• Korean Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.1-13
• /
• 2013

희귀질환이란 일반적으로 그 유병율이 인구 일만 명당 5명 이하인 질환을 말한다. 세계에는 약 7,000여종의 희귀질환이 알려져 있고 학술지에 매 주 대략 5종의 새로운 희귀질환이 보고되고 있다. 희귀 의약품(orphan drug)이란 희귀질환치료제 또는 수익성이 없어 개발을 기피하는 일반질환 치료제로서 정부가 지정한 의약품을 말한다. Orphan 의약품의 개발에는 많은 장점이 있다. Orphan 의약품으로 정부의 지정을 받으면 세금감면을 통한 연구비 지원, 임상시험 비용 지원, 신약허가 심사비 면제, 시장독점권 부여 등의 특혜가 주어진다. 희귀질환의 대부분은 단순한 유전적 결함에 의하는 경우가 많아 치료제의 표적발견이 비교적 쉬우므로 개발 성공률이 높고, 임상시험기간이 짧으며, 시판허가를 받을 확률이 높아 연구개발비용이 적게 든다. 그 결과 전세계 orphan 의약품 시장은 최근 매년 6%씩 성장하여 2014년에는 약 1,120억달러의 시장을 형성할 것으로 추정된다. Orphan 의약품 시장은 현재 매년 8.9%씩 성장하고 글로벌 시장의 51%를 점유하는 미국을 중심으로 확장되어 가고 있으며, 총매출액의 64.3%가 유전자재조합의약품에 의한 것으로 알려져 있다. 이러한 의약품시장의 변화와 사회적 요구에 부응하여 한국 또한 희귀질환 치료제 개발의 활성화를 위해 재정적 지원체계를 구축하고, 허가관리를 개선하며, 법률적 제도를 완비하는 과정에 있다. 현재 희귀질환의 치료적 타겟을 찾아 신물질이나 기존의 약물을 발굴하는 과정이 주로 대학이나 연구 중심 병원에서 이루어지고 있다. 제도가 잘 정립되어 있는 미국 시장을 겨낭하여 orphan 의약품 개발을 전략적으로 수행한다면 큰 성공을 거둘 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.

• 한국벤처창업학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2022.04a
• /
• pp.25-30
• /
• 2022

Despite the importance of partnership for commercialization of innovations in startups, it is not easy for startups to persuade an established firm to collaborate on a completely novel idea. If information transfer about the innovations is too costly, startups may avoid pursuing radically new projects. Our paper examines the impact of policy signals on the novelty of the innovations pursued by startups. In the context of the Orphan Drug Act(ODA), we find that startups develop more radical therapies when policy signals help them to convince potential partners of the value of prospective therapies. While the likelihood of partnership increases, the timing of partnership is delayed in ODA-affected fields.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.223-259
• /
• 2020

With COVID-19 spreading rapidly around the world, research and development issues on treatments and vaccines for the virus are of high interest. Among them, Remdesivir was the first to show noticeable therapeutic effects and began clinical trials, with each country authorizing the use of the drug through emergency approval. However, Gilead Co., Ltd., the developer of Remdesivir, received a lot of criticism from civic groups for submitting the application for the marketing authorization as an orphan drug. This is because when a new drug got a marketing authorization as an orphan drug could be granted an exclusive status for seven year. The long-term exclusive status of an orphan drug comes from the policy purpose of motivating pharmaceutical companies to develop treatment opportunities for patients suffering from rare diseases, which was not appropriate to apply to infectious disease treatments. This paper provides a review of the problems and improvement directions of the domestic system through comparative legal consideration against the United States, Europe and Japan for the statutes which give exclusive status to medicines. The domestic system has a fundamental problem that it does not have explicit provisions in the statute in the manner of granting exclusive status, and that it uses the review system to give it exclusive status indirectly. In addition, in the case of orphan drugs, the "Rare Diseases Management Act" and the "Regulations on Examination of Items Permission and Reporting of Drugs" provide overlapping review periods, and despite the relatively long monopoly period, there seems to be no check clause to recover exclusive status in the event of a change in circumstances. Given that biopharmaceuticals are difficult to obtain patents, the lack of such provisions is a pity of domestic legislation, although granting exclusive rights may be a great motivation to induce drug development. In the United States, given that the first biosimilar also has a one-year monopoly period, it can be interpreted that domestic legislation is quite strictly limited to granting exclusive status to biopharmaceuticals. The need for improvement of the domestic system will be recognized in that it could undermine local pharmaceutical companies' willingness to develop biopharmaceuticals in the future, and in that it is also necessary to harmonize international regulations. Taking advantage of the emergence of COVID-19 as an opportunity, we look again at the problems of the domestic system that grants exclusive rights to medicines and hope that an overall revision of the relevant legislation will be made to establish a unified legal basis.