Orphan designation, incentives, HTA and pricing, early access and legislation reform: what developing and commercialising a rare disease drug in the EU takes.
Developing and commercialising a rare disease medicine in the EU starts with orphan designation under Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, for conditions affecting no more than 5 in 10,000 people, which brings protocol assistance, fee reductions and ten years of market exclusivity. The harder part is access: health technology assessment, including EU joint clinical assessment under Regulation (EU) 2021/2282, and pricing and reimbursement decided country by country.
Europe has become one of the most active regions for orphan drug development, yet rare disease drug development, the path from laboratory to patient, remains anything but straightforward. Between 27 and 36 million people in the EU live with a rare disease (European Commission, n.d.-b), and the rare disease market continues to attract significant investment, but the commercialisation of these medicines requires a different playbook from that for conventional medicines. Fragmented healthcare systems, varying reimbursement standards and complex regulatory requirements create a unique set of hurdles. For companies developing treatments for rare diseases in the EU, understanding the interplay between regulation, market access and patient engagement is not optional: it is the difference between a medicine reaching patients and one that stalls at the approval stage. This piece breaks down the current state of orphan drug development and commercialisation across Europe, from regulatory incentives to the legislative changes reshaping the field in 2026.
In the EU a condition is rare when it affects no more than 5 in 10,000 people (Regulation (EC) No 141/2000).
Each rare disease affects few people, but together rare diseases affect between 27 and 36 million people in the EU (European Commission, n.d.-b).
Rare diseases affect a small number of individuals per condition, but collectively they represent a massive public health challenge. The European Commission recognises between 6,000 and 8,000 distinct rare diseases (European Commission, n.d.-b), and an analysis of the Orphanet database counted 6,172 unique rare diseases (Nguengang Wakap et al., 2020; Orphanet, n.d.). New conditions are still being identified: the medical literature describes an average of five new diseases every week (European Medicines Agency, 2026b). The sheer breadth of this category means that policy responses must balance specificity with scalability.
Orphan drug designation, called orphan designation in EU law, is granted by the European Commission on the opinion of the EMA's Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products (COMP), which gives its opinion within 90 days of a valid application (Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, Art. 5; European Medicines Agency, 2026b). The threshold of no more than 5 in 10,000 people in the EU was established under Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, and it remains the foundational criterion in 2026. To qualify, the medicine must be intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition, and the sponsor must also show that no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of the condition is authorised in the EU, or that the medicine would be of significant benefit to those affected (Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, Art. 3(1)). The regulation also provides an alternative route for serious conditions where, without incentives, marketing the medicine would be unlikely to generate a sufficient return to justify the investment (Art. 3(1)(a)).
By the end of 2025, the European Commission had granted 3,175 orphan designations since the regulation's inception (European Medicines Agency, 2026c), and more than 275 orphan medicines had been authorised in the EU since 2000 (European Medicines Agency, 2026b). The designation itself does not guarantee approval, but it unlocks incentives designed to encourage the development of medicines that otherwise would not be developed (European Medicines Agency, 2026b).
The Orphanet database analysis estimated the population prevalence of rare diseases at 3.5% to 5.9%, or 263 to 446 million people worldwide at any point in time, using the European definition of 5 in 10,000 and excluding rare cancers, infectious diseases and poisonings (Nguengang Wakap et al., 2020). The same analysis of the database of Orphanet, the reference portal for rare diseases, found that 71.9% of rare diseases are genetic and 69.9% have an exclusively paediatric onset (Nguengang Wakap et al., 2020).
Patient registries and cross-border initiatives such as the European Reference Networks (ERNs) help consolidate data on rare diseases, and registries also supply information on epidemiology, standards of care and treatment patterns that regulators use when assessing medicines for rare diseases (Jonker et al., 2022). Still, underdiagnosis remains a persistent problem. The average diagnostic odyssey for a rare disease patient in Europe stretches to 4.7 years, according to a 2024 EURORDIS Rare Barometer survey of 6,507 people living with 1,675 rare diseases in 41 countries (Faye et al., 2024), and in some cases much longer.
Related: rare disease epidemiology and statistics
Designated orphan medicines receive protocol assistance from the EMA at reduced fees and, once authorised, ten years of market exclusivity (European Medicines Agency, 2020; Regulation (EC) No 141/2000).
