg, A. and Busse, R. 2005. Ethical issues in funding orphan drug research and development. Journal of Medical Ethics, 31 (3): 164-168.
45. Global Genes Project. (2012). Who We Are. http://globalgenes.org/who-we-are-2/ (http://globalgenes.org/who-we-are-2/) (Accessed: 11 June 2013).
46. Grootendorst, P., Hollis, A., Levine, D. K., Pogge, T. and Edwards, A. M. 2011. New approaches to rewarding pharmaceutical innovation. CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal (Journal De l'Association Medicale Canadienne, 183 (6): 681-685.
47. Gupta, S. 2012. Rare diseases: Canada's 'research orphans. Open Medicine, 6 (1): 24-27.
48. Haffner, M. E. 2006. Adopting orphan drugs: Two dozen years of treating rare diseases. The New England Journal of Medicine, 354 (5): 445-447.
49. Haffner, M. E., Torrent-Farnell, J. and Maher, P. D. 2008. Does orphan drug legislation really answer the needs of patients?. The Lancet, 371 (9629): 2041-2044.
50. Harper, A. R. and Topol, E. J. 2012. Pharmacogenomics in clinical practice and drug development. Nature Biotechnology, 30 (11): 1117-1124.
51. Health Canada. (2012a). An Orphan Drug Framework for Canada-Health Canada News Release 2012-10-03. Media release, August 3, 2012. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/nr-cp/_2012/2012-147a-eng.php (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/nr-cp/_2012/2012-147a-eng.php)
52. Health Canada. (2012b). Federal Government Takes Action to Help Canadians with Rare Diseases. Health Canada News Release 2012-10-03. Media release, October 3, 2012. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/nr-cp/_2012/2012-147-eng.php (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/nr-cp/_2012/2012-147-eng.php)
53. Health Canada. (1997a). Policy Issues: Orphan Drug Policy. Correspondence, January 16, 1997. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/prodpharma/applic-demande/pol/orph_pol-eng.php (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/prodpharma/applic-demande/pol/orph_pol-eng.php)
54. Health Canada. (1997b). Guidance for Industry: Good Clinical Practice: Consolidated Guideline: ICH Topic E6" Notice, September 19, 1997. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/prodpharma/applic-demande/guide-ld/ich/efficac/e6-eng.php (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/prodpharma/applic-demande/guide-ld/ich/efficac/e6-eng.php)
55. ICH. (1996). Guideline for Good Clinical Practice. European Union, Japan and USA (1996). http://www.cinme.com.ar/english/lecturas/ICH_E6_Guias_BPC.pdf (http://www.cinme.com.ar/english/lecturas/ICH_E6_Guias_BPC.pdf) (Accessed: 11 June 2013).
56. Heemstra, H. E., Giezen, T. J., Mantel-Teeuwisse, A. K., de Vrueh, R. L. A. and Leufkens, H. G. M. 2010. Safety-related regulatory actions for orphan drugs in the US and EU: A cohort study. Drug Safety: An International Journal of Medical Toxicology and Drug Experience, 33 (2): 127-137.
57. Heemstra, H. E., van Weely, S., Büller, H. A., Leufkens, H. G. M. and de Vrueh, R. L. A. 2009. Translation of rare disease research into orphan drug development: Disease matters. Drug Discovery Today, 14 (23-24): 1166-1173.
58. Hemphill, T. A. 2010. Extraordinary pricing of orphan drugs: Is it a socially responsible strategy for the U.S. pharmaceutical industry?. Journal of Business Ethics, 94 (2): 225-242.
59. Herder, M. 2012a. Unlocking Health Canada's cache of trade secrets: Mandatory disclosure of clinical trial results. CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal (Journal De l'Association Medicale Canadienne), 184 (2): 194-199.
