corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 6087

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: Journal Article

Joppi R, Bertele V, Garattini S.
Orphan drug development is progressing too slowly.
Br J Clin Pharmacol 2006 Mar 01; 61:(3):355-60
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2125.2006.02579.x


Abstract:

AIMS: To assess the methodological quality of OMP dossiers and to discuss possible reasons for the small number of products licensed. METHODS: Information about orphan drug designation and approval was obtained from the website of the European Commission-Enterprise and Industry DG and from the European Public Assessment Reports. RESULTS: Out of 255 OMP designations, only 18 were approved (7.1%). Their dossiers often showed methodological limitations such as inappropriate clinical design, lack of active comparator where available and use of surrogate end-points. CONCLUSIONS: The paucity of European incentives for manufacturers and the poor documentation underpinning the applications may have limited the number of new OMP. The over 5000 rare diseases awaiting therapy are an important public health issue.

Keywords:
Animals Documentation Drug Industry* European Union Health Systems Agencies Pharmaceutical Preparations* Research/trends Retrospective Studies

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Cases of wilful misrepresentation are a rarity in medical advertising. For every advertisement in which nonexistent doctors are called on to testify or deliberately irrelevant references are bunched up in [fine print], you will find a hundred or more whose greatest offenses are unquestioning enthusiasm and the skill to communicate it.

The best defence the physician can muster against this kind of advertising is a healthy skepticism and a willingness, not always apparent in the past, to do his homework. He must cultivate a flair for spotting the logical loophole, the invalid clinical trial, the unreliable or meaningless testimonial, the unneeded improvement and the unlikely claim. Above all, he must develop greater resistance to the lure of the fashionable and the new.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963