The EU's regulatory framework for orphan medicines was designed to solve a specific problem: developing medicines intended for small numbers of patients has little commercial incentive under normal market conditions (European Medicines Agency, 2026b), and the regulation itself recognises that, without incentives, marketing some of these medicines would be unlikely to generate a sufficient return to justify the investment (Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, Art. 3(1)). The system that exists today is a direct response to that market failure.
Building that country by country is where most of the work sits, and where a centrally authorised medicine can still stall. Ideogen provides the local access route, the supply model and the regulatory filings across Europe, MENA, CIS and 94 markets worldwide, in orphan and rare disease. Talk to our experts about bridging access to unmet need in orphan and rare disease, where earlier access changes patient outcomes, at [email protected].
One of the most valuable tools available to orphan drug developers is EMA protocol assistance, a form of scientific advice specifically for designated orphan medicines (Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, Art. 6; European Medicines Agency, 2020). It answers sponsors' questions on the types of studies needed to demonstrate a medicine's quality, benefits and risks, and on the significant benefit of the medicine, and there is no limit on how often a sponsor can request it (European Medicines Agency, 2020). This is especially important for rare diseases, where small populations make clinical trial recruitment and design difficult and the clinical evidence available when the marketing authorisation application is made is often limited (Jonker et al., 2022).
Protocol assistance comes at a reduced charge. For designated orphan medicines, it carries a 75% fee reduction, which rises to 100% when the sponsor is a micro, small or medium-sized enterprise (SME); SMEs also receive a 100% reduction on the initial marketing authorisation application (European Medicines Agency, 2026a), and the fee for an orphan designation application is waived in full (Regulation (EU) 2024/568). Companies that use this advice early align their development with what regulators expect to see, and following it matters: an EMA analysis of 157 orphan medicines with a marketing authorisation outcome between 2000 and 2013 found that company size and compliance with scientific advice were determinants of success (Hofer et al., 2018). Yet the COMP's own review of gene therapy applications found that sponsors do not frequently use the incentives that could support their development (Palomo et al., 2023).
The headline incentive for orphan drug developers in the EU has been 10 years of market exclusivity following authorisation (Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, Art. 8(1)). During this period, the EU and the Member States may not authorise a similar medicine for the same therapeutic indication, unless the holder consents, cannot supply sufficient quantities, or the second medicine is shown to be safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior (Art. 8(3)). Orphan drug market exclusivity can be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, the designation criteria are no longer met, for example because the medicine is sufficiently profitable (Art. 8(2)), and it is extended by two years for medicines that have also complied with an agreed paediatric investigation plan (European Medicines Agency, 2020). This exclusivity is the central financial incentive of the orphan regulation.
Beyond exclusivity, developers benefit from reduced fees for EMA regulatory activities (European Medicines Agency, 2020), access to the centralised marketing authorisation procedure, which is mandatory for designated orphan medicines and gives a single opinion and a single Commission decision valid in all EU Member States (Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, Art. 3(1) and Annex; European Medicines Agency, 2020), and eligibility for EU-funded research such as Horizon Europe, the EU framework programme for research and innovation (European Medicines Agency, 2020; Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, Art. 9(1)). Member States can add their own incentives: designated orphan medicines are eligible for incentives made available by the Member States, which had to report these measures to the Commission (Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, Art. 9), and the EMA directs sponsors to their national medicines authority for the incentives available in each country (European Medicines Agency, 2020). The reform of the EU pharmaceutical legislation, discussed below, changes the exclusivity periods, which is why it matters for every development plan.
Designation activity remains high. The European Commission granted between 137 and 182 orphan designations a year from 2021 to 2025, 163 of them in 2025, and in those years between 12% and 22% of orphan designation submissions concerned a substance similar to an advanced therapy medicinal product (European Medicines Agency, 2026c). Applications for gene therapies have reached the COMP in increasing numbers, and most of the conditions they target are monogenic, most commonly lysosomal disorders (Palomo et al., 2023).
Advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) are gene therapy medicinal products, somatic cell therapy medicinal products and tissue-engineered products (Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007, Art. 2(1)). The regulation set up the EMA's Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT) (Art. 20), which carries out the scientific evaluation of marketing authorisation applications for these products and prepares a draft opinion for the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (Schuessler-Lenz et al., 2023). Between 2013 and 2024 the European Commission approved 25 ATMPs (Almeida et al., 2025), among them gene therapies for rare conditions such as spinal muscular atrophy (Kirschner et al., 2024) and inherited retinal diseases (Josan et al., 2025).
