Contribution of patient organisations to the NCLs

Resilience in patients and family caregivers living with congenital disorders of glycosylation (CDG): a quantitative study using the brief resilience coping scale (BRCS)

BACKGROUND

Patients and family caregivers living with Congenital Disorders of Glycosylation (CDG) experience a heavy burden, which can impact their resiliency and quality of life. The study's purpose was to measure the resilience levels of patients and family caregivers living with CDG using the brief resilience coping scale.

METHODS

We conducted an observational, cross-sectional study with 23 patients and 151 family caregivers living with CDG. Descriptive analyses were performed to characterize patients with CDG and family caregivers' samples. Additionally, we assessed correlations between resilience and specific variables (e.g., age, academic degree, time until diagnosis) and examined resilience differences between groups (e.g., sex, marital status, occupation, professional and social support).

RESULTS

GNE myopathy was the most prevalent CDG among patients, while in family caregivers was PMM2-CDG. Both samples showed medium levels of resilience coping scores. Individuals with GNE myopathy had significantly higher scores of resilience compared to patients with other CDG. Resilience was positively correlated with educational degree in patients with CDG. Family caregivers had marginally significant higher scores of resilience coping if they received any kind of professional support or had contact with other families or people with the same or similar disease, compared with unsupported individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the inherited difficulties of living with a life-threatening disease like CDG, patients and family caregivers showed medium resilient coping levels. Resilience scores changed significantly considering the CDG genotype, individual's academic degree and professional and social support. These exploratory findings can empower the healthcare system and private institutions by promoting the development of targeted interventions to enhance individuals` coping skills and improve the overall well-being and mental health of the CDG community.

The involvement of rare disease patient organisations in therapeutic innovation across rare paediatric neurological conditions: a narrative review

Background

The patient voice is becoming increasingly prominent across all stages of therapeutic innovation. It pervades research domains from funding and recruitment, to translation, care, and support. Advances in genomic technologies have facilitated novel breakthrough therapies, whose global developments, regulatory approvals, and confined governmental subsidisations have stimulated renewed hope amongst rare disease patient organisations (RDPOs). With intensifying optimism characterising the therapeutic landscape, researcher-advocate partnerships have reached an inflexion point, at which stakeholders may evaluate their achievements and formulate frameworks for future refinement.

Main text

Through this narrative review, we surveyed relevant literature around the roles of RDPOs catering to the rare paediatric neurological disease community. Via available literature, we considered RDPO interactions within seven domains of therapeutic development: research grant funding, industry sponsorship, study recruitment, clinical care and support, patient-reported outcome measures, and research prioritisation. In doing so, we explored practical and ethical challenges, gaps in understanding, and future directions of inquiry. Current literature highlights the increasing significance of ethical and financial challenges to patient advocacy. Biomedical venture philanthropy is gaining momentum amongst RDPOs, whose small grants can incrementally assist laboratories in research, training, and pursuits of more substantial grants. However, RDPO seed funding may encounter long-term sustainability issues and difficulties in selecting appropriate research investments. Further challenges include advocate-industry collaborations, commercial biases, and unresolved controversies regarding orphan drug subsidisation. Beyond their financial interactions, RDPOs serve instrumental roles in project promotion, participant recruitment, biobank creation, and patient registry establishment. They are communication conduits between carers, patients, and other stakeholders, but their contributions may be susceptible to bias and unrealistic expectations.

Conclusion

Further insights into how RDPOs navigate practical and ethical challenges in therapeutic development may enhance cooperative efforts. They may also inform resources, whose distribution among advocates, parents, and clinicians, may assist decision-making processes around rare disease clinical trials and treatments.