Investigators say that inconsistencies in the way rare diseases are defined contribute to misdiagnoses, delayed treatment, and other ills that could be addressed with global standards.
There is an urgent need to improve classification of rare diseases, because the lack of consistent definitions impairs diagnosis and treatment, research on rare disease mechanisms, access to patient resources, and potential therapies, according to a commentary in Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.
The high incidence of common diseases in certain populations, regions, and contexts helps to corroborate disease definitions and support standard diagnostic capabilities and therapeutic approaches. However, “the probability of such corroboration for rare diseases is substantially lower,” the authors wrote.
There is not even agreement on how many people are affected by rare diseases. The US Orphan Drug Act of 1983 defines rare diseases as affecting fewer than 200,000 individuals worldwide, but European Union legislation passed in 2000 defines them as affecting fewer than 1 in 2000.
Further complicating the picture is that local incidence may determine whether a disease is rare. Examples of this are Tay-Sachs disease, which has a carrier frequency of 1 in 25 among Ashkenazi Jews; sickle cell disease among those of sub-Saharan African descent; and tuberculosis, which is rare in the United States but is 1 of the top 10 causes of death worldwide.
Terms used to define rare diseases can sometimes be inaccurate or imprecise. For example, “breast cancer” encompasses a variety of tumor subtypes with unique genetic signatures and different treatments, leaving it open to interpretation whether breast cancer should be considered 1 or multiple diseases.
The authors described a collaborative effort to harmonize disease definitions called Monarch Disease Ontology (Mondo), which estimates the number of specific rare diseases (not categories or parent terms) at more than 10,000. However, the authors said, “This preliminary analysis suggests that there could be a substantially higher number of rare diseases than typically assumed at present, with obvious implications for diagnostics, drug discovery and treatment.”
Regulators, scientists, clinicians, and patient advocacy groups peg the number of rare diseases at between 5000 and 8000. The article estimates about 10% of the world’s population is affected by a rare disease; another source estimates 3.5% to 5.9%. These percentages translate to somewhere between 300 and 700 million people affected by rare diseases.
Rare disease classification systems may exclude chromosomal disorders, structural variations such as inversions, and diseases caused by environmental factors such as toxin exposure. “Ultimately, if knowledge on rare diseases is not collected and curated more effectively, many patients with rare diseases will remain underserved or neglected by healthcare systems,” the authors wrote.
Most common diseases are associated with numerous small-effect genetic variants, but various types of rare disease have their own characteristics. Providers may attempt to identify these rare diseases based on a patient's phenotypic features, but “even with the current limited knowledge of the genetic basis of many rare diseases, it is known that different pathogenic variants in the same gene may have different consequences, which is often not adequately recorded,” wrote the authors. Although some diseases involve variants in the same gene, they should be considered distinct diseases with different presentation and treatment, the authors note.
A significant clinical challenge is that most clinicians are unlikely to have experience diagnosing or monitoring rare diseases, which contributes to delayed or wrong diagnoses for patients. The authors stress that consensus on physical, genetic, and environmental characteristics of each condition is critical to solving these problems.
The authors call for funding and regulatory agencies, patient advocacy groups, and other organizations in the rare disease field to join forces globally to collect, consolidate, and curate the most current knowledge on rare diseases. Agencies the authors call upon to develop unified rare disease definitions include the World Health Organization, the FDA, the European Medicines Agency, and the National Academy of Medicine.
They also suggest that a forum is needed to discuss these issues, with dedicated funding mechanisms to address them. The authors hope that globally consistent criteria for rare diseases will provide a foundation for more effective diagnosis and care of patients as well as the development of new therapeutic approaches.
Reference
Haendel M, Vasilevsky N, Unni D, et al. How many rare diseases are there? Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2019;19:77-78. doi: 10.1038/d41573-019-00180-y.
NCCN Guidelines Update Adds Momelotinib Below Ruxolitinib for High-, Low-Risk Myelofibrosis
November 21st 2023Momelotinib was given category 2A and 2B status for patients with high- and low-risk myelofibrosis (MF) and MF with anemia. However, ruxolitinib retains a higher category of recommendation as a treatment for patients with MF.
Read More
Oncology Onward: A Conversation With Dr Shereef Elnahal, Under Secretary for Health
April 20th 2023Shereef Elnahal, MD, MBA, under secretary for health at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), sat for a conversation with our hosts Emeline Aviki, MD, MBA, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and Stephen Schleicher, MD, MBA, Tennessee Oncology, that covered the cancer footprint of the VHA.
Listen
Odevixibat Safe for Alagille Syndrome Based on Hepatic Changes
November 8th 2023Pooled phase 3 data presented at North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Nutrition 2023 support the benefit-risk profile of the ileal bile acid transport inhibitor in treating the rare liver disease.
Read More
Exploring Payer Coverage Decisions Following FDA Novel Drug Approvals
May 3rd 2022On this episode of Managed Care Cast, Ari D. Panzer, BS, lead author and researcher, then at Tufts Medical Center—now at Duke University—discusses the findings from his team’s investigation into coverage decisions by health plan insurers of the 66 drugs approved by the FDA in 2018.
Listen