Marketing authorisation of orphan medicines in Europe from 2000 to 2013

Drug Discovery Today

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2018, Pages 424-433

  Hofer, Matthias P ^a   Hedman, Hanna ^a,c   Mavris, Maria ^a   Koenig, Franz ^b   Vetter, Thorsten ^a   Posch, Martin ^b   Vamvakas, Spiros ^a   Regnstrom, Jan ^a   Aarum, Stiina ^a  

^a EUROPEAN MEDICINES AGENCY   (United Kingdom)

^b MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

^c NOVO NORDISK A S   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EUROPE; MARKETING; MEDICINE; DRUG APPROVAL; DRUG MANUFACTURE; HUMAN; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

DRUG APPROVAL; EUROPE; HUMANS; MARKETING; ORPHAN DRUG PRODUCTION;

EID: 85032910606     PISSN: 13596446     EISSN: 18785832     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.drudis.2017.10.012     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. Lincker, H., et al. Regulatory watch: where do new medicines originate from in the EU?. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 13 (2014), 92–93.
2. Putzeist, M., et al. Determinants for successful marketing authorisation of orphan medicinal products in the EU. Drug Discov. Today 17 (2012), 352–358.
3. Heemstra, H.E., et al. Predictors of orphan drug approval in the European Union. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 64 (2008), 545–552.
4. Heemstra, H.E., et al. Characteristics of orphan drug applications that fail to achieve marketing approval in the USA. Drug Discov. Today 16 (2011), 73–80.
5. Regnstrom, J., et al. Factors associated with success of market authorisation applications for pharmaceutical drugs submitted to the European Medicines Agency. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 66 (2010), 39–48.
6. Hofer, M.P., et al. Regulatory watch: Impact of scientific advice from the European Medicines Agency. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 14 (2015), 302–303.
7. Orfali, M., et al. Raising orphans: how clinical development programs of drugs for rare and common diseases are different. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 92 (2012), 262–264.
8. Winstone, J., et al. Review and comparison of clinical evidence submitted to support European Medicines Agency market authorization of orphan–designated oncological treatments. Orphanet. J. Rare Dis., 10, 2015, 139.
9. Putzeist, M., et al. EU marketing authorization review of orphan and non-orphan drugs does not differ. Drug Discov. Today 18 (2013), 1001–1006.
10. Moscicki, R.A., Tandon, P.K., Drug-development challenges for small biopharmaceutical companies. N. Engl. J. Med. 376 (2017), 469–474.
11. Pignatti, F., et al. The review of drug applications submitted to the European Medicines Evaluation Agency: frequently raised objections, and outcome. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 58 (2002), 573–580.
12. Butlen-Ducuing, F., et al. Regulatory watch: challenges in drug development for central nervous system disorders: a European Medicines Agency perspective. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 15 (2016), 813–814.
13. Hilgers, R.D., et al. Directions for new developments on statistical design and analysis of small population group trials. Orphanet. J. Rare Dis., 11, 2016, 78.
14. Bauer, P., et al. Twenty-five years of confirmatory adaptive designs: opportunities and pitfalls. Stat. Med. 35 (2016), 325–347.
15. Eichler, H.G., et al. ‘Threshold-crossing’: a useful way to establish the counterfactual in clinical trials?. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 100 (2016), 699–712.
16. Eichler, H.G., et al. The risks of risk aversion in drug regulation. Nat. Rev. Drug. Discov. 12 (2013), 907–916.
17. Bauer, P., Konig, F., The risks of methodology aversion in drug regulation. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 13 (2014), 317–318.