The challenge with ATMPs is not just scientific but economic. Many are one-time treatments with high upfront costs, and payers have criticised their 'high sticker price' against the limited evidence on durability available at launch; recent launches have therefore often used outcome-based agreements, instalments and other contracting models (Sabatini et al., 2022). Some gene therapies have been withdrawn from markets after pricing disputes (Mohan et al., 2025). Complex manufacturing, distribution and administration add further layers of difficulty, and availability across Member States also depends on each company's decision and capacity to launch (Čechová et al., 2025). Development continues nonetheless: gene editing approaches based on CRISPR technology are in clinical trials for rare diseases such as β-thalassaemia and sickle cell disease (Badwal & Singh, 2024).
While biologics and ATMPs get the most attention, the orphan medicines authorised in the EU span chemical medicines, proteins, monoclonal antibodies and oligonucleotides as well as cell and gene therapies (European Medicines Agency, 2026c). Enzyme replacement therapies, substrate reduction therapies and targeted small molecules for metabolic disorders remain part of the pipeline.
The pipeline split roughly reflects the nature of the diseases being targeted. Genetic conditions with well-characterised molecular pathways often lend themselves to biologic or gene-based approaches, and most gene therapy designation applications target monogenic conditions (Palomo et al., 2023). Rare cancers and certain inflammatory conditions, on the other hand, are often approached with small molecule inhibitors. Combination strategies and companion diagnostics, which identify the patients a medicine is intended for, are also part of the picture in 2026.
Getting an orphan medicine approved is only half the battle. Securing reimbursement and actual patient access across 27 EU Member States is where many companies stumble: across the EU27, the orphan medicines centrally authorised between 2021 and 2024 had an average rate of availability of 43% at the start of 2026, and took 614 days on average from authorisation to reach patients (Newton et al., 2026).
Health technology assessment (HTA) bodies evaluate whether a new medicine offers sufficient clinical and economic value to justify its price. For rare diseases, this process is inherently difficult. Anticancer and orphan medicines are often authorised on the basis of surrogate endpoints and limited clinical trial data, and limited clinical evidence can hinder HTA and, combined with high costs, delay reimbursement negotiations (Rosenberg et al., 2025). Long-term outcome data are scarce at the time of launch, which is why regulators impose post-authorisation measures: for the ATMPs approved between 2013 and 2024, 49 of 118 such measures involved real-world data, most often from registries (Almeida et al., 2025).
The EU's joint clinical assessment regulation, which began phased implementation in 2025 (Regulation (EU) 2021/2282), aims to harmonise the clinical component of HTA across Member States: the developer submits the evidence for the joint clinical assessment only once at Union level (Art. 1(1)). Oncology medicines with new active substances and ATMPs have been in scope since 12 January 2025 (European Commission, n.d.-a), and designated orphan medicines follow from 13 January 2028 (Regulation (EU) 2021/2282, Art. 7(2)). For rare disease developers, this could reduce duplication of effort, but pricing and reimbursement decisions still remain national: the regulation does not interfere with the exclusive national competence for them (Art. 1(2)). Companies need to build their evidence generation strategy early, and real-world evidence for joint clinical assessment needs careful attention to methods and early planning (Sarri et al., 2026).
Pricing an orphan medicine in Europe is a balancing act. External reference pricing is widely used: in a review of 31 European countries, every country except the United Kingdom and Sweden applied it, 23 of them as the main pricing criterion, and its spill-over effect, by which a low price in one country travels to others, led companies to plan the sequence of their launches (Rémuzat et al., 2015). Ability to pay differs as well: once costs were adjusted for GDP per capita, lower-income European countries faced three to six times higher relative costs for similar orphan medicines (Young et al., 2017). Health technology assessment and managed entry agreements play a central role in pricing and reimbursement decisions for expensive medicines in Europe (Han et al., 2026).
The result is a patchwork. In Germany, the benefit assessment under § 35a of the Social Code Book V (the AMNOG procedure) rests on a dossier due no later than the medicine's first placing on the market, and for a medicine authorised under Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 the added benefit is deemed proven by the authorisation until its annual turnover with the statutory health insurance exceeds €30 million (SGB V, 1988, § 35a). Across the EU27, the time to availability differs by more than two years between faster and slower countries (Newton et al., 2026). Managed entry agreements are widely used across Europe, mostly as financial agreements, because performance-based ones carry complexity and administrative burden (Dabbous et al., 2020); for high-cost one-time therapies, recent launches have used outcome-based agreements and instalments (Sabatini et al., 2022), and managed entry agreements can themselves add delay and administrative burden to pricing discussions (Han et al., 2026). For companies planning drug commercialisation in the EU, a country-by-country access strategy is not a luxury: it is a necessity.
