Explore the vast range of titles available.

We now live in a time of unprecedented opportunities to turn scientific discoveries into better treatments for the estimated 30 million people in the US living with rare diseases. Despite these scientific advances, more than 90% of rare diseases still lack an effective treatment. New data and genetics technologies have resulted in the first transformational new treatments for a handful of rare diseases. This challenges us as a society to accelerate progress so that no disease and no patient is, ultimately, left behind in getting access to safe and effective therapeutics. This article reviews initiatives of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) Office of Rare Diseases Research (ORDR) that are aimed at catalyzing rare diseases research. These initiatives fall into two groups: Promoting information sharing; and building multi-disciplinary multi-stakeholder collaborations. Among ORDR’s information sharing initiatives are GARD (The Genetics and Rare Diseases Information Center), RaDaR (The Rare Diseases Registries Program) and the NCATS Toolkit for Patient-Focused Therapy Development (Toolkit). Among the collaboration initiatives are the RDCRN (Rare Diseases Clinical Research Network), and the NCATS ORDR support for conferences and workshops. Despite the success of these programs, there remains substantial work to be done to build enhanced collaborations, clinical harmonization and interoperability, and stakeholder engagement so that the recent scientific advances can benefit all patients on the long list of rare diseases waiting for help.

Background Rare diseases (RD) are a diverse collection of more than 7–10,000 different disorders, most of which affect a small number of people per disease. Because of their rarity and fragmentation of patients across thousands of different disorders, the medical needs of RD patients are not well recognized or quantified in healthcare systems (HCS). Methodology We performed a pilot IDeaS study, where we attempted to quantify the number of RD patients and the direct medical costs of 14 representative RD within 4 different HCS databases and performed a preliminary analysis of the diagnostic journey for selected RD patients. Results The overall findings were notable for: (1) RD patients are difficult to quantify in HCS using ICD coding search criteria, which likely results in under-counting and under-estimation of their true impact to HCS; (2) per patient direct medical costs of RD are high, estimated to be around three–fivefold higher than age-matched controls; and (3) preliminary evidence shows that diagnostic journeys are likely prolonged in many patients, and may result in progressive, irreversible, and costly complications of their disease Conclusions The results of this small pilot suggest that RD have high medical burdens to patients and HCS, and collectively represent a major impact to the public health. Machine-learning strategies applied to HCS databases and medical records using sentinel disease and patient characteristics may hold promise for faster and more accurate diagnosis for many RD patients and should be explored to help address the high unmet medical needs of RD patients.

Improving health and social equity for persons living with a rare disease (PLWRD) is increasingly recognized as a global policy priority. However, there is currently no international alignment on how to define and describe rare diseases. A global reference is needed to establish a mutual understanding to inform a wide range of stakeholders for actions. A multi-stakeholder, global panel of rare disease experts, came together and developed an Operational Description of Rare Diseases. This reference describes which diseases are considered rare, how many persons are affected and why the rare disease population demands specific attention. The operational description of rare diseases is framed in two parts: a core definition of rare diseases, complemented by a descriptive framework of rare diseases. The core definition includes parameters that permit the identification of which diseases are considered rare, and how many persons are affected. The descriptive framework elaborates on the impact and burden of rare diseases on patients, their caregivers and families, healthcare systems, and society overall. The Operational Description of Rare Diseases establishes a common point of reference for decision-makers across the world who strive to understand and address the unmet needs of persons living with a rare disease. Adoption of this reference is essential to improving the visibility of rare conditions in health systems across the world. Greater recognition of the burden of rare diseases will motivate new actions and policies to address the unmet needs of the rare disease community.

