1
|
Gentilini A, Miraldo M. The role of patient organisations in research and development: Evidence from rare diseases. Soc Sci Med 2023; 338:116332. [PMID: 37866173 DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116332] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2023] [Revised: 09/27/2023] [Accepted: 10/11/2023] [Indexed: 10/24/2023]
Abstract
Patient organisations play an increasingly crucial role in the pharmaceutical sector, yet their impact on innovation remains unexplored. We estimate the impact of patient organisations on R&D activity in the context of rare diseases in Europe using a proprietary dataset that maps clinical trials from discovery to phase III across 29 countries, 1893 indications, and 30 years (1990-2019). By applying difference-in-differences and event study methodologies to a panel of 1,646,910 unique R&D observations, we find that country-indication pairs with at least one operating patient organisation have a higher rate of R&D activity compared to those without, with stronger effect in more prevalent rare diseases compared to ultra-rare conditions. We observe a lag in effects from patient organisation introduction, suggesting it takes approximately five years for these organisations to affect R&D activity. Overall, our work suggests that patient organisations play an important role in steering R&D efforts in rare diseases. Further research is needed to better understand mechanisms driving this effect and the potential impact of patient organisations on existing health inequities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arianna Gentilini
- Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.
| | - Marisa Miraldo
- Department of Economics and Public Policy, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Innovation, Imperial College Business School, Imperial College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gentilini A, Parvanova I. Industry funding of patient organisations in the UK: a retrospective study of commercial determinants, funding concentration and disease prevalence. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e071138. [PMID: 37369404 PMCID: PMC10410975 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-071138] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2022] [Accepted: 06/02/2023] [Indexed: 06/29/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To assess the relationship between UK-based patient organisation funding and companies' commercial interests in rare and non-rare diseases in 2020. DESIGN Retrospective analysis of the value and volume of payments from pharmaceutical companies to patient organisations in the UK matched with data on the conditions supported by patient organisations and drugs in companies' approved portfolios and research and development pipelines. SETTING UK. PARTICIPANTS 74 pharmaceutical companies making payments to 341 UK-based patient organisations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Alignment between the commercial interests of pharmaceutical companies and the disease area focus of patient organisations; difference in the volume and value of payments to patient organisations broken down by prevalence of conditions; industry funding concentration, measured as the number of companies funding each patient organisation, the share of overall industry funding coming from each contributing company and the share of industry funding of each organisation comprised by the single highest payments. RESULTS 1422 payments were made by 74 companies to 341 patient organisations. Almost all funds (90%) from pharmaceutical companies were directed to patient organisations that are aligned with companies' approved drug portfolios and research and development pipelines. Despite rare diseases affecting less than 5% of the UK population, more than 20% of all payments were directed to patient organisations which target such conditions. Patient organisations focusing on rare diseases relied on payments from fewer companies (p value=0.0031) compared to organisations focusing on non-rare diseases. CONCLUSIONS Companies predominantly funded patient organisations operating in therapeutic areas relevant to companies' portfolio or drug development pipeline. Patient organisations focusing on rare diseases received more funding relative to the number of patients affected by these conditions and relied more heavily on payments from fewer companies compared to organisations targeting non-rare diseases. Increased independence of patient organisations could help avoid conflicts of interest.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arianna Gentilini
- Department of Health Policy, The London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - Iva Parvanova
- Department of Health Policy, The London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Konradi A. Stigma and psychological distress among pediatric participants in the FD/MAS Alliance Patient Registry. BMC Pediatr 2021; 21:173. [PMID: 33853566 PMCID: PMC8048182 DOI: 10.1186/s12887-021-02647-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2020] [Accepted: 04/07/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Stigma, both enacted and internalized, is part of the illness experience of many chronic conditions / diseases and has been found to increase psychological distress, lower self-esteem, and impact social engagement lowering quality of life (QOL). Stigma among pediatric patients is of particular concern due to its potential impact on identity formation. Using patient data from the online FD/MAS Alliance Patient Registry (FDMASAPR), this study seeks to 1) determine levels of enacted and self-stigma in a pediatric population of fibrous dysplasia (FD) / McCune Albright syndrome (MAS) patients and 2) to explore the relationship between stigma and anxiety and depression. Methods This is a cross sectional analysis of deidentified self-report data from 18 pediatric patients. Key analytic variables include the Neuro-QOL stigma short form, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), diagnostic category and craniofacial involvement, and select demographics. Sample means and score distributions are examined. Bivariate relationships between stigma, anxiety and depression and patient’s personal and medical