Three Pillars of Support for Orphan Drug Programs: Individual Valuations, Societal Valuations, and Anonymous Altruism.

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS Value in Health Pub Date : 2024-07-06 DOI:10.1016/j.jval.2024.06.014
Darius N Lakdawalla, Charles E Phelps, Hong-Hanh Nguyen
{"title":"Three Pillars of Support for Orphan Drug Programs: Individual Valuations, Societal Valuations, and Anonymous Altruism.","authors":"Darius N Lakdawalla, Charles E Phelps, Hong-Hanh Nguyen","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2024.06.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To identify and describe potential societal and individual sources of support for orphan drug programs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Generalized Risk-Adjusted Cost-Effectiveness method shows that acute illness and disability severity increase individuals' willingness to pay for health gains. We develop a social welfare function (SWF) that incorporates individuals' own values, combined with politically or ethically determined weights. We introduce the concept of horizontal equity-that individuals in similar situations should be treated similarly-into the SWF. Finally, we introduce anonymous altruism into individuals' utility functions-the desire to help others, without knowing their identity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Combined with the empirical link between disease severity and rarity, the Generalized Risk-Adjusted Cost-Effectiveness method demonstrates heightened willingness to pay for health gains for people with rare diseases, leading rational individuals to support orphan drug programs, our first pillar of support. Adding horizontal equity to the SWF further increases societal support for orphan drug programs. Anonymous altruism, focusing most strongly on those in the most-dire circumstances, leads to altruistic support for those with severe disorders. Because innovators' economic incentives lead them to focus on larger markets, anonymous altruistic individuals will increasingly prefer public investments into rare diseases over time, as private markets systematically produce gains for common diseases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We identified 3 supporting pillars for orphan drug programs: (1) individuals' propensity to prefer treatments for severe diseases; (2) the preference for horizontal equity in our social welfare; (3) anonymous altruism, the desire to help strangers, coupled with market incentives that underserve strangers with rare diseases.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.06.014","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To identify and describe potential societal and individual sources of support for orphan drug programs.

Methods: The Generalized Risk-Adjusted Cost-Effectiveness method shows that acute illness and disability severity increase individuals' willingness to pay for health gains. We develop a social welfare function (SWF) that incorporates individuals' own values, combined with politically or ethically determined weights. We introduce the concept of horizontal equity-that individuals in similar situations should be treated similarly-into the SWF. Finally, we introduce anonymous altruism into individuals' utility functions-the desire to help others, without knowing their identity.

Results: Combined with the empirical link between disease severity and rarity, the Generalized Risk-Adjusted Cost-Effectiveness method demonstrates heightened willingness to pay for health gains for people with rare diseases, leading rational individuals to support orphan drug programs, our first pillar of support. Adding horizontal equity to the SWF further increases societal support for orphan drug programs. Anonymous altruism, focusing most strongly on those in the most-dire circumstances, leads to altruistic support for those with severe disorders. Because innovators' economic incentives lead them to focus on larger markets, anonymous altruistic individuals will increasingly prefer public investments into rare diseases over time, as private markets systematically produce gains for common diseases.

Conclusions: We identified 3 supporting pillars for orphan drug programs: (1) individuals' propensity to prefer treatments for severe diseases; (2) the preference for horizontal equity in our social welfare; (3) anonymous altruism, the desire to help strangers, coupled with market incentives that underserve strangers with rare diseases.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
支持孤儿药计划的三大支柱:个人价值、社会价值和匿名利他主义。
目的确定并描述支持孤儿药项目的潜在社会和个人来源:广义风险调整成本效益法(GRACE)显示,急性病和残疾的严重程度会增加个人对健康收益的支付意愿(WTP)。我们开发了一种社会福利函数(SWF),将个人自身的价值与政治或道德决定的权重相结合。我们在 SWF 中引入了横向公平的概念,即处于类似情况的个人应得到类似的待遇。最后,我们在个人效用函数中引入了匿名利他主义--在不知道他人身份的情况下帮助他人的愿望:结果:结合疾病严重性与稀有性之间的经验联系,GRACE 显示了对健康收益的更高 WTP,从而引导理性个体支持孤儿药项目,即我们的第一支持支柱。将横向公平添加到 SWF 中会进一步增加社会对孤儿药项目的支持。匿名利他主义最强烈地关注那些处于最恶劣环境中的人,从而导致对严重失调患者的利他主义支持。由于创新者的经济动机促使他们关注更大的市场,因此匿名利他主义者会特别支持孤儿药项目。搭便车问题的存在将其转化为对公共项目的支持:我们确定了支持孤儿药项目的三大支柱:(1)个人对治疗罕见疾病的渴望,这些疾病通常病情严重、危及生命;(2)我们的社会福利基金中的横向公平概念;(3)匿名利他主义,即对处于困境中的人的渴望,即使他们并不为人所知。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Value in Health
Value in Health 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
3064
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
期刊最新文献
Analytical Methods for Comparing Uncontrolled Trials with External Controls from Real-World Data: a Systematic Literature Review and Comparison to European Regulatory and Health Technology Assessment Practice. Author Reply to "Cost-of/Burden-of-Illness Studies: Steps Backward?" Author Reply. Table of Contents Editorial Board
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1