The investment in and acquisition of rare disease drug development programmes have been encouraged by an advanced understanding of the molecular basis of rare disease, along with regulatory and economic incentives. However, merger and acquisition deals in the rare disease space frequently fail to lead to a marketed therapy, according to a 2023 Nature article1. The article suggests that challenges in research and development (R&D) play a key role in commercialisation failures, including difficulty validating scientific targets, and translating those targets into clinically relevant outcomes.
Difficulties in R&D for rare disease therapeutics have been compounded by a historically challenging market for biotechs, even as projections for spending increase. A recent survey of more than 130 biotech executives, published by ICON, shows that 60% of respondents expected to increase R&D spending, whilst only 2% planned to reduce funding. Significantly, 32% of biotech executives cited clinical trials as one of the biggest challenges in bringing novel therapies to market, which suggests an opportunity for biotechs to consider how they can work more comprehensively with their clinical development partners.
As development complexity and associated costs increase, optimising the efficiency and reach of secured funding becomes more crucial – especially in a highly competitive market for early-stage capital. The blog will highlight how biotechs developing rare disease therapeutics can maximise their funds and de-risk their asset development programmes through strategic trial design and engagement with regulators.
Optimising trial design
Many rare diseases are fatal and have a high degree of unmet clinical need. As a result, regulatory approvals for rare diseases follow a unique trajectory, compared to medicines for common illnesses, with more flexibility in regulatory pathways. This has created a favourable drug development landscape in which the clinical development of a rare disease therapy may require fewer patients, smaller trials, lower overall development costs, fewer external controls and higher chances of market authorisation compared to more common indications. For example, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) may accept natural history data as a comparator for a new drug in the regulatory application for a rare disease drug, instead of data from randomised controlled trials.
However, taking advantage of the flexibility permitted in rare disease trials, compared to more common indications, requires specialised insight. Sponsors who wish to develop and execute a trial that is feasible and compliant must do so with input from various groups, such as experts in rare-disease drug development, patients, caregivers and regulators.
Of these groups, sponsors may be tempted to forgo engagement with patients and caregivers during initial protocol development. However, this is a mistake. In rare disease clinical trials, incorporating patient and caregiver input into clinical trial design and protocol design is critical to developing realistic and feasible studies. Incorporating patient input results in studies that enrol patients more quickly and have better patient retention, which ultimately accelerates time to market and reduces costs of developing new treatments.
One challenge sponsors may face during initial trial design for rare disease therapies is the selection of appropriate endpoints. Most rare diseases have never previously been treated, so clinical endpoints are often poorly defined, and it can be difficult to establish baselines against which to measure effectiveness. Rare disease sponsors should leverage diagnostic, pharmacy and procedural claims data to illustrate what a patient journey and baseline healthcare utilisation look like for a given rare disease. Additionally, natural history data should be used to select endpoints, eligibility criteria and expected levels of efficacy.
Ultimately, rare disease companies should avoid responding to time-to-market pressures by moving too quickly during trial design. While meeting milestones on time is a priority, speed should not compromise the integrity of the trial at any level. In effect, the solution to a rapid development programme is getting it right the first time to avoid delays.
Strategically mapping failure points
Even when a trial is optimally designed, it may prove challenging to validate therapeutic targets for rare diseases and translate those targets into clinically relevant outcomes. The scientific validation of therapeutic targets for rare diseases may be far less robust than those for common diseases. And, because each rare disease may only have a handful of experts, independent due diligence is difficult to come by1. In some cases, substantial work is needed to establish that endpoints for use in pivotal trials are clinically meaningful and acceptable to regulators. In other cases, a therapeutic may be scientifically valid, but it may not be feasible to intervene early enough in the disease course.
To hedge against burning through cash stockpiles in scenarios in which the long-term goal is ultimately unachievable, developers of rare disease therapies should map strategic points to abort clinical development. Biotechs can identify these strategic points by exploring interim analyses and establishing rigorous go/no-go strategies, so that the ultimate success or failure can be determined at earlier points in the process and with clarity. Optimising this strategy requires careful consideration of what data would signal clear success or failure at key inflection points early in development, and then designing development plans to provide clear data readouts at each point to inform the viability of continuing further with the trial.
