Transposition and implementation of EU rare disease policy in Eastern Europe

Challenges in mapping European rare disease databases, relevant for ML-based screening technologies in terms of organizational, FAIR and legal principles: scoping review

Background

Given the increased availability of data sources such as hospital information systems, electronic health records, and health-related registries, a novel approach is required to develop artificial intelligence-based decision support that can assist clinicians in their diagnostic decision-making and shorten rare disease patients' diagnostic odyssey. The aim is to identify key challenges in the process of mapping European rare disease databases, relevant to ML-based screening technologies in terms of organizational, FAIR and legal principles.

Methods

A scoping review was conducted based on the PRISMA-ScR checklist. The primary article search was conducted in three electronic databases (MEDLINE/Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science) and a secondary search was performed in Google scholar and on the organizations' websites. Each step of this review was carried out independently by two researchers. A charting form for relevant study analysis was developed and used to categorize data and identify data items in three domains - organizational, FAIR and legal.

Results

At the end of the screening process, 73 studies were eligible for review based on inclusion and exclusion criteria with more than 60% (n = 46) of the research published in the last 5 years and originated only from EU/EEA countries. Over the ten-year period (2013-2022), there is a clear cycling trend in the publications, with a peak of challenges reporting every four years. Within this trend, the following dynamic was identified: except for 2016, organizational challenges dominated the articles published up to 2018; legal challenges were the most frequently discussed topic from 2018 to 2022. The following distribution of the data items by domains was observed - (1) organizational (n = 36): data accessibility and sharing (20.2%); long-term sustainability (18.2%); governance, planning and design (17.2%); lack of harmonization and standardization (17.2%); quality of data collection (16.2%); and privacy risks and small sample size (11.1%); (2) FAIR (n = 15): findable (17.9%); accessible sustainability (25.0%); interoperable (39.3%); and reusable (17.9%); and (3) legal (n = 33): data protection by all means (34.4%); data management and ownership (22.9%); research under GDPR and member state law (20.8%); trust and transparency (13.5%); and digitalization of health (8.3%). We observed a specific pattern repeated in all domains during the process of data charting and data item identification - in addition to the outlined challenges, good practices, guidelines, and recommendations were also discussed. The proportion of publications addressing only good practices, guidelines, and recommendations for overcoming challenges when mapping RD databases in at least one domain was calculated to be 47.9% (n = 35).

Conclusion

Despite the opportunities provided by innovation - automation, electronic health records, hospital-based information systems, biobanks, rare disease registries and European Reference Networks - the results of the current scoping review demonstrate a diversity of the challenges that must still be addressed, with immediate actions on ensuring better governance of rare disease registries, implementing FAIR principles, and enhancing the EU legal framework.

The Awareness of Rare Diseases Among Medical Students and Practicing Physicians in the Republic of Kazakhstan. An Exploratory Study

Although national plans or strategies for rare diseases (RDs) have been implemented in many jurisdictions research show that one of the main barriers RD patients face during medical encounter is medical professionals' low level of knowledge and experience on the diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation of RD patients. Consequently, there is a need to increase the standards of medical education in the field of RDs and to revise the undergraduate and postgraduate training programs. However, while studies on medical education in the field of RDs has been conducted in various countries across the both Americas, Asia or the European Union, still little is known about the awareness of RDs among healthcare professionals in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Thus, we conducted a survey among 207 medical students and 101 medical doctors from the West Kazakhstan Marat Ospanov Medical University, Aktobe, Kazakhstan. The study was conducted between March and May 2021. The questionnaire assessed their knowledge about the number, examples, etiology and estimated frequency of RDs. It also evaluated respondents self-assessment of competence in RDs. Although the majority of respondents agreed that RDs constitute a serious public health issue both medical students and medical doctors showed insufficient knowledge on the etiology, epidemiology and prevalence of RDs, and many had problems with separating RDs from more common disorders. Moreover, they also lacked knowledge about and the central register of RD patients and reimbursement of orphan drugs in Kazakhstan. Finally, while almost half respondents declared having had classes about RDs during their studies most perceived their knowledge about RDs as insufficient or poor and felt unprepared for caring for RD patients. Additionally, although majority of respondents in both groups believed that all physicians, regardless of their specialization, should possess knowledge on RDs many respondents did not look for such information at all.

