Recent approval of eteplirsen for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), a rare disease with few treatment alternatives, has reignited the debate over the U.S. drug approval process. The evolution of legal… Click to show full abstract
Recent approval of eteplirsen for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), a rare disease with few treatment alternatives, has reignited the debate over the U.S. drug approval process. The evolution of legal and regulatory restrictions to the marketing and sale of pharmaceuticals has spanned more than a century, and throughout this history, patient advocacy has played a significant role. Scientific evidence from clinical trials serves as the foundation for drug approval, but the patient voice has become increasingly influential. Although the gold standard for establishing safety and efficacy through randomized controlled trials has been in place for more than 50 years, it poses several limitations for rare disorders where patient recruitment for traditional clinical trials is a major barrier. Organized efforts by patient advocacy groups to help patients with rare diseases access investigational therapy have had a legislative and regulatory effect. After approval by the FDA, patient access to therapy may still be limited by cost. A managed care organization (MCO) with the fiduciary responsibility of managing the health of a population must weigh coverage decisions for costly therapies with questionable effectiveness against alternatives within the constraint of a finite budget. Even when the FDA deems a drug safe and effective, an MCO may determine that the drug should only be made available at a tier level where out-of-pocket costs are still too high for many patients. This limitation of availability may be due to cost, other treatment alternatives, or outcomes from existing clinical evidence. However, if the MCO makes a costly new treatment for a rare disease readily available, it may temporarily satisfy a small contingency at the cost of all of its members. This article examines the risks and benefits of patient-centered drug approval and the potential economic effect of patient-centered drug approval on population health. DISCLOSURES There is no funding to disclose. Mattingly reports advisory board fees from Summit Therapeutics and an educational grant from ALK, outside of this article. Simoni-Wastila has nothing to disclose. Mattingly took the lead in conceptualizing this Viewpoint article and writing the manuscript, along with Simoni-Wastila. Both authors contributed equally to manucript revision.
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.