Abstract:For rare disease drug development, the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has indicated that the same standards as those for drug products for common conditions will be applied. To assist the sponsors in rare disease drug development, the FDA has initiated several incentive programs to encourage the sponsors in rare disease drug development. In practice, these incentive programs may not help in achieving the study objectives due to the limited small patient population. To overcome this problem, some out-of-the-box innovative thinking and/or approaches, without jeopardizing the integrity, quality, and scientific validity of rare disease drug development, are necessarily considered. These innovative thinking and/or approaches include but are not limited to (i) sample size justification based on probability statements rather than conventional power analysis; (ii) demonstrating not-ineffectiveness and not-unsafeness rather than demonstrating effectiveness and safety with the small patient population (i.e., limited sample size) available; (iii) the use of complex innovative designs such as a two-stage seamless adaptive trial design and/or an n-of-1 trial design for flexibility and the efficient assessment of the test treatment under study; (iv) using real-world data (RWD) and real-world evidence (RWE) to support regulatory submission; and (v) conducting an individual benefit–risk assessment for a complete picture of the clinical performance of the test treatment under investigation. In this article, we provide a comprehensive summarization of this innovative thinking and these approaches for an efficient, accurate and reliable assessment of a test treatment used for treating patients with rare diseases under study. Statistical considerations including challenges and justifications are provided whenever possible. In addition, an innovative approach that combines innovative thinking and these approaches is proposed for regulatory consideration in rare disease drug development.

Challenges and Possible Strategies to Address Them in Rare Disease Drug Development: A Statistical Perspective

Use of Real-World Data and Real-World Evidence in Rare Disease Drug Development: A Statistical Perspective

Use of real‐world evidence in regulatory decisions for rare diseases in the United States—Current status and future directions

Natural History and Real‐World Data in Rare Diseases: Applications, Limitations, and Future Perspectives

Novel Design and Analysis for Rare Disease Drug Development

Model‐Informed Approach Supporting Drug Development and Regulatory Evaluation for Rare Diseases

Challenges of developing and conducting clinical trials in rare disorders

Real-world evidence for coverage determination of treatments for rare diseases

Ensuring Stakeholder Feedback in the Design and Conduct of Clinical Trials for Rare Diseases: ISCTM Position Paper of the Orphan Disease Working Group

From Challenge to Opportunity: How Shwachman-Diamond Syndrome Became a Promising Target for Therapy Development

Use of Real‐World Evidence to Drive Drug Development Strategy and Inform Clinical Trial Design

Leveraging real-world data to conduct externally controlled trial for rare diseases with count-type endpoints: utilizing multiple entries – a simulation study

On the use of RWD in support of regulatory submission in drug development

Clinical Pharmacology Applications of Real‐World Data and Real‐World Evidence in Drug Development and Approval–An Industry Perspective

A Descriptive Review of Global Real World Evidence Efforts to Advance Drug Discovery and Clinical Development in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis

Designing clinical trials for rare diseases: unique challenges and opportunities

The Current Landscape in Biostatistics of Real-World Data and Evidence: Clinical Study Design and Analysis

Lessons learned from the RE(ACT) conference on medical devices for rare diseases

Quantitative Systems Pharmacology Models: Potential Tools for Advancing Drug Development for Rare Diseases

Examining the Use of Real‐World Evidence in the Regulatory Process