characteristics are established through analysis of variance and correlation. Results Composite stigma levels for FD/MAS pediatric patients were comparable to those of children with multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, and muscular dystrophy. Self-stigma was more frequently reported than enacted/felt stigma, but few patients indicated complete freedom from either type of stigma. Diagnosis was significantly related to self-stigma. Significant bivariate relationships were found between depression and enacted/felt and self-stigma and between anxiety and self-stigma. Conclusions This study establishes the illness experience of pediatric patients with FD / MAS is impacted by stigma and suggests they should be regularly screened for stigma and psychological distress. It supports the integration of clinical psychologists/ therapists in regular patient care, referral of families to advocacy organizations, and indicates that rare disease patient registries can be a useful tool in efforts to improve the QOL of patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda Konradi
- Department of Sociology, Loyola University Maryland, 4501 North Charles St., Baltimore, MD, 20210, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Drewitz KP, Grey J, Brügmann P, Pichl J, Sammarco M, Aarts M, van Genechten D, Brandi ML, Schaaf L. Patients' perception on the quality of care for multiple endocrine neoplasia disorders in Europe: an online survey from a patient support group. Endocrine 2021; 71:634-640. [PMID: 33537957 DOI: 10.1007/s12020-021-02637-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2020] [Accepted: 01/18/2021] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE European Patient Advocacy Groups (ePAGs) within the Endo-ERN identified a lack of knowledge about quality of care (QoC) of patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia (MEN). The aim of this study was to identify inequalities in care and to encourage improvements. METHODS The European MEN Alliance (EMENA) developed and conducted a survey, using the European Commissions' EUSurvey platform. Patient groups and healthcare professionals (HCPs) distributed the survey. RESULTS A total of 288 participants completed the survey (MEN1 n = 203, MEN2 n = 67, MEN3 n = 18) from 18 European countries. The majority of respondents were recruited via patient groups (58%), aged between 41 and 60 years (53%) and were female (67%). All participants reported having been diagnosed on average 5.58 years (95%-CI: 4.45-6.60) after first symptoms occurred. This timeframe was lower in the group with MEN2 (2.97 years, 95%-CI: 1.37-4.57). Most of the participants (67%) received their diagnosis by a positive gene test after presenting with one or more MEN-related tumours. Overall QoC was rated as either "good" (43%) or "excellent" (36%). CONCLUSION The results of this unique Europe-wide, patient-driven survey on QoC of patients with MEN show that ratings for overall QoC were lower than ratings for different aspects of care. This may be because of the complex nature of care for genetic syndromes. Furthermore, patients who connect with patient groups may be deemed "expert patients" whose answers are not representative of the overall MEN patient community. We hope that Endo-ERN can support further education and training for HCPs based on these results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karl Philipp Drewitz
- European Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Alliance (EMENA), Munich, Germany.
- Institute of Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
- German Network of Pituitary and Adrenal Diseases, Fürth, Germany.
| | - Jo Grey
- European Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Alliance (EMENA), Munich, Germany
- Association for Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Disorders (AMEND), Kent, UK
- European Patient Advocacy Group (ePAG), Main Thematic Group 4 (Genetic Endocrine Tumour Syndromes), European Reference Network on Rare Endocrine Conditions (Endo-ERN), Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Petra Brügmann
- European Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Alliance (EMENA), Munich, Germany
- German Network of Pituitary and Adrenal Diseases, Fürth, Germany
- European Patient Advocacy Group (ePAG), Main Thematic Group 4 (Genetic Endocrine Tumour Syndromes), European Reference Network on Rare Endocrine Conditions (Endo-ERN), Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Josef Pichl
- European Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Alliance (EMENA), Munich, Germany
- German Network of Pituitary and Adrenal Diseases, Fürth, Germany
| | - Martina Sammarco
- European Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Alliance (EMENA), Munich, Germany
- Associazione Italiana Neoplasie Endocrine Multiple di tipo 1 e 2 (AIMEN 1 e 2), Torino, Italy
| | - Monique Aarts
- European Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Alliance (EMENA), Munich, Germany
- Belangengroep MEN, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Dirk van Genechten
- European Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Alliance (EMENA), Munich, Germany
- vzw NET & MEN Kanker, Blankenberge, Belgium
| | - Maria-Luisa Brandi
- European Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Alliance (EMENA), Munich, Germany
- Donatello Bone Clinic, Florence, Italy
- Endo-ERN Reference Center, University Hospital Careggi, Florence, Italy
| | - Ludwig Schaaf
- European Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Alliance (EMENA), Munich, Germany
- Department of Endocrinology, München Klinik Schwabing, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Horrow C, Pacyna JE, Cosenza C, Sharp RR. Examining Physician Interactions with Disease Advocacy Organizations. AJOB Empir Bioeth 2019; 10:222-230. [PMID: 31449475 DOI: 10.1080/23294515.2019.1652213] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
