Health technology assessment and medical insurance access for rare disease drugs in China: A policy review with quantitative insights from publicly available data.

IF 2.1 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Dandan Ai, Binyan Sui, Chengaxin Duan, Zhao Liu, Fan Zhang, Kun Zhao
{"title":"Health technology assessment and medical insurance access for rare disease drugs in China: A policy review with quantitative insights from publicly available data.","authors":"Dandan Ai, Binyan Sui, Chengaxin Duan, Zhao Liu, Fan Zhang, Kun Zhao","doi":"10.5582/irdr.2025.01076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To ascertain the status and propose optimization strategies for rare disease drugs (RDDs) value assessment in the scenario of the National Reimbursement Drug List (NRDL) dynamic adjustment in China, we conducted a narrative policy review that synthesized published literature and policy documents, supplemented by a secondary descriptive statistical analysis of publicly available 2022-2024 year NRDL negotiation data to contextualize recent reimbursement practices for rare disease drugs in China. This study found that value assessment of RDDs largely aligned with the traditional framework, encompassing five key dimensions: safety, efficacy, economic evaluation, innovation, and equity. Considering disease severity and the competitive landscape, innovative RDDs tend to receive higher clinical value ratings, higher willingness-to-pay thresholds, and broader policy support across the healthcare system. Between 2022 and 2024, a total of 60 RDDs applied for NRDL inclusion, with 43% successfully reimbursed. Most applicants were either original research drugs already approved overseas or modified new drugs launched domestically and abroad. Notably, 42% of the drugs had achieved global first launches before 2015, thereby accumulating extensive clinical evidence, and 58% submitted randomized controlled trial (RCT) data. The proportion of drugs supported by RCT evidence in the reimbursed group was significantly higher than the figure in the non-reimbursed group, whereas the proportion of drugs with pediatric indications were relatively lower in the reimbursed group. No significant differences were observed in other value assessment dimensions between successful and unsuccessful applicants. It is recommended that China develop detailed health technology assessment (HTA) guidelines and real-world evidence (RWE) guidance tailored for RDDs, facilitating the generation of high-quality evidence and decreasing decision-making risks associated with the value assessment of innovative RDDs.</p>","PeriodicalId":14420,"journal":{"name":"Intractable & rare diseases research","volume":"15 1","pages":"17-25"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12932014/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intractable & rare diseases research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5582/irdr.2025.01076","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To ascertain the status and propose optimization strategies for rare disease drugs (RDDs) value assessment in the scenario of the National Reimbursement Drug List (NRDL) dynamic adjustment in China, we conducted a narrative policy review that synthesized published literature and policy documents, supplemented by a secondary descriptive statistical analysis of publicly available 2022-2024 year NRDL negotiation data to contextualize recent reimbursement practices for rare disease drugs in China. This study found that value assessment of RDDs largely aligned with the traditional framework, encompassing five key dimensions: safety, efficacy, economic evaluation, innovation, and equity. Considering disease severity and the competitive landscape, innovative RDDs tend to receive higher clinical value ratings, higher willingness-to-pay thresholds, and broader policy support across the healthcare system. Between 2022 and 2024, a total of 60 RDDs applied for NRDL inclusion, with 43% successfully reimbursed. Most applicants were either original research drugs already approved overseas or modified new drugs launched domestically and abroad. Notably, 42% of the drugs had achieved global first launches before 2015, thereby accumulating extensive clinical evidence, and 58% submitted randomized controlled trial (RCT) data. The proportion of drugs supported by RCT evidence in the reimbursed group was significantly higher than the figure in the non-reimbursed group, whereas the proportion of drugs with pediatric indications were relatively lower in the reimbursed group. No significant differences were observed in other value assessment dimensions between successful and unsuccessful applicants. It is recommended that China develop detailed health technology assessment (HTA) guidelines and real-world evidence (RWE) guidance tailored for RDDs, facilitating the generation of high-quality evidence and decreasing decision-making risks associated with the value assessment of innovative RDDs.

中国罕见病药物的卫生技术评估和医疗保险可及性:基于公开数据的定量见解的政策审查。
为了确定中国罕见病药物(rdd)价值评估在国家医保目录(NRDL)动态调整情景下的现状并提出优化策略,我们进行了一项综合已发表文献和政策文件的叙述性政策综述,并辅以对公开的2022-2024年NRDL谈判数据的二次描述性统计分析,以了解中国罕见病药物最近的报销实践。本研究发现,rdd的价值评估与传统框架基本一致,包括五个关键维度:安全性、有效性、经济评估、创新和公平性。考虑到疾病严重程度和竞争格局,创新的rdd往往获得更高的临床价值评级、更高的支付意愿阈值以及整个医疗保健系统更广泛的政策支持。在2022年至2024年期间,共有60个rdd申请纳入NRDL,其中43%成功报销。大多数申请人要么是已经在海外获得批准的原研药物,要么是在国内外上市的改良新药。值得注意的是,42%的药物在2015年之前实现了全球首次上市,从而积累了广泛的临床证据,58%的药物提交了随机对照试验(RCT)数据。报销组RCT证据支持的药物比例显著高于未报销组,而报销组具有儿科适应症的药物比例相对较低。成功申请者与不成功申请者在其他价值评估维度上无显著差异。建议中国制定针对rdd的详细卫生技术评估(HTA)指南和现实世界证据(RWE)指南,促进高质量证据的产生,降低与创新rdd价值评估相关的决策风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Intractable & rare diseases research
Intractable & rare diseases research MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书