Background Many patients with rare diseases are still lacking a timely diagnosis and approved therapies for their condition despite the tremendous efforts of the research community, biopharmaceutical, medical device industries, and patient support groups. The development of clinical research networks for rare diseases offers a tremendous opportunity for patients and multi-disciplinary teams to collaborate, share expertise, gain better understanding on specific rare diseases, and accelerate clinical research and innovation. Clinical Research Networks have been developed at a national or continental level, but global collaborative efforts to connect them are still lacking. The International Rare Diseases Research Consortium set a Task Force on Clinical Research Networks for Rare Diseases with the objective to analyse the structure and attributes of these networks and to identify the barriers and needs preventing their international collaboration. The Task Force created a survey and sent it to pre-identified clinical research networks located worldwide. Results A total of 34 responses were received. The survey analysis demonstrated that clinical research networks are diverse in their membership composition and emphasize community partnerships including patient groups, health care providers and researchers. The sustainability of the networks is mostly supported by public funding. Activities and research carried out at the networks span the research continuum from basic to clinical to translational research studies. Key elements and infrastructures conducive to collaboration are well adopted by the networks, but barriers to international interoperability are clearly identified. These hurdles can be grouped into five categories: funding limitation; lack of harmonization in regulatory and contracting process; need for common tools and data standards; need for a governance framework and coordination structures; and lack of awareness and robust interactions between networks. Conclusions Through this analysis, the Task Force identified key elements that should support both developing and established clinical research networks for rare diseases in implementing the appropriate structures to achieve international interoperability worldwide. A global roadmap of actions and a specific research agenda, as suggested by this group, provides a platform to identify common goals between these networks.

ABSTRACT Rare diseases play a leading role in innovation and the advancement of medical and pharmaceutical science. Most rare diseases are genetic disorders or atypical manifestations of infectious, immunologic, or oncologic diseases; they all provide opportunities to study extremes of human pathology and provide insight into both normal and aberrant physiology. Recently, drug development has become increasingly focused on classifying diseases largely on genetic grounds; this has allowed the identification of molecularly defined targets and the development of targeted therapies. Clinical trials are now focusing on progressively smaller subgroups within both common and rare disease populations, often based on genetic tests or biomarkers. Drug developers, researchers, and regulatory agencies face a variety of challenges throughout the life cycle of drug research and development for rare diseases. These include the small numbers of patients available for study, lack of knowledge of the disease’s natural history, incomplete understanding of the basic mechanisms causing the disorder, and variability in disease severity, expression, and course. Traditional approaches to rare disease clinical research have not kept pace with advances in basic science, and increased attention to translational science is needed to address these challenges, especially diagnostic testing, registries, and novel trial designs.

BackgroundThe Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) receives about 1500 initial Investigational New Drug applications (INDs) per year. In the first 30 days after initial IND submission, FDA conducts a review to determine whether the proposed investigation is safe to proceed, and if not, the IND may be placed on clinical hold.MethodsA retrospective study of rates and reasons for clinical hold for all initial INDs submitted to CDER in fiscal year (FY) 2013 was performed. INDs were assessed for reasons that led to clinical hold, included chemistry, manufacturing and controls (CMC), animal toxicology or clinical issues. INDs were further categorized by commercial versus research sponsorship, and rare versus common disease indications. All INDs placed on hold were reassessed by whether they remained on hold within the first year following hold imposition.ResultsCDER received 1410 initial INDs in FY 2013, of which 125 (8.9%) were placed on hold during the first 30 days after initial submission. Of the INDs placed on hold, more than half became active within the first year after first imposition of hold. CMC reasons were most commonly cited, followed by clinical, then toxicology reasons. There were no substantive differences in rates and reasons for hold between INDs for rare or common disease indications, or between commercial or research INDs.ConclusionsThe vast majority of initial INDs moved forward within 30 days after submission, and for those applications placed on hold, most became active within 1 year. The findings also suggest that many holds for new drug product programs can be avoided by following the available guidelines for investigational product development.

Interest in developing drugs for rare diseases has increased substantially in recent years. This article from the US Food and Drug Administration highlights the role of regulators in catalysing further progress in this field.

A recent US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory committee meeting highlighted the potential of clinical pharmacology to overcome challenges in orphan drug development.A recent US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory committee meeting highlighted the potential of clinical pharmacology to overcome challenges in orphan drug development.

Introduction: Prior studies suggested that holding preinvestigational new drug application (PIND) meetings with FDA has a positive effect on clinical development time (CDT). Methods: New product marketing applications submitted to FDA CDER during fiscal years 2008-2012 were assessed for whether a PIND meeting was held and, if so, a qualitative assessment of meeting content was performed. Results: Discussions contained in the PIND meeting minutes tended to reflect topics appropriate to an early phase of drug development, including chemistry, manufacturing, and controls (CMC) and safety topics (eg, nonclinical and clinical domains). Additionally, FDA commonly provided additional advice most often in the clinical and CMC domains. Applications for which a PIND meeting was held during drug development had shorter CDTs than those that did not. Conclusions: This analysis showed the importance of early communication with FDA during development, and small companies with limited regulatory experience may gain the greatest benefit from early communication with FDA.