60. Herder, M. 2012b. Choice patents. IDEA: The Intellectual Property Law Review, 52 (3): 309-378.
61. Herder, M. 2009. Patents and the progress of personalized medicine: Biomarkers research as lens. Annals of Health Law/Loyola University Chicago, School of Law, Institute for Health Law, 18 (2): 187-229. 8 p. preceding i
62. Hohl, C. M., Nosyk, B., Kuramoto, L., Zed, P. J., Brubacher, J. R., Abu-Laban, R. B., Sheps, S. B. and Sobolev, B. 2011. Outcomes of emergency department patients presenting with adverse drug events. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 58 (3): 270-279. e4
63. Hollis, A. 2007. Drugs for rare diseases: Paying for innovation. In: Beach, C. M., Chaykowski, R., Shortt, S., St-Hilaire, F., and Sweetman, A. (eds.). Health services restructuring in Canada: New evidence and new directions, Kingston, Ontario, Canada: McGill-Queen's Press-MQUP, 155-177
64. Huyard, C. 2009. How did uncommon disorders become 'rare diseases'? History of a boundary object. Sociology of Health and Illness, 31 (4): 463-477.
65. Japan. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. (2009). Overview of Orphan Drug/Medical Device Designation System. http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/policy/health-medical/pharmaceuticals/orphan_drug.html (http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/policy/health-medical/pharmaceuticals/orphan_drug.html)
66. Jayadev, A. and Stiglitz, J. 2009. Two ideas to increase innovation and reduce pharmaceutical costs and prices. Health Affairs, 28 (1): w165-w168.
67. Kesselheim, A. S. 2011. An empirical review of major legislation affecting drug development: Past experiences, effects, and unintended consequences. Milbank Quarterly, 89 (3): 450-502.
68. Kesselheim, A. S., Myers, J. A. and Avorn, J. 2011. Characteristics of clinical trials to support approval of orphan vs. nonorphan drugs for cancer. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 305 (22): 2320-2326.
69. Kesselheim, A. S. and Solomon, D. H. 2010. Incentives for drug development: The curious case of Colchicine. The New England Journal of Medicine, 362 (22): 2045-2047.
70. Kirby, T. 2012. Australia makes up for lost time on rare diseases. The Lancet, 379 (9827): 1689-1690.
71. Lang, T., Hill, A. V. S., McShane, H., Shah, R., Towse, A., Pritchard, C. and Garau, M. 2005. New Tb vaccine granted orphan drug status. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 331 (7530): 1476
72. Law, M. R., Kawasumi, Y. and Morgan, S. G. 2011. Despite law, fewer than one in eight completed studies of drugs and biologics are reported on time on ClinicalTrials.gov. Health Affairs, 30 (12): 2338-2345.
73. Lehoux, P., Williams-Jones, B., Miller, F., Urbach, D. and Tailliez, S. 2008. What leads to better health care innovation? Arguments for an integrated policy-oriented research agenda. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 13 (4): 251-254.
74. Lexchin, J. 2012. New drugs and safety: What happened to new active substances approved in Canada between 1995 and 2010?. Archives of Internal Medicine,: 1-2.
75. Light, D. W. and Lexchin, J. R. 2012. Pharmaceutical research and development: What do we get for all that money?. BMJ, 345 (1): e4348-e4348.
76. Light, D. W. and Warburton, R. 2011. Demythologizing the high costs of pharmaceutical research. Biosocieties, 6 (1): 34-50.
77. Loughnot, D. 2005. Potential interactions of the Orphan Drug Act and pharmacogenomics: A flood of orphan drugs and abuses. Am. J. L. and Med., 31: 365
78. Maher, P. D. and Haffner, M. 2006. Orphan drug designation and pharmacogenomics: Options and opportunities. BioDrugs, 20 (2): 71
79. McCabe, C., Claxton, K. and Tsuchiya, A. 2005. Orphan drugs and the Nhs: Should we value rarity?. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 331 (7523): 1016-1019.
80. Meekings, K. N., Williams, C. S. M. and Arrowsmith, J. E. 2012. Orphan drug development: An economically viable strategy for Biopharma R&D. Drug Discovery Today, 17 (13-14): 660-664.
81. Menon, D. and Stafinski, T. 2008. Engaging the public in priority-setting for health technology assessment: Findings from a Citizens' Jury. Health Expectations: An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy, 11 (3): 282-293.
82. Menon, D. and Stafinski, T. 2011. Role of patient and public participation in health technology assessment and coverage decisions. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 11 (1): 75-89.
83. Menon, D., Stafinski, T. and Martin, D. 2007. Priority-setting for healthcare: Who, how, and is it fair?. Health Policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 84 (2-3): 220-233.