Related: market access, pricing and reimbursement
The fragmentation of Europe's healthcare systems means that a single commercialisation plan will not work. Success requires adapting to local regulatory, cultural and economic realities while maintaining a coherent brand and medical strategy.
Before formal marketing authorisation, many EU countries allow patients without a satisfactory authorised alternative to access a medicine that is not yet authorised, through early access or compassionate use programmes. France's autorisation d'accès précoce, granted by the HAS (Haute Autorité de Santé, n.d.), Germany's import route for individual patients (AMG, 1976, § 73(3)) and similar schemes across Europe exist for patients first. They are not a promotional channel: a medicine without a marketing authorisation may not be advertised (Directive 2001/83/EC, Art. 87(1)).
How early access fits a launch is therefore a question of planning. Early access often spans the authorisation itself: in seven European countries, most compassionate use programmes for anticancer and orphan medicines authorised in 2021 and 2022 started before EU authorisation, and on average they continued for 246 days after it, pending health technology assessment and reimbursement (Rosenberg et al., 2025). Some programmes collect data by design: the French early access programmes provide for data collection and are financed through social insurance (Tarantola et al., 2023), and data from expanded access programmes have informed regulatory assessments of efficacy (Polak et al., 2020). A launch plan therefore covers continuity of supply for treated patients when authorisation arrives, data collection that can later inform the HTA dossier, and the price and reimbursement position of supply given before a negotiated price exists.
Related: early access programmes
Rare disease patient organisations have a formal place in European decision-making. Three members of the EMA's Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products are nominated by the Commission to represent patients' organisations (Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, Art. 4(3)), and in EU joint clinical assessments, patients, clinical experts and other relevant experts can give input on the draft reports (Regulation (EU) 2021/2282, Art. 11(4)). Groups such as EURORDIS-Rare Diseases Europe and national patient associations also produce evidence, for example through the Rare Barometer surveys (EURORDIS-Rare Diseases Europe, 2026) behind Europe's 4.7-year average time to diagnosis (Faye et al., 2024).
Effective engagement means more than sponsoring a conference booth. It means co-designing clinical trials with patient input, supporting registry development, funding independent research and genuinely listening to what patients and caregivers need. Registries matter in their own right: they provide data on epidemiology, standards of care and treatment patterns across the development and authorisation of medicines for rare diseases (Jonker et al., 2022).
The proposed revision of the EU pharmaceutical legislation, first introduced by the Commission on 26 April 2023 as a new directive and a new regulation (European Commission, 2023b; European Commission, 2023c), revises and replaces both the general pharmaceutical legislation and the orphan and paediatric regulations (European Commission, n.d.-c), and it could significantly reshape the rare disease market across Europe. The Council and the European Parliament reached a political agreement in December 2025 (European Commission, 2025a), and the Council adopted its position at first reading on 28 September 2026; the new regulation, which repeals Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, now awaits the European Parliament's position at second reading (Council of the European Union, 2026).
The most debated provision involves orphan market exclusivity. The Commission's 2023 proposal set a standard period of nine years, with an extra year for medicines addressing a high unmet medical need, an extra year for launch in all Member States and up to two extra years for new indications, for a maximum of 13 years (European Commission, 2023a). The text adopted by the Council keeps nine years as the standard period, sets eleven years for breakthrough orphan medicines, which must meet additional criteria including the absence of any medicine authorised in the Union for the condition, and allows the period to be extended by 12 months, at most twice, when the holder obtains authorisation for a new indication in a different orphan condition (Council of the European Union, 2026, Arts. 72 to 74).
Exclusivity is debated because, for conditions with very small patient populations, the return on investment is uncertain: Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 itself provides for designation where, without incentives, marketing would be unlikely to generate a sufficient return to justify the investment (Art. 3(1)(a)). The Council text does not keep that route: it bases designation on the 5 in 10,000 threshold and the significant benefit test, and allows the Commission to set specific criteria for certain conditions on a recommendation from the EMA (Council of the European Union, 2026, Art. 65).
