BackgroundNumber of orphan medicinal products on the market and number of rare disease patients, taking these usually expensive products, are increasing. As a result, budget impact of orphan drugs is growing. This factor, along with the cost-effectiveness of orphan drugs, is often considered in the reimbursement decisions, directly affecting accessibility of rare disease therapies. The current study aims to assess the budget impact of orphan drugs in Latvia.MethodsOur study covered a 5-year period, from 2010 to 2014. Impact of orphan drugs on Latvian budget was estimated from the National Health Service’s perspective. It was calculated in absolute values and relative to total pharmaceutical market and total drug reimbursement budget. A literature review was performed for comparison with other European countries.ResultsOrphan drug annual expenditure ranged between EUR 2.065 and 3.065 million, with total 5-year expenditure EUR 12.467 million. It constituted, on average, 0.84 % of total pharmaceutical market and 2.14 % of total drug reimbursement budget, respectively. Average annual per patient expenditures varied widely, from EUR 1 534 to EUR 580 952. The most costly treatment was enzyme replacement therapy (Elaprase) for MPS II. Glivec had the highest share (34 %) of the total orphan drug expenditure. Oncological drugs represented more than a half of the total orphan drug expenditure, followed by drugs for metabolic and endocrine conditions and medicines for cardiopulmonary diseases. Three indications: Ph+ CML, MPS II, and PAH accounted for nearly 90 % of the total orphan drug expenditure.ConclusionsBudget impact of orphan drugs in Latvia is very small. It increased slightly over a period of five years, due to the slight increase in the number of patients and the number of orphan drugs reimbursed. Current Latvian drug reimbursement system is not sufficient for most orphan drugs.

BackgroundTen years have passed since Latvia became a Member State of the EU in 2004. As a result European regulations, including those related to rare diseases and orphan drugs, have been applied to Latvian legislative system. Orphan diseases have been recognized as a priority area for action in the public health system, though there are significant differences in the national healthcare services for rare diseases among the EU States. This study aims to determine situation in the field of rare diseases in Latvia and compare it with other European countries.MethodsWe used the national plan for rare diseases, EUCERD reports, Orphanet data, Latvian and European regulations, publicly available data from the state agencies, and directly contacted drug manufacturers and wholesalers.ResultsNational plan for rare diseases was developed and approved in 2013. Although there are no official designated centers of expertise as well as no specific register for rare diseases. Newborns are screened for only two disorders: phenylketonuria and congenital hypothyroidism. Currently 34 orphan drugs are available on Latvian market. Three medicines (8.8%) are included in the reimbursement drug list, all indicated for Ph + CML. 15 drugs (44.1%) were reimbursed within the framework of individual reimbursement system, and five drugs (14.7%) were provided within the program of medicinal treatment of rare diseases in children.ConclusionsMajority of orphan drugs authorized in the EU are not available in Latvia, moreover those drugs that are available are often not accessible because they are insufficiently reimbursed. Besides, approval of the national plan might be an important step towards improving situation in the field of rare diseases.

Levofloxacin pharmacokinetic profiles were evaluated in 6 healthy female rabbits after intravenous (I/V), intramuscular (I/M), or subcutaneous (S/C) administration routes at a single dose of 5 mg/kg in a 3 × 3 cross-over study. Plasma levofloxacin concentrations were detected using a validated Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography method with a fluorescence detector. Levofloxacin was quantifiable up to 10 h post-drug administration. Mean AUC 0-last values of 9.03 ± 2.66, 9.07 ± 1.80, and 9.28 ± 1.56 mg/h*L were obtained via I/V, I/M, and S/C, respectively. Plasma clearance was 0.6 mL/g*h after I/V administration. Peak plasma concentrations using the I/M and S/C routes were 3.33 ± 0.39 and 2.91 ± 0.56 µg/mL. Bioavailability values, after extravascular administration were complete, -105% ± 27% (I/M) and 118% ± 40% (S/C). Average extraction ratio of levofloxacin after I/V administration was 7%. Additionally, levofloxacin administration effects on tear production and osmolarity were evaluated. Tear osmolarity decreased within 48 h post-drug administration. All 3 levofloxacin administration routes produced similar pharmacokinetic profiles. The studied dose is unlikely to be effective in rabbits; however, it was calculated that a daily dose of 29 mg/kg appears effective for I/V administration for pathogens with MIC < 0.5 µg/mL.

Background and Goal. The aim was to examine the serum levels of homocysteine (Hcy) and their associations with the methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) gene C677T polymorphism in patients with schizophrenia and mood disorders as well as controls. Materials and Methods. There were 198 patients: 82 with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, 22 with mood disorders, and 94 controls. The level of Hcy was determined by an isocratic high-performance liquid chromatography system. MTHFR C677T polymorphism was analysed using the restriction fragment length polymorphism-polymerase chain reaction method. Results. The average level of Hcy was 11.94 ± 5.6 μmol/L for patients with schizophrenia, 11.65 ± 3.3 μmol/L for patients with affective disorders, versus 6.80 ± 2.93 μmol/L in a control. The highest level of Hcy has been observed in patients with episodic-recurrent course of schizophrenia (11.30 ± 7.74 μmol/L), paranoid schizophrenia continuous (12.76 ± 5.25 μmol/L), and in patients with affective disorders (11.65 ± 3.26 μmol/L). An association between the MTHFR gene C677T polymorphism and Hcy level was found by linear regression analysis (r = 1.41, P = 0.029). Conclusions. The data indicate a link between Hcy levels and schizophrenia and mood disorders. No associations between the level of Hcy in patients with schizophrenia and mood disorders and the MTHFR C677T polymorphism were found.

BackgroundConducting clinical studies in small populations may be very challenging; therefore quality of clinical evidence may differ between rare and non-rare disease therapies.ObjectiveThis register-based study aims to evaluate the characteristics of clinical trials in rare diseases conducted in Latvia and compare them with clinical trials in more common conditions.MethodsThe EU Clinical Trials Register (clinicaltrialsregister.eu) was used to identify interventional clinical trials related to rare diseases (n = 51) and to compose a control group of clinical trials in non-rare diseases (n = 102) for further comparison of the trial characteristics.ResultsWe found no significant difference in the use of overall survival as a primary endpoint in clinical trials between rare and non-rare diseases (9.8% vs. 13.7%, respectively). However, clinical trials in rare diseases were less likely to be randomized controlled trials (62.7% vs. 83.3%). Rare and non-rare disease clinical trials varied in masking, with rare disease trials less likely to be double blind (45.1% vs. 63.7%). Active comparators were less frequently used in rare disease trials (36.4% vs. 58.8% of controlled trials). Clinical trials in rare diseases enrolled fewer participants than those in non-rare diseases: in Latvia (mean 18.3 vs. 40.2 subjects, respectively), in the European Economic Area (mean 181.0 vs. 626.9 subjects), and in the whole clinical trial (mean 335.8 vs. 1406.3 subjects). Although, we found no significant difference in trial duration between the groups (mean 38.3 vs. 36.4 months).ConclusionsThe current study confirms that clinical trials in rare diseases vary from those in non-rare conditions, with notable differences in enrollment, randomization, masking, and the use of active comparators. However, we found no significant difference in trial duration and the use of overall survival as a primary endpoint.