Search

Older people are often affected by impaired organ and bodily functions resulting in multimorbidity and polypharmacy, turning them into the main user group of many medicines. Very often, medicines have not specifically been developed for older people, causing practical medication problems for them like limited availability of easy to swallow formulations, easy to open packaging and dosing instructions for enteral administration. In 2020, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) published a reflection paper 'Pharmaceutical development of medicines for use in the older population', which discusses how the emerging needs of an ageing European population can be addressed by medicines regulation. The paper intends to help industry to better consider the needs of older people during pharmaceutical/clinical medicines development by summarising data on the most relevant topics, providing early suggestions on how to move forward and prompting expert discussions and studies into knowledge gaps. Topics include patient acceptability, (dis)advantages of an administration route, formulation, dosage form, packaging, dosing device and user instruction. While the paper is directed at older people and the pharmaceutical industry, the reflections are also relevant to younger patients with similar disease‐related needs and of value to other stakeholders parties, e.g., healthcare professionals, academics, patients and caregivers, as the paper makes clear what can be expected from industry and where collaborative work is needed. This commentary provides an overview of the different steps in the development of the reflection paper, discusses points considered most controversial and/or subject to (multidisciplinary) expert discussions and indicates their value for real world clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Guidelines establish a framework for how therapeutics and vaccines are developed, assessed and approved. They influence which innovations are likely to be approved in the European Union (EU), and thus, they have an impact on the pipeline decisions taken by research‐based industry. This study analyses the level of acceptance for changes suggested by stakeholders within the authoring groups at the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Methods: We looked at 87 guidelines from EMA Working Parties (WPs) launched for consultation between 2013 and 2017. Acceptance of stakeholder proposals and the time between the end of consultation and guideline adoption were studied as well as the openness of different WPs to accept changes. Results: Adoption of a guideline after the close of public consultation took at least 4 months, with an average of 12–16 months. The number of accepted and rejected comments were nearly equal across the stakeholders, with government having slightly higher chance for acceptance. Academia and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) had generally higher chances to have their comments accepted for general and indication‐level guidelines. Government and individual companies had highest acceptance for molecule‐level guidelines and trade associations for indication‐level guidelines. Only a third of the comments related to scientific content of the guideline. Conclusion: This pattern of progress in regulatory science at EMA demonstrates the essential and interrelated role of academia, industry, government and civil society—described as the quadruple helix model—to promote establishment of a strong innovation ecosystem in Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

IMPROVING AVAILABILITY OF MEDICINES AND MEDICAL DEVICES Shortages of medicines have been a problem in the EU and globally long before the pandemic. Moreover, EMA and ETF members have contributed to scientific and regulatory initiatives by EU bodies such as the directorate-general of the European Commission, the HERA and the EU member states to purchase and use available medicines. With the emergence of COVID-19 in early 2019, the European Union (EU) was confronted with unexpected challenges on many fronts. Finally, the high number of medicines developed and assessed for COVID-19 as opposed to previous emergencies, as well as the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic, have clearly highlighted the need for the EU network to become more agile and to better use available resources in Europe. [Extracted from the article]

The development of specific drug therapy for children was a paradigm‐changing event that transformed paediatric medical practice. However, a series of tragedies involving drug treatment for children resulted in a gap developing between drug regulation and practice, with the majority of drugs used in child healthcare being used off‐label, rendering children therapeutic orphans. Over the past two decades changes in drug regulation led by the US Food and Drug Administration and followed by the European Union's European Medicines Agency have led to substantial changes in how new drugs with potential use in children are studied and labelled. While these changes have substantially improved labelling for new drugs, there has been much less progress with older drugs. Although the unique challenges of conducting clinical research in children have been addressed by novel clinical trial designs, many of these innovations have not been translated into approaches accepted for the drug approval process. The regulations applying to the need for paediatric studies currently are only applicable in the United States and the European Union, and there is less impetus for paediatric labelling in other jurisdictions. This impacts on a number of issues beyond labelling, including the availability of child‐friendly formulations. Finally, the impact of Brexit on paediatric drug studies in the UK remains unclear and is subject to ongoing negotiations between the UK government and the European Union. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The disposition of a drug is driven by various processes, such as drug metabolism, drug transport, glomerular filtration and body composition. These processes are subject to developmental changes reflecting growth and maturation along the paediatric continuum. However, knowledge gaps exist on these changes and their clinical impact. Filling these gaps may aid better prediction of drug disposition and creation of age‐appropriate dosing guidelines. We present innovative approaches to study these developmental changes in relation to drug metabolism and transport. First, analytical methods such as including liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry for proteomic analyses allow quantitation of the expressions of a wide variety of proteins, e.g. membrane transporters, in a small piece of organ tissue. The latter is specifically important for paediatric research, where tissues are scarcely available. Second, innovative study designs using radioactive labelled microtracers allowed study—without risk for the child—of the oral bioavailability of compounds used as markers for certