EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 10 (2014) SHS Web of Conferences, 10 (2014) 00021 References
Open Access
Issue
SHS Web of Conferences
Volume 10, 2014
4th International Interdisciplinary Scientific Conference SOCIETY, HEALTH, WELFARE
Article Number 00021
Number of page(s) 8
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20141000021
Published online 09 September 2014
  1. Ambulatorajai ārstēšanai paredzēto zāïu un medicınisko ierıču iegādes izdevumu kompensācijas kārtıba. (2006). Ministru kabineta noteikumi Nr.899. Rīga. [Order of reimbursement of medicines and medical devices for outpatient treatment. Regulation No. 899 of the Cabinet of Ministers]. (in Latvian). http://www.likumi.lv/doc.php?id=147522&from=off, accessed 05.05.2013. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bignami, F. (2007). Eurordis survey on orphan drugs availability in Europe. 6th Eurordis Round Table of Companies Workshop. Barcelona, Spain. http://www.eurordis.org/IMG/pdf/2007ODsurvey-eurordis.pdf, accessed 05.05.2013. [Google Scholar]
  3. Boon, W., Moors, E. (2008). Exploring emerging technologies using metaphors–a study of orphan drugs and pharmacogenomics. Soc Sci Med, 66, 1915–1927. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the regions on Rare Diseases: Europe's challenges. (2008). Commission of the European Communities. Brussels. http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_threats/non_com/docs/rare_com_en.pdf, accessed 05.05.2013. [Google Scholar]
  5. de Varax, A., Letellier, M., Börtlein, G. (2004). Study on orphan drugs: Phase I: overview of the conditions for marketing orphan drugs in Europe. Alcimed. Paris, France. http://ec.europa.eu/health/files/orphanmp/doc/pricestudy/final_final_report_part_1_wwe_en.pdf, accessed 05.05.2013. [Google Scholar]
  6. Denis, A., Mergaert, L., Fostier, C., Cleemput, I., Simoens, S. (2010). A comparative study of European rare disease and orphan drug markets. Health Policy, 97, 173–179. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. Denis, A., Mergaert, L., Fostier, C., Cleemput, I., Simoens, S. (2010). Budget impact analysis of orphan drugs in Belgium: estimates from 2008 to 2013. J Med Econ, 13(2), 295–301. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. Drummond, M.F., Wilson, D.A., Kanavos, P., Ubel, P., Rovira, J. (2007). Assessing the economic challenges posed by orphan drugs. Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 23(1), 36–42. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. Iskrov, G., Miteva-Katrandzhieva, T., Stefanov, R. (2012). Challenges to orphan drugs access in Eastern Europe: The case of Bulgaria. Health Policy, 108, 10–18. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Kompensējamo zālu saraksts. (2013). Nacionālais veselıbas dienests. Rīga. [Reimbursement drug list]. (in Latvian). http://www.vmnvd.gov.lv/lv/kompensejamie-medikamenti/kompensejamo-zalu-saraksts, accessed 05.05.2013. [Google Scholar]
  11. Latvijas Republikas Zālu reìistrs. (2013). Zālu valsts a‘gentūra. Rīga. [Drug Register of the Republic of Latvia]. (in Latvian). http://www.zva.gov.lv/?id=375&sa=375&top=334, accessed 05.05.2013. [Google Scholar]
  12. Le Cam, Y. (2010). Inventory of access and prices of orphan drugs across Europe: a collaborative work between national alliances on rare diseases & Eurordis. Eurordis. Paris, France. http://img.eurordis.org/newsletter/pdf/mar-2011/ERTC_13122010_YLeCam_Final.pdf, accessed 05.05.2013. [Google Scholar]
  13. List of rare disease designations. (2013). European Medicines Agency. http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/medicines/landing/orphan_searse.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac058001d12b, accessed 05.05.2013. [Google Scholar]
  14. Michel, M., Toumi, M. (2012). Access to orphan drugs in Europe: current and future issues. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res, 12(1), 23–29. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. Orofino, J., Soto, J., Casado, M.A., Oyagüez, I. (2010). Global spending on orphan drugs in France, Germany, the UK, Italy and Spain during 2007. Appl Health Econ Health Policy, 8(5), 301–315. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. Pavlović, N., Stanimirov, B., Stojančević, M., Paut-Kusturica, M., Stoimenova, A., Goločorbin-Kon, S., Mikov, M. (2012). An insight on differences in availability and reimbursement of orphan medicines among Serbia, Bulgaria and Sweden. Biotechnol Biotec Eq, 26(5), 3236–3241. [Google Scholar]
  17. Picavet, E., Dooms, M., Cassiman, D., Simoens, S. (2011). Drugs for rare diseases: influence of orphan designation status on price. Appl Health Econ Health Policy, 9(4), 275–279. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. Register of designated orphan medicinal products.European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/health/documents/community-register/html/alforphreg.htm, accessed 05.05.2013. [Google Scholar]
  19. Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1999 on Orphan Medicinal Products. (2000). Official Journal of the EuropeanCommunities, L18:1-5. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2000:018:0001:0005:en:PDF, accessed 05.05.2013. [Google Scholar]
  20. Schey, C., Milanova, T., Hutchings, A. (2011). Estimating the budget impact of orphan medicines in Europe: 2010 – 2020. Orphanet J Rare Dis, 6(62), 1–10. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. Simoens, S. (2011). Pricing and reimbursement of orphan drugs: the need for more transparency. Orphanet J Rare Dis, 6(42), 1–8. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. Spokiene, I. (2008). Legal assessment of current situation on orphan patients in Lithuania. Medicina (Kaunas), 44(8), 571–576. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.