↓ Skip to main content

Pressure for drug development in lysosomal storage disorders – a quantitative analysis thirty years beyond the US orphan drug act

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
Title
Pressure for drug development in lysosomal storage disorders – a quantitative analysis thirty years beyond the US orphan drug act
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13023-015-0262-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Konstantin Mechler, William K Mountford, Georg F Hoffmann, Markus Ries

Abstract

Lysosomal storage disorders are a heterogeneous group of approximately 50 monogenically inherited orphan conditions. A defect leads to the storage of complex molecules in the lysosome, and patients develop a complex multisystemic phenotype of high morbidity often associated with premature death. More than 30 years ago the Orphan Drug Act of 1983 passed the United States legislation intended to facilitate the development of drugs for rare disorders. We directed our efforts in assessing which lysosomal diseases had drug development pressure and what distinguished those with successful development and approvals from diseases not treated or without orphan drug designation. Analysis of the FDA database for orphan drug designations through descriptive and comparative statistics. Between 1983 and 2013, fourteen drugs for seven conditions received FDA approval. Overall, orphan drug status was designated 70 times for 20 conditions. Approved therapies were enzyme replacement therapies (N = 10), substrate reduction therapies (N = 1), small molecules facilitating lysosomal substrate transportation (N = 3). FDA approval was significantly associated with a disease prevalence higher than 0.5/100,000 (p = 0.00742) and clinical development programs that did not require a primary neurological endpoint (p = 0.00059). Orphan drug status was designated for enzymes, modified enzymes, fusion proteins, chemical chaperones, small molecules leading to substrate reduction, or facilitating subcellular substrate transport, stem cells as well as gene therapies. Drug development focused on more common diseases. Primarily neurological diseases were neglected. Small clinical trials with either somatic or biomarker endpoints were successful. Enzyme replacement therapy was the most successful technology. Four factors played a key role in successful orphan drug development or orphan drug designations: 1) prevalence of disease 2) endpoints 3) regulatory precedent, and 4) technology platform. Successful development seeded further innovation.

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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Korea, Republic of 1 2%
Unknown 62 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 18%
Student > Master 9 14%
Other 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 11 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 17 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 24 January 2016.
All research outputs
#12,727,600
of 22,799,071 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#1,210
of 2,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,527
of 265,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#25
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,799,071 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,615 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 265,112 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.