The reform also creates a transferable data exclusivity voucher for priority antimicrobials, which extends by 12 months the regulatory data protection of one authorised medicine (Council of the European Union, 2026, Art. 41), and the agreement shortens the EMA's standard evaluation from 210 to 180 days (European Commission, 2025b).
Under Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 141/2000, the medicine must be intended for a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition affecting no more than 5 in 10,000 people in the EU, with no satisfactory existing method, or with significant benefit over it (Regulation (EC) No 141/2000).
Ten years from authorisation, under Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 (Regulation (EC) No 141/2000).
A joint assessment of a new medicine's relative clinical effects under Regulation (EU) 2021/2282. It applies from 12 January 2025 to medicines with new active substances for cancer and to advanced therapy medicinal products, from 13 January 2028 to designated orphan medicines, and from 13 January 2030 to the rest (Regulation (EU) 2021/2282).
Pricing and reimbursement stay national, so a centrally authorised orphan medicine still needs a decision in each country. Across the EU27, orphan medicines authorised between 2021 and 2024 took 614 days on average from authorisation to reach patients, with average availability at 43% at the start of 2026. Companies bridge that period through early access or named patient supply where national rules allow, while the reimbursement file progresses. Ideogen runs both sides of that for partners across Europe, MENA, CIS and 94 markets worldwide. Talk to our experts about bridging access to unmet need in orphan and rare disease, where earlier access changes patient outcomes, at [email protected].
With the Council's position adopted and the European Parliament's second reading to come, companies active in rare disease drug development in the EU should be scenario-planning now, whatever the final text looks like. The rules of the game are shifting, and the organisations that adapt their development and commercialisation strategies to the new framework will be best positioned to bring medicines to the patients who need them.
Almeida, D., Mandslay, D., Mol, P. G. M., Sepodes, B., & Torre, C. (2025). Real-world data included in post-authorisation measures: A case study of approved advanced therapy medicinal products in the European Union between 2013 and 2024. BioDrugs, 39(6), 927-941. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40259-025-00737-x
Badwal, A. K., & Singh, S. (2024). A comprehensive review on the current status of CRISPR based clinical trials for rare diseases. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 277(Pt 2), Article 134097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.134097
Council of the European Union. (2026). Position of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down Union procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human use and establishing rules governing the European Medicines Agency, amending Regulations (EC) No 1394/2007 and (EU) No 536/2014 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 141/2000, (EC) No 726/2004 and (EC) No 1901/2006 (ST 7105/2/26 REV 2). https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-7105-2026-REV-2/en/pdf
Dabbous, M., Chachoua, L., Caban, A., & Toumi, M. (2020). Managed entry agreements: Policy analysis from the European perspective. Value in Health, 23(4), 425-433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2019.12.008
Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use. (2001). Official Journal of the European Communities, L 311, 67-128. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2001/83/oj
European Commission. (2023a, April 26). Frequently asked questions: Revision of the pharmaceutical legislation [QANDA/23/1844]. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_23_1844
European Commission. (2023b). Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Union code relating to medicinal products for human use, and repealing Directive 2001/83/EC and Directive 2009/35/EC (COM(2023) 192 final). EUR-Lex. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52023PC0192
European Commission. (2023c). Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down Union procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human use and establishing rules governing the European Medicines Agency, amending Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007 and Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 and Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 (COM(2023) 193 final). EUR-Lex. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52023PC0193
European Commission. (2025a, December 11). Commission welcomes political agreement on major reform of EU pharmaceutical rules [Press release IP/25/3015]. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_3015
European Commission. (2025b). Key elements of the EU pharmaceutical reform [Factsheet]. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2875/0439635
