What is known about the cost-effectiveness of orphan drugs? Evidence from cost-utility analyses

What is known and objective: In times of financial and economic hardship, governments are looking to contain pharmaceutical expenditure by focusing on cost-effective drugs. Because of their high prices and difficulties in demonstrating effectiveness in small patient populations, orphan drugs are often perceived as not able to meet traditional reimbursement threshold value for money. The aim of this study was to provide an overview of the available evidence on the cost-effectiveness of orphan drugs. Methods: All orphan drugs listed as authorized on the website of the European Medicines Agency on 21 November 2013 were included in the analysis. Cost-utility analyses (CUAs) were identified by searching the Tufts Medical Center Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry and Embase. For each CUA, a number of variables were collected. Results and discussion: The search identified 23 articles on the Tufts registry and 167 articles on Embase. The final analysis included 45 CUAs and 61 incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs) for 19 orphan drugs. Of all ICURS, 16.3% were related to dominant drugs (i.e. more effective and less expensive than the comparator), 70.5% were related to drugs that are more effective, but at a higher cost, and 13.1% were related to dominated drugs (i.e. less effective and more expensive than the comparator). The median overall ICUR was (sic)40 242 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) with a minimum ICUR of (sic)6311/QALY and a maximum ICUR of (sic)974 917/QALY. What is new and conclusion: This study demonstrates that orphan drugs can meet traditional reimbursement thresholds. Considering a threshold of 30 pound 000/QALY, in this study, ten (52.6%) of a total of 19 orphan drugs for which data were available meet the threshold. As much as fifteen orphan drugs (78.9%) are eligible for reimbursement if a threshold of (sic)80 000/QALY is considered.