Engaging with regulators
According to the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, the most common reason for implementing time-consuming, costly and burdensome protocol amendments to a clinical trial are requests from regulatory agencies2. Sponsors aiming to start a development programme quickly risk derailing their timelines if they have not properly prepared for regulatory compliance. Early and frequent communication with regulatory bodies can help to ensure more thorough preparedness and reduce protocol amendments, each of which can add months of delay.
For rare disease therapies, early engagement with regulators is of particular importance because there are several potential opportunities for fast-track development programmes that can optimise timelines. Regulatory bodies around the globe, including the FDA and the European Union’s European Medicines Agency, offer expedited programmes for therapies addressing unmet medical needs for serious or life-threatening conditions.
For example, the FDA has launched several programmes in recent years to advance rare disease treatments through the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) and the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). These include the Support for clinical Trials Advancing Rare disease Therapeutic (START) pilot programme, the Accelerating Rare Cures (ARC) programme and the Rare Disease Endpoint Advancement (RDEA) pilot programme:
- The START pilot programme, launched in October of 2023, is similar to Operation Warp Speed for COVID-19 vaccines, and allows participants to frequently meet with FDA staff to address development issues. The programme provides an alternative to the infrequent and formal meetings that are currently standard between product developers and the FDA during drug development, which can lead to development delays if important questions are not answered soon enough.
- The ARC programme provides a way for stakeholders in rare disease drug development to share feedback with the FDA, and will be used to identify existing knowledge gaps. These insights will be used to develop publicly available resources informing regulatory considerations surrounding clinical trial design for rare disease drug developers.
- The RDEA pilot programme is a joint CDER/CBER initiative intended to support efficacy endpoint development for rare disease drugs through increased collaboration and engagement with the FDA.
Investments in expedited programmes for rare disease and orphan drugs by government regulators spell hope for the field, despite presently challenging economic conditions. Importantly, learnings from these pilot programmes may inform more successful drug development of rare disease going forward. An experienced partner can help guide biotechs through optimal clinical trial design and regulatory engagement to maximise their funds and accelerate time to market.
ICON experts can help you navigate the clinical development challenges in rare and orphan diseases. To speak with one of our experts, please contact us.
Citations
2. Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development. Impact Report. VOLUME 25, NUMBER 2 | March/April 2023
In this section
-
Digital Disruption
- AI and clinical trials
-
Clinical trial data anonymisation and data sharing
-
Clinical Trial Tokenisation
-
Closing the evidence gap: The value of digital health technologies in supporting drug reimbursement decisions
-
Digital disruption in biopharma
-
Disruptive Innovation
- Remote Patient Monitoring
-
Personalising Digital Health
- Real World Data
-
The triad of trust: Navigating real-world healthcare data integration
-
Patient Centricity
-
Agile Clinical Monitoring
-
Capturing the voice of the patient in clinical trials
-
Charting the Managed Access Program Landscape
-
Developing Nurse-Centric Medical Communications
- Diversity and inclusion in clinical trials
-
Exploring the patient perspective from different angles
-
Patient safety and pharmacovigilance
-
A guide to safety data migrations
-
Taking safety reporting to the next level with automation
-
Outsourced Pharmacovigilance Affiliate Solution
-
The evolution of the Pharmacovigilance System Master File: Benefits, challenges, and opportunities
-
Sponsor and CRO pharmacovigilance and safety alliances
-
Understanding the Periodic Benefit-Risk Evaluation Report
-
A guide to safety data migrations
-
Patient voice survey
-
Patient Voice Survey - Decentralised and Hybrid Trials