Disease advocacy organizations (DAOs) have traditionally focused on raising awareness of rare diseases, providing educational resources to patients, and supporting patients and families. Previous research has described how scientists collaborate with DAOs, but few empirical data are available regarding the extent to which physicians interact with DAOs and how those interactions impact patient care. We conducted a national survey of 230 board-certified pediatric neurologists to assess their engagement with DAOs and their beliefs about the impact of DAOs on patient care. In that context, we evaluated a set of 24 items describing interactions between physicians and DAOs. Exploratory factor analysis produced a 19-item model capturing four types of physician-DAO engagement: (1) accessing or distributing DAO-produced materials (6 items, alpha = 0.80); (2) consulting on DAO activities (5 items, alpha = 0.81); (3) collaborating with DAOs on research activities (6 items, alpha = 0.80); and (4) co-producing scholarly materials with DAOs (2 items, alpha = 0.80). Our data indicate that physicians engage with DAOs in more frequent and diverse ways than has been previously reported. Almost all physicians in our sample had interacted directly with a DAO in some way, from low-effort activities such as visiting a DAO's website to deeper forms of engagement including coauthoring journal articles. These findings may provide a framework for bioethicists to characterize the nature and extent of physician interactions with advocacy organizations, which is critical for evaluating the ethical implications of physician-DAO relationships.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caroline Horrow
- Biomedical Ethics Research Program, Mayo Clinic , Rochester , Minnesota , USA
| | - Joel E Pacyna
- Biomedical Ethics Research Program, Mayo Clinic , Rochester , Minnesota , USA
| | - Carol Cosenza
- Center for Survey Research, University of Massachusetts Boston , Boston , Massachusetts , USA
| | - Richard R Sharp
- Biomedical Ethics Research Program, Center for Individualized Medicine, Mayo Clinic , Rochester , Minnesota , USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Dijkstra S, Kok G, Ledford JG, Sandalova E, Stevelink R. Possibilities and Pitfalls of Social Media for Translational Medicine. Front Med (Lausanne) 2018; 5:345. [PMID: 30574495 PMCID: PMC6291449 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2018.00345] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2018] [Accepted: 11/23/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
We live in an age where the sharing of scientific findings and ideas is no longer confined to people with access to academic libraries or scientific journals. Social media have permitted for knowledge and ideas to be shared with an unprecedented speed and magnitude. This has made it possible for research findings to have a greater impact and to be rapidly implemented in society. However, the spread of unfiltered, unreferenced, and non-peer-reviewed articles through social media comes with dangers as well. In this perspective article, we aim to address both the possibilities and pitfalls of social media for translational medicine. We describe how social media can be used for patient engagement, publicity, transparency, sharing of knowledge, and implementing findings in society. Moreover, we warn about the potential pitfalls of social media, which can cause research to be misinterpreted and false beliefs to be spread. We conclude by giving advice on how social media can be harnessed to combat the pitfalls and provide a new avenue for community engagement in translational medicine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Gautam Kok
- University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Julie G. Ledford
- Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, United States
| | - Elena Sandalova
- Danone Nutricia Research, Singapore, Singapore
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Research and drug development activities in rare diseases: differences between Japan and Europe regarding influence of prevalence. Drug Discov Today 2016; 21:1681-1689. [DOI: 10.1016/j.drudis.2016.06.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2016] [Revised: 05/12/2016] [Accepted: 06/13/2016] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
|
8
|
Menon D, Stafinski T, Dunn A, Short H. Involving patients in reducing decision uncertainties around orphan and ultra-orphan drugs: a rare opportunity? PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2016; 8:29-39. [PMID: 25516506 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-014-0106-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Uncertainty influences the amount of risk in decision making, and is typically related to clinical benefit, value for money, affordability, and/or adoption/diffusion of the technology (e.g., drug, device, procedure, etc.). Although evidence-based review processes within each stage of the technology lifecycle have been implemented to minimize uncertainty, high-quality information addressing that related to orphan and ultra-orphan drugs is often unavailable. The role that patients, as experts in their disease, may play in providing such information has yet to be fully explored. OBJECTIVE The objective of this systematic review was to identify existing and proposed opportunities for patients with rare diseases and their families to provide input aimed at reducing decision uncertainties throughout the lifecycle of an orphan or ultra-orphan drug. METHODS A comprehensive review of published and gray literature describing roles for patients and families in activities related to orphan and ultra-orphan drugs was conducted. In addition, the websites of regulatory and centralized reimbursement decision-making bodies in the top 22 OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries by gross domestic product (GDP) were scanned to identify current opportunities for patients with rare diseases in both stages. The websites of umbrella patient organizations for rare diseases in these countries were also scanned. These roles were then mapped onto a matrix to determine the stage in the technology lifecycle and types of uncertainties they directly or indirectly addressed. RESULTS Across the 22 countries, nine roles for patients within regulatory related processes were identified, with at least one in each country. These roles were not specific to patients with rare diseases. Similarly, six different opportunities for patient input in centralized drug review processes were identified, all of which applied to patients, in general, rather than just those with rare diseases. 