European Commission. (n.d.-a). Joint Clinical Assessments. Retrieved September 25, 2026, from https://health.ec.europa.eu/health-technology-assessment/implementation-regulation-health-technology-assessment/joint-clinical-assessments_en
European Commission. (n.d.-b). Rare diseases and European Reference Networks. Retrieved October 4, 2026, from https://health.ec.europa.eu/rare-diseases-and-european-reference-networks_en
European Commission. (n.d.-c). Reform of EU pharmaceutical legislation. Retrieved October 4, 2026, from https://health.ec.europa.eu/medicinal-products/reform-eu-pharmaceutical-legislation_en
European Medicines Agency. (2020, January 16). Orphan incentives. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory-overview/research-development/orphan-designation-research-development/orphan-incentives
European Medicines Agency. (2026a, June 11). Fee Regulation working arrangements on fees and charges payable to the European Medicines Agency applicable from 1 January 2025 (EMA/MB/183645/2024, revision 3). https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/other/fee-regulation-working-arrangements_en.pdf
European Medicines Agency. (2026b, March 6). Orphan designation: Overview. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory-overview/orphan-designation-overview
European Medicines Agency. (2026c). Orphan medicines figures 2000-2025 [Presentation]. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/other/orphan-medicines-figures-2000-2025_en.pdf
EURORDIS-Rare Diseases Europe. (2026, August 7). Rare Barometer. https://www.eurordis.org/rare-barometer/
Faye, F., Crocione, C., Anido de Peña, R., Bellagambi, S., Escati Peñaloza, L., Hunter, A., Jensen, L., Oosterwijk, C., Schoeters, E., de Vicente, D., Faivre, L., Wilbur, M., Le Cam, Y., & Dubief, J. (2024). Time to diagnosis and determinants of diagnostic delays of people living with a rare disease: Results of a Rare Barometer retrospective patient survey. European Journal of Human Genetics, 32(9), 1116-1126. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-024-01604-z
Gesetz über den Verkehr mit Arzneimitteln (Arzneimittelgesetz, AMG) § 73 Verbringungsverbot [Medicinal Products Act, Section 73: prohibition on bringing medicinal products into Germany]. (1976). Gesetze im Internet. Retrieved October 4, 2026, from https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/amg_1976/__73.html
Han, Y., Andreoletti, M., Minssen, T., Vayena, E., & Ormond, K. E. (2026). The impacts of pricing and reimbursement policies on access to cell and gene therapies across Europe. Journal of Community Genetics, 17(1), Article 23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-026-00860-4
Haute Autorité de Santé. (n.d.). Accès précoce à un médicament [Early access to a medicine]. Retrieved September 25, 2026, from https://www.has-sante.fr/jcms/r_1500918/fr/acces-precoce-a-un-medicament
Hofer, M. P., Hedman, H., Mavris, M., Koenig, F., Vetter, T., Posch, M., Vamvakas, S., Regnstrom, J., & Aarum, S. (2018). Marketing authorisation of orphan medicines in Europe from 2000 to 2013. Drug Discovery Today, 23(2), 424-433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drudis.2017.10.012
Jonker, C. J., Bakker, E., Kurz, X., & Plueschke, K. (2022). Contribution of patient registries to regulatory decision making on rare diseases medicinal products in Europe. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 13, Article 924648. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2022.924648
Josan, A. S., Raji, S., & MacLaren, R. E. (2025). Approval of retinal gene therapies in the US and Europe based on visual acuity and microperimetry. Expert Review of Ophthalmology, 20(3), 127-132. https://doi.org/10.1080/17469899.2025.2487544
Kirschner, J., Bernert, G., Butoianu, N., De Waele, L., Fattal-Valevski, A., Haberlova, J., Moreno, T., Klein, A., Kostera-Pruszczyk, A., Mercuri, E., Quijano-Roy, S., Sejersen, T., Tizzano, E. F., van der Pol, W. L., Wallace, S., Zafeiriou, D., Ziegler, A., Muntoni, F., & Servais, L. (2024). 2024 update: European consensus statement on gene therapy for spinal muscular atrophy. European Journal of Paediatric Neurology, 51, 73-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpn.2024.06.001
Mohan, R., Reckelbus, M., & Borry, P. (2025). Regional disparities in access to gene therapies in the European Union, the United States, Japan, and China. Personalized Medicine, 22(4), 267-273. https://doi.org/10.1080/17410541.2025.2515002
Newton, M., Stoddart, K., Travaglio, M., & Heron, E. (2026). EFPIA Patients W.A.I.T. Indicator 2025 survey. IQVIA; European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations. https://www.efpia.eu/media/mnfdwzax/efpia-patients-wait-indicator-2025.pdf
Nguengang Wakap, S., Lambert, D. M., Olry, A., Rodwell, C., Gueydan, C., Lanneau, V., Murphy, D., Le Cam, Y., & Rath, A. (2020). Estimating cumulative point prevalence of rare diseases: Analysis of the Orphanet database. European Journal of Human Genetics, 28(2), 165-173. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-019-0508-0
Orphanet. (n.d.). Orphanet: Knowledge on rare diseases and orphan drugs. Retrieved September 25, 2026, from https://www.orpha.net/
