↓ Skip to main content

Using four decades of FDA orphan drug designations to describe trends in rare disease drug development: substantial growth seen in development of drugs for rare oncologic, neurologic, and pediatric-ons…

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, June 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#20 of 3,187)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
24 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Using four decades of FDA orphan drug designations to describe trends in rare disease drug development: substantial growth seen in development of drugs for rare oncologic, neurologic, and pediatric-onset diseases
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, June 2021
DOI 10.1186/s13023-021-01901-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathleen L. Miller, Lewis J. Fermaglich, Janet Maynard

Abstract

Orphan drug designations are a useful proxy to investigate trends in rare disease drug development. Drug developers must receive a designation before they are eligible for the economic incentives of the Orphan Drug Act in the United States. We created a database of all orphan drugs designated between 1983 and 2019 that included numerous drug characteristics, including therapeutic area. In addition, we constructed a "broad disease" categorization of designations as an alternative to therapeutic area, based on disease etiology and age of onset rather than organ system. By looking at the pattern of orphan drug designations over the past four decades, this analysis studied the impact of the evolving rare disease drug development landscape and considers the future of rare disease therapies over the coming decades. Between 1983 and 2019, a total of 5099 drugs and biologics received orphan drug designation. Designations more than doubled between the 1980s and 1990s, almost doubled between the 1990s and 2000s, and almost tripled in number between the 2000s and 2010s. The top three therapeutic areas represented in the orphan drug designations were: oncology (1910, 37%), neurology (674, 13%), and infectious diseases (436, 9%). The broad disease categorization found that the proportion of designations for pediatric-onset diseases has increased in the most recent decade to 27%. Analysis of the last four decades of orphan drug designation indicates seismic shifts have occurred in the rare disease drug development space. The number of designations granted more than quadrupled between the 1990s and 2010s. While these substantial increases led to growth in the absolute number of designations within all therapeutic areas (bar one) and broad disease categories, the relative proportions have seen considerable change over time. In the most recent decade, there have been notable increases in the proportion of drugs in oncology, pediatric-onset diseases, and neurologic disorders. The dramatic rise in overall orphan designations over the past four decades suggests we may continue to see an upward trajectory in designations leading to an increased number of approvals for drugs and biologics designed specifically for diagnosing, preventing, and treating rare diseases in the coming decades.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 77 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 18%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Professor 4 5%
Student > Master 4 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 4%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 39 51%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 44 57%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 177. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 March 2024.
All research outputs
#231,906
of 25,756,531 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#20
of 3,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,661
of 460,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#1
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,756,531 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,187 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 460,840 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.