Clinical and economic issues complicating cost-effectiveness evaluation of orphan diseases

1. Zicht op zinnige en duurzame zorg. Zoetermeer: Raad voor de Volksgezondheid en Zorg, 2006.Search in Google Scholar

2. College voor zorgverzekeringen (since 2014 Zorginstituut Nederland). Diemen 2012. Report assessment health outcomes research alglucosidase alfa (Myozyme®) for Pompe disease. Diemen: CVZ; 2012. http://www.cvz.nl/binaries/live/%20cvzinternet/hst_content/nl/documenten/rapporten/2012/rpt211-ziekte-van-pompe.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

3. College voor zorgverzekeringen (since 2014 Zorginstituut Nederland). Diemen 2012. Report assessment health outcomes research agalsidase alfa (Replagal®) and agalsidase bèta (Fabrazyme®) for Fabry disease. Diemen: CVZ; 2012. http://www.cvz.nl/binaries/live/cvzinternet/hst_content/nl/documenten/rapporten/2012/rpt1211-ziekte-van-fabry.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

4. Letter of Ministry of Health 29 January 2013. The Netherlands. Search in Google Scholar

5. Letter of Ministry of Health 3 October 2013. The Netherlands.Search in Google Scholar

6. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Appraising Orphan Drugs. Last updated: 14 April 2008. www.nice.org.uk/aboutnice/whoweare/seniormanagementteam/meetings/2005/12july2005/appraising_orphan_drugs.jsp; www.nice.org.uk/niceMedia/pdf/smt/120705item4.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

7. Hutton J, Rutten FFH, Hasselt van P, Oosterwijk C, Dubois D, Nuijten MJC. Economic relevance and validation procedure. Orphan Medicinal Products. Munich, 28 February 2014, ISBN: 978-94-91526-04-6.Search in Google Scholar

8. Rabinovich, M., Greenberg, D. and Shemer, J.(2007). Threshold values for cost-effectiveness ratio and public funding of medical technologies. Harefuah 146, 453-458, 500.Search in Google Scholar

9. Nuijten MJ, Dubois DJ. Cost-utility analysis: current methodological issues and future perspectives. Front Pharmacol 2011. Jun 8;2:29. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2011.00029. eCollection 2011.Search in Google Scholar

10. http://www.emea.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/regulation/general/general_content_000029.jsp&mid=WC0b01aSearch in Google Scholar

11. European Medicines Agency. EPAR Myozyme. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_Scientific_Discussion/human/000636/WC500032128.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

12. Acquadro C, Berzon R, Dubois D. Incorporating the Patient’s Perspective into Drug Development and Communication: An Ad Hoc Task Force Report of the Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Harmonization Group Meeting at the Food and Drug Administration, February 16, 2001. Value in Health. Volume 6, Number 5, 2003, 522-531.10.1046/j.1524-4733.2003.65309.x14627058Search in Google Scholar

13. EUnetHTA JA1 WP5 methodology guidelines Endpoints used for relative effectiveness assessment of pharmaceuticals HEALTHRELATED QUALITY OF LIFE and UTILITY MEASURES. February 2013.Search in Google Scholar

14. Sussex J, Rollet P, Garau M et al. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to Value Orphan Medicines. Research Paper 13/03. OHE. May 2013.10.2139/ssrn.2631463Search in Google Scholar

15. Deverka PA et al. Economic Opportunities and Challenges for Pharmacogenomics; Annual Revue of Pharmacology and Toxicology 50: 423-37, 2010.10.1146/annurev.pharmtox.010909.10580520055709Open DOISearch in Google Scholar