84. Michaux, G. 2010. EU orphan regulation: Ten years of application. Food and Drug Law Journal, 65: 639-669.
85. Milne, C.-P. and Tait, J. 2009. Evolution along the Government--Governance continuum: FDA's orphan products and fast track programs as exemplars of what works for innovation and regulation. Food and Drug Law Journal, 64: 733
86. Mitsumoto, J., Dorsey, E. R., Beck, C. A., Kieburtz, K. and Griggs, R. C. 2009. Pivotal studies of orphan drugs approved for neurological diseases. Annals of Neurology, 66 (2): 184-190.
87. Morgan, S. G., Bassett, K. L., Wright, J. M., Evans, R. G., Barer, M. L., Caetano, P. A. and Black, C. D. 2005. 'Breakthrough' drugs and growth in expenditure on prescription drugs in Canada. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 331 (7520): 815-816.
88. Narukawa, M. 2001. Japanese approach to orphan products. The European Regulation on Orphan Medicinal Products,: 41
89. Network, The Cancer Genome Atlas. 2012. Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature, 490 (7418): 61-70.
90. Orphan Drug Act of 1983, Pub. L. No. 97-414, 96 Stat. 2049
91. Orphan Drug Regulations, 57 Fed. Reg. 62,076, 62,081 (Dec. 29, 1992)
92. Panju, A. H. and Bell, C. M. 2010. Policy alternatives for treatments for rare diseases. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 182 (17): E787-E792.
93. Peterson, M., Hollis, A. and Pogge, T. 2010. A critique in need of critique. Public Health Ethics, 3 (2): 178-185.
94. Pinxten, W., Denier, Y., Dooms, M., Cassiman, J.-J. and Dierickx, K. 2012. A fair share for the orphans: Ethical guidelines for a fair distribution of resources within the bounds of the 10-year-old European Orphan Drug Regulation. Journal of Medical Ethics, 38 (3): 148-153.
95. Pogge, T. W. 2005. Human rights and global health: A research program. Metaphilosophy, 36 (1-2): 182-209.
96. Rai, A. K. 2002. Pharmacogenetic interventions, orphan drugs, and distributive justice: The role of cost-benefit analysis. Social Philosophy and Policy, 19 (2): 246-270.
97. Reinecke, M., Rommel, K. and Schmidtke, J. 2011. Funding of rare disease research in Germany: A pilot study. Journal of Community Genetics, 2 (2): 101-105.
98. Rinaldi, A. 2005. Adopting an orphan. EMBO Reports, 6 (6): 507-510.
99. Sekeres, M., Gold, J. L., Chan, A.-W., Lexchin, J., Moher, D., Van Laethem, M. L. P., Maskalyk, J., Ferris, L., Taback, N. and Rochon, P. A. 2008. Poor reporting of scientific leadership information in clinical trial registers. PLoS ONE, 3 (2): e1610
100. Seoane-Vazquez, E., Rodriguez-Monguio, R., Szeinbach, S. and Visaria, J. 2008. Incentives for orphan drug research and development in the United States. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, 3 (1): 33
101. Sharma, A., Jacob, A., Tandon, M. and Kumar, D. 2010. Orphan drug: Development trends and strategies. Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences, 2 (4): 290-299.
102. Silversides, A. 2010. Federal Committee to review appointment of Pfizer vice-president to CIHR Governing Council. CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal, 182 (1): E33-E34.
103. Simoens, S. 2011. Pricing and reimbursement of orphan drugs: The need for more transparency. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, 6: 42
104. Spilker, B. 1986. " The development of orphan drugs: an industry perspective ". In Orphan Diseases and Orphan Drugs, Edited by: Scheinberg, I. H. and Walshe, J. M. 119-134. Manchester University Press. 1986
105. Stafinski, T., McCabe, C. J. and Menon, D. 2010. Funding the unfundable: Mechanisms for managing uncertainty in decisions on the introduction of new and innovative technologies into healthcare systems. PharmacoEconomics, 28 (2): 113-142.
106. Stallings, S. C., Huse, D., Finkelstein, S. N., Crown, W. H., Witt, W. P., Maguire, J., Hiller, A. J., Sinskey, A. J. and Ginsburg, G. S. 2006. A framework to evaluate the economic impact of pharmacogenomics. Pharmacogenomics, 7 (6): 853-862.
107. Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology. (2012). Canada's Clinical Trial Infrastructure: A Prescription for Improved Access to New Medicines. November 2012. http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/SEN/Committee/411/SOCI/DPK/01nov12/home-e.htm (http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/SEN/Committee/411/SOCI/DPK/01nov12/home-e.htm) (Accessed: 11 June 2013).
108. Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology. (2013). Prescription Pharmaceuticals in Canada: Post-Approval Monitoring of Safety and Effectiveness. March 2013. http://parl.gc.ca/Content/SEN/Committee/411/SOCI/rep/rep20mar13-e.pdf (http://parl.gc.ca/Content/SEN/Committee/411/SOCI/rep/rep20mar13-e.pdf) (Accessed: 11 June 2013).
109. Tansey, K. E., Guipponi, M., Perroud, N., Bondolfi, G., Domenici, E., Evans, D. and Hall, S. K. 2012. Genetic predictors of response to serotonergic and noradrenergic antidepressants in major depressive disorder: A genome-wide analysis of individual-level data and a meta-analysis. PLoS Med., 9 (10): e1001326
110. Thamer, M., Brennan, N. and Semansky, R. 1998. A cross-national comparison of orphan drug policies: Implications for the U.S. Orphan Drug Act. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 23 (2): 265-290.
111. TRIPS. WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, 15 April 1994, 33 I.L.M. 1197
112. Trotta, F., Leufkens, H. G. M., Schellens, J. H. M., Laing, R. and Tafuri, G. 2011. Evaluation of oncology drugs at the European Medicines Agency and US Food and Drug Administration: When differences have an impact on clinical practice. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 29 (16): 2266-2272.
113. Trouiller, P., Torreele, E., Olliaro, P., White, N., Foster, S., Wirth, D. and Pécoul, B. 2001. Drugs for neglected diseases: A failure of the market and a public health failure?. Tropical Medicine and International Health, 6 (11): 945-951.
114. Tyers, M., Brown, E., Andrews, D. W., Bergeron, J. J. M., Boone, C., Bremner, R. and Bussey, H. A. 2005. Problems with co-funding in Canada. Science (New York, N.Y.), 308 (5730): 1867
115. Valverde, A. M., Reed, S. D. and Schulman, K. A. 2012. Proposed 'Grant-And-Access' Program with price caps could stimulate development of drugs for very rare diseases. Health Affairs, 31 (11): 2528-2535.
116. Vera-Badillo, F. E., Shapiro, R., Ocana, A., Amir, E. and Tannock, I. F. 2013. Bias in reporting of end points of efficacy and toxicity in randomized, clinical trials for women with breast cancer. Annals of Oncology: Official Journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology/ESMO, 24 (5): 1238-1244.
117. Viergever, R. F. and Ghersi, D. 2011. The quality of registration of clinical trials. PloS One, 6 (2): e14701
118. Warren, K. S. 1986. " The great neglected diseases of mankind, or All the world's an orphanage ". In Orphan Diseases and Orphan Drugs, Edited by: Scheinberg, I. H. and Walshe, J. M. 169-176. Manchester University Press. 1986
119. Waxman, H. A. 1986. " The history and development of the Orphan Drug Act ". In Orphan Diseases and Orphan Drugs, Edited by: Scheinberg, I. H. and Walshe, J. M. 135-145. Manchester University Press. 1986
120. Wellman-Labadie, O. and Zhou, Y. 2010. The US Orphan Drug Act: Rare disease research stimulator or commercial opportunity?. Health Policy, 95 (2-3): 216-228.
121. Winquist, E., Bell, C. M., Clarke, J. T. R., Evans, G., Martin, J., Sabharwal, M., Gadhok, A., Stevenson, H. and Coyle, D. 2012. An evaluation framework for funding drugs for rare diseases. Value in Health: The Journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 15 (6): 982-986.
122. Yin, W. 2008. Market incentives and pharmaceutical innovation. Journal of Health Economics, 27 (4): 1060-1077.
123. Yin, W. 2009. R&D policy, agency costs and innovation in personalized medicine. Journal of Health Economics, 28 (5): 950-962.