'Real-world' examples of patient involvement explicitly related to rare diseases centered around 11 different themes. Seven fell within the research and development or clinical trial stages of a drug's lifecycle. Of the remaining four, three were associated with education and advocacy. All of the proposed roles identified focused on greater involvement in (1) the design and conduct of clinical trials, or (2) the 'valuation' of evidence during reimbursement decision making. When mapped onto the matrix of decision uncertainties, almost all of the existing and proposed roles addressed 'clinical benefit'. Roles for patients in reducing 'value for money', affordability, or adoption/diffusion uncertainties were mainly indirect, and a result of patient involvement in activities aimed at generating information on clinical benefit, which is then used to inform discussions around these uncertainties. CONCLUSIONS While patient involvement in activities that directly address uncertainties in clinical benefit may not be 'rare', opportunities for reducing those related to 'value for money', affordability, and adoption/diffusion remain scarce.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Devidas Menon
- Health Technology and Policy Unit, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, 3021 Research Transition Facility, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2V2, Canada,
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Pinto D, Martin D, Chenhall R. The involvement of patient organisations in rare disease research: a mixed methods study in Australia. Orphanet J Rare Dis 2016; 11:2. [PMID: 26754025 PMCID: PMC4709899 DOI: 10.1186/s13023-016-0382-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2015] [Accepted: 01/04/2016] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND We report here selected findings from a mixed-methods study investigating the role of Australian rare disease patient organisations (RDPOs) in research. Despite there being many examples of RDPOs that have initiated and supported significant scientific advances, there is little information - and none at all in Australia - about RDPOs generally, and their research-related goals, activities, and experiences. This information is a pre-requisite for understanding what RDPOs bring to research and how their involvement could be strengthened. METHODS We reviewed 112 RDPO websites, conducted an online survey completed by 61 organisational leaders, and interviewed ten leaders and two key informants. Quantitative and qualitative data were analysed using basic descriptive statistics and content analysis, respectively. RESULTS Although most are small volunteer-based groups, more than 90% of the surveyed RDPOs had a goal to promote or support research on the diseases affecting their members. Nearly all (95 %) had undertaken at least one research-related activity - such as providing funding or other support to researchers - in the previous five years. However, RDPO leaders reported considerable challenges in meeting their research goals. Difficulties most frequently identified were insufficient RDPO resources, and a perceived lack of researchers interested in studying their diseases. Other concerns included inadequate RDPO expertise in governing research "investments", and difficulty engaging researchers in the organisation's knowledge and ideas. We discuss these perceived challenges in the light of two systemic issues: the proliferation of and lack of collaboration between RDPOs, and the lack of specific governmental policies and resources supporting rare disease research and patient advocacy in Australia. CONCLUSION This study provides unique information about the experiences of RDPOs generally, rather than experiences retrospectively reported by RDPOs associated with successful research. We describe RDPOs' valuable contributions to research, while also providing insights into the difficulties for small organisations trying to promote research. The study is relevant internationally because of what it tells us about RDPOs; however, we draw attention to specific opportunities in Australia to support RDPOs' involvement in research, for the benefit of current and future generations affected by rare diseases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deirdre Pinto
- Centre for Health Equity, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Victoria, 3010, Australia.
| | - Dominique Martin
- Centre for Health Equity, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Victoria, 3010, Australia.
| | - Richard Chenhall
- Centre for Health Equity, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Victoria, 3010, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
|
11
|
Mavris M, Le Cam Y. Involvement of patient organisations in research and development of orphan drugs for rare diseases in europe. Mol Syndromol 2012; 3:237-43. [PMID: 23293582 DOI: 10.1159/000342758] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Patients' representatives have an increasingly present voice in all aspects of drug development from fundamental research through regulatory processes to health technology assessment. Although major advances have been made in raising awareness and increasing funding for rare diseases, important challenges remain in terms of best use of resources, coordinating efforts and improving policy. This article describes actions taken by rare disease patients' organisations as well as initiatives at the national and European levels to promote research into rare diseases. A survey conducted by EURORDIS (European Organisation for Rare Diseases) on the support (financial and non-financial) provided by patients' organisations in rare disease research is described as well as the involvement of patients' representatives in regulatory processes for medicinal products at the European Medicines Agency. The importance of including patients' groups in fundamental and clinical research as equal partners has become a fact that clearly contributes to the success of an application and the research conducted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Mavris
- EURORDIS - European Organisation for Rare Diseases, Paris, France
| | | |
Collapse
|