Background: The European Commission and Patients Organizations identify rare disease registries (RDRs) as strategic instruments to develop research and improve knowledge in the field of rare diseases. Interoperability between RDRs is needed for research activities, validation of therapeutic treatments, and public health actions. Sharing and comparing information requires a uniform and standardized way of data collection, so levels of interconnection between RDRs with similar aims and/or nature of data should be identified. The objective of this study is to define a classification and characterization of RDRs in order to identify different profiles and informative needs. Methods: Exploratory statistical analyses (cluster analysis and random forest) were applied to data derived from the EPIRARE project (‘Building Consensus and Synergies for the EU Rare Disease Patient Registration') survey on the activities and needs of RDRs. Results: The cluster analysis identified 3 main typologies of RDRs: public health, clinical and genetic research, and treatment registries. The analysis of the most informative variables, identified by the random forest method, led to the characterization of 3 types of RDRs and the definition of different profiles and informative needs. Conclusions: These results represent a useful source of information to facilitate the harmonization and interconnection of RDRs in accordance with the different profiles identified. It could help sharing the information between RDRs with similar profiles and, whenever possible, interconnections between registries with different profiles.

1.
Commission of the European Communities. 2008. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Rare Diseases: Europe's challenges. Brussels, 11.11.2008 COM(2008) 679 final. http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_threats/non_com/docs/rare_com_en.pdf.
2.
Council recommendation of 8 June 2009 on an action in the field of rare diseases. Official Journal of the European Union. 2009/C 151/02. http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2009:151:0007:0010:EN:PDF.
3.
EURORDIS-NORD-CORD: Joint Declaration of 10 Key Principles for Rare Disease Patient Registries. 2012. http://download.eurordis.org/documents/pdf/EURORDIS_NORD_CORD_JointDec_Registries_FINAL.pdf.
4.
EUCERD/EMA workshop report: towards a public-private partnership for registries in the field of rare diseases. London, 4 October, 2011. http://nestor.orpha.net/EUCERD/upload/file/EUCERDWorkshopRegistries2011.pdf.
5.
EUCERD: Core recommendations on rare disease patient registration and data collection. 2013. http://www.eucerd.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/EUCERD_Recommendations_RDRegistryDataCollection_adopted.pdf.
6.
Orphanet Report Series: Disease Registries in Europe. 2014. http://www.orpha.net/orphacom/cahiers/docs/GB/Registries.pdf.
7.
Rubinstein YR, Groft SC, Barteck R, Brown K, Christensen RA, Collier E, Farber A, Farmer J, Ferguson JH, Forrest CB Lockhart NC, McCurdy KR, Moore H, Pollen GB, Richesson R, Rangel Miller W, Hull S, Vaught J: Creating a global rare disease patient registry linked to a rare diseases biorepository database: Rare Disease-HUB (RD-HUB). Contemp Clin Trials 2010;31:394-404.
8.
Workshop on Patients' Registries for Rare Disorders: Need for Data Collection to Increase Knowledge on Rare Disorders and Optimize Disease Management and Care 18-19 March 2009 FPS Employment, Labour and Social Dialogue, Brussels, Belgium; Report written by Pete Wrobel and EPPOSI. http://www.epposi.org/images/stories/publications/rare-diseases/2009/Registries2009final.pdf.
9.
Thompson R, Johnston L, Taruscio D, Monaco L, Béroud C, Gut IG, Hansson MG, ‘t Hoen PB, Patrinos GP, Dawkins H, Ensini M, Zatloukal K, Koubi D, Heslop E, Paschall JE, Posada M, Robinson PN, Bushby K, Lochmüller H: RD-Connect: an integrated platform connecting databases, registries, biobanks and clinical bioinformatics for rare disease research. J Gen Intern Med 2014;29(suppl 3):S780-S787.
10.
Krischer JP, Gopal-Srivastava R, Groft SC, Eckstein DJ; Rare Diseases Clinical Research Network: The Rare Diseases Clinical Research Network's organization and approach to observational research and health outcomes research. J Gen Intern Med 2014;29(suppl 3):S739-S744.
11.
EPIRARE project. http://www.epirare.eu/.
12.
Taruscio D, Gainotti S, Vittozzi L, Bianchi F, Ensini M, Posada M: EPIRARE survey on activities and needs of rare disease registries in the European Union. Orphanet J Rare Dis 2012;7(suppl 2):A22.
13.
Taruscio D, Gainotti S, Mollo E, Vittozzi L, Bianchi F, Ensini M, Posada M: The current situation and needs of rare disease registries in Europe. Public Health Genomics 2013;16:288-298.
14.
Gliklich RE, Dreyer NA (eds): Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User's Guide, ed 2. (Prepared by Outcome DEcIDE Center [Outcome Sciences, Inc. d/b/a Outcome] under Contract No.HHSA29020050035I TO3.) AHRQ Publication No. 10-EHC049. Rockville, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2010.
15.
Richesson R, Vehik K: Patient registries: utility, validity and inference. Adv Exp Med Biol 2010;686:87-104.
16.
SAS Institute Inc.: SASOnlineDoc9.2. Cary, SAS Institute Inc., 2009.
17.
SAS Institute Inc.: SAS/STAT User's Guide, Version 8. Cary, SAS Institute Inc., 1999.
18.
Breiman L: Random forests. Mach Learn 2001;45:5-32.
19.
Hothorn T, Bühlmann P, Dudoit S, Molinaro A, van der Laan MJ: Survival ensembles. Biostatistics 2006;7:355-373.
20.
Liaw A, Wiener M: Classification and regression by randomForest. R News 2002;2:18-22.
21.
Strobl C, Boulesteix AL, Zeileis A, Hothorn T: Bias in random forest variable importance measures: illustrations, sources and a solution. BMC Bioinformatics 2007;8:25.
22.
Strobl C, Boulesteix AL, Kneib T, Augustin T, Zeileis A: Conditional variable importance for random forests. BMC Bioinformatics 2008;9:307.
23.
Strobl C, Malley J, Tutz G: An introduction to recursive partitioning: rational, application, and characteristics of classification and regression trees, bagging, and random forests. Psychol Methods 2009;14:323-348.
24.
R Development Core Team: R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2010.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.