Palomo, G. M., Pose-Boirazian, T., Naumann-Winter, F., Costa, E., Duarte, D. M., Kalland, M. E., Malikova, E., Matusevicius, D., Vitezic, D., Larsson, K., Magrelli, A., Stoyanova-Beninska, V., & Mariz, S. (2023). The European landscape for gene therapies in orphan diseases: 6-year experience with the EMA Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products. Molecular Therapy, 31(12), 3414-3423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymthe.2023.09.020
Polak, T. B., van Rosmalen, J., & Uyl-de Groot, C. A. (2020). Expanded Access as a source of real-world data: An overview of FDA and EMA approvals. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 86(9), 1819-1826. https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.14284
Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2007 on advanced therapy medicinal products and amending Directive 2001/83/EC and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004. (2007). Official Journal of the European Union, L 324, 121-137. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2007/1394/oj
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 European Communities, L 18, 1-5. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2000/141/oj
Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency. (2004). Official Journal of the European Union, L 136, 1-33. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2004/726/oj
Regulation (EU) 2021/2282 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2021 on health technology assessment and amending Directive 2011/24/EU. (2021). Official Journal of the European Union, L 458, 1-32. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2282/oj
Regulation (EU) 2024/568 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 February 2024 on fees and charges payable to the European Medicines Agency, amending Regulations (EU) 2017/745 and (EU) 2022/123 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Regulation (EU) No 658/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (EC) No 297/95. (2024). Official Journal of the European Union, L series, 2024/568. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/568/oj
Rosenberg, N., Post, H. C., Schutte, T., de Visser, S. J., Bartelink, I., Pasmooij, A. M. G., van Laarhoven, H. W. M., & Hollak, C. E. M. (2025). Access to anticancer and orphan medicines through compassionate use programs and named patient basis in seven European countries. ESMO Open, 10(11), Article 105855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esmoop.2025.105855
Rémuzat, C., Urbinati, D., Mzoughi, O., El Hammi, E., Belgaied, W., & Toumi, M. (2015). Overview of external reference pricing systems in Europe. Journal of Market Access & Health Policy, 3(1), Article 27675. https://doi.org/10.3402/jmahp.v3.27675
Sabatini, M. T., Xia, T., & Chalmers, M. (2022). Pricing and market access challenges in the era of one-time administration cell and gene therapies. Pharmaceutical Medicine, 36(5), 265-274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40290-022-00443-x
Sarri, G., Liljas, B., Abrams, K. R., Duffield, S. J., & Bharmal, M. (2026). Mapping the use of real-world evidence across the EU Health Technology Assessment Regulation: Methodological considerations, challenges, and opportunities for harmonization. Journal of Market Access & Health Policy, 14(2), Article 20. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp14020020
Schuessler-Lenz, M., Herberts, C., Reischl, I., Ruiz, S., Celis, P., Beuneu, C., Kjeken, R., & Timón, M. (2023). Marketing regulatory oversight of advanced therapy medicinal products in Europe. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, 1430, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34567-8_1
Sozialgesetzbuch (SGB) Fünftes Buch (V): Gesetzliche Krankenversicherung, § 35a Bewertung des Nutzens von Arzneimitteln mit neuen Wirkstoffen [Social Code Book V, Section 35a: assessment of the benefit of medicinal products with new active substances]. (1988). Gesetze im Internet. Retrieved October 5, 2026, from https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/sgb_5/__35a.html
Tarantola, A., Otto, M. H., Armeni, P., Costa, F., Malandrini, F., & Jommi, C. (2023). Early access programs for medicines: Comparative analysis among France, Italy, Spain, and UK and focus on the Italian case. Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, 16(1), Article 67. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40545-023-00570-z
Young, K. E., Soussi, I., & Toumi, M. (2017). The perverse impact of external reference pricing (ERP): A comparison of orphan drugs affordability in 12 European countries. A call for policy change. Journal of Market Access & Health Policy, 5(1), Article 1369817. https://doi.org/10.1080/20016689.2017.1369817
Čechová, Z., Kubátová, J., Bártová, A., Jamárik, J., & Samek, J. (2025). Beyond reimbursement status: Availability of advanced therapy medicinal products across the European Union. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science, 59(4), 728-736. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-025-00769-z