-
Reimagining Patient-Centricity with the Internet of Medical Things (IoMT)
-
Using longitudinal qualitative research to capture the patient voice
-
Agile Clinical Monitoring
-
Regulatory Intelligence
-
An innovative approach to rare disease clinical development
- EU Clinical Trials Regulation
-
Using innovative tools and lean writing processes to accelerate regulatory document writing
-
Current overview of data sharing within clinical trial transparency
-
Global Agency Meetings: A collaborative approach to drug development
-
Keeping the end in mind: key considerations for creating plain language summaries
-
Navigating orphan drug development from early phase to marketing authorisation
-
Procedural and regulatory know-how for China biotechs in the EU
-
RACE for Children Act
-
Early engagement and regulatory considerations for biotech
-
Regulatory Intelligence Newsletter
-
Requirements & strategy considerations within clinical trial transparency
-
Spotlight on regulatory reforms in China
-
Transfer of marketing authorisation
-
An innovative approach to rare disease clinical development
-
Therapeutics insights
- Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders
- Cardiovascular
- Cell and Gene Therapies
- Central Nervous System
-
Glycomics
- Infectious Diseases
- NASH
-
Oncology
- Paediatrics
-
Respiratory
-
Rare and orphan diseases
-
Advanced therapies for rare diseases
-
Cross-border enrollment of rare disease patients
-
Crossing the finish line: Why effective participation support strategy is critical to trial efficiency and success in rare diseases
-
Diversity, equity and inclusion in rare disease clinical trials
-
Identify and mitigate risks to rare disease clinical programmes
-
Leveraging historical data for use in rare disease trials
-
Natural history studies to improve drug development in rare diseases
-
Patient Centricity in Orphan Drug Development
-
The key to remarkable rare disease registries
-
Advanced therapies for rare diseases
-
Transforming Trials
-
Accelerating biotech innovation from discovery to commercialisation
-
Ensuring the validity of clinical outcomes assessment (COA) data: The value of rater training
-
Linguistic validation of Clinical Outcomes Assessments
-
Optimising biotech funding
- Adaptive clinical trials
-
Best practices to increase engagement with medical and scientific poster content
-
Decentralised clinical trials
-
Biopharma perspective: the promise of decentralised models and diversity in clinical trials
-
Decentralised and Hybrid clinical trials
-
Practical considerations in transitioning to hybrid or decentralised clinical trials
-
Navigating the regulatory labyrinth of technology in decentralised clinical trials
-
Biopharma perspective: the promise of decentralised models and diversity in clinical trials
-
eCOA implementation
- Flexible delivery models
-
Implications of COVID-19 on statistical design and analyses of clinical studies
-
Improving pharma R&D efficiency
-
Increasing Complexity and Declining ROI in Drug Development
-
Innovation in Clinical Trial Methodologies
- Partnership insights
-
Risk Based Quality Management
-
Transforming the R&D Model to Sustain Growth
-
Accelerating biotech innovation from discovery to commercialisation
-
Value Based Healthcare
-
Strategies for commercialising oncology treatments for young adults
-
US payers and PROs
-
Accelerated early clinical manufacturing
-
Cardiovascular Medical Devices
-
CMS Part D Price Negotiations: Is your drug on the list?
-
COVID-19 navigating global market access
-
Ensuring scientific rigor in external control arms
-
Evidence Synthesis: A solution to sparse evidence, heterogeneous studies, and disconnected networks
-
Global Outcomes Benchmarking
-
Health technology assessment
-
Perspectives from US payers
-
ICER’s impact on payer decision making
-
Making Sense of the Biosimilars Market
-
Medical communications in early phase product development
-
Navigating the Challenges and Opportunities of Value Based Healthcare
-
Payer Reliance on ICER and Perceptions on Value Based Pricing
-
Payers Perspectives on Digital Therapeutics
-
Precision Medicine
-
RWE Generation Cross Sectional Studies and Medical Chart Review
-
Survey results: How to engage healthcare decision-makers
-
The affordability hurdle for gene therapies
-
The Role of ICER as an HTA Organisation
-
Strategies for commercialising oncology treatments for young adults
-
Blog
-
Videos
-
Webinar Channel