The Awareness of Rare Diseases Among Medical Students and Practicing Physicians in the Republic of Kazakhstan. An Exploratory Study

Although national plans or strategies for rare diseases (RDs) have been implemented in many jurisdictions research show that one of the main barriers RD patients face during medical encounter is medical professionals' low level of knowledge and experience on the diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation of RD patients. Consequently, there is a need to increase the standards of medical education in the field of RDs and to revise the undergraduate and postgraduate training programs. However, while studies on medical education in the field of RDs has been conducted in various countries across the both Americas, Asia or the European Union, still little is known about the awareness of RDs among healthcare professionals in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Thus, we conducted a survey among 207 medical students and 101 medical doctors from the West Kazakhstan Marat Ospanov Medical University, Aktobe, Kazakhstan. The study was conducted between March and May 2021. The questionnaire assessed their knowledge about the number, examples, etiology and estimated frequency of RDs. It also evaluated respondents self-assessment of competence in RDs. Although the majority of respondents agreed that RDs constitute a serious public health issue both medical students and medical doctors showed insufficient knowledge on the etiology, epidemiology and prevalence of RDs, and many had problems with separating RDs from more common disorders. Moreover, they also lacked knowledge about and the central register of RD patients and reimbursement of orphan drugs in Kazakhstan. Finally, while almost half respondents declared having had classes about RDs during their studies most perceived their knowledge about RDs as insufficient or poor and felt unprepared for caring for RD patients. Additionally, although majority of respondents in both groups believed that all physicians, regardless of their specialization, should possess knowledge on RDs many respondents did not look for such information at all.

A Review of Rare Disease Policies and Orphan Drug Reimbursement Systems in 12 Eurasian Countries

Background: Despite international initiatives on collaboration within the field of rare diseases, patient access to orphan medicinal products (OMPs) and healthcare services differ greatly between countries. This study aimed to create a comprehensive and in-depth overview of rare diseases policies and reimbursement of OMPs in a selection of 12 countries in the Western Eurasian region: Armenia, France, Germany, Kazakhstan, Latvia, The Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Russia, Turkey, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed and an analysis of publicly available legislative and rare disease health policy data was undertaken in five focus areas: rare disease definition, newborn screening, registries, national plans, access to/reimbursement of OMPs. Results: Screening programs are broadly implemented but the number of screened diseases differs significantly (2-35 diseases), either between EU and non-EU countries, between EU member states and sometimes even within a single country. In most countries rare disease registries are operating with regional, national, European or worldwide coverage. The number of rare disease registries is growing, as a result of the National Plans (EU) and increased international scientific cooperation. France, Russia, and Poland have a centrally acting registry. National plans are present in all EU countries but implementation varies and is ongoing. The number of reimbursed OMPs in the selected countries ranges from nearly all available OMPs in the Netherlands, Germany, and France to zero in Armenia. Reimbursement rules differ considerably regionally and a trend is observed of reimbursement conditions getting stricter for expensive (orphan) drugs. Discussion: Inequality in patient access to new OMPs still exists due to variations in national policies, healthcare budgets, health insurance, and reimbursement systems. The observed differences are challenging for rare disease patients, health authorities and manufacturers alike. Progress can be seen, however, and international cooperation and harmonization is slowly but steadily expanding in the rare disease arena.

A compilation of national plans, policies and government actions for rare diseases in 23 countries

Previous studies have focused on the comparison of specific laws among multiple countries and regions; for example, laws related to facilitating treatments with orphan drugs or laws seeking to address the multiple needs of patients with rare diseases. The purpose of this scoping review is to examine and compare published reports on national plans, polices and legislation related to all rare diseases in different countries. We also examine strategies or programs that countries may have for these diseases. Articles were obtained from journals and books published between January 1, 2000, through December 15, 2017. Reports from the grey literature (documents issued by government and private organizations) were included if they were available on the internet. The databases used were Google and Google Scholar, PubMed, and the websites of Orphanet and the National Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD). We obtained information on 23 countries. Among these countries, the way in which rare diseases were defined varied from having similar definitions to no definition. Multinational programs supported by common or similar laws are likely to have a greater impact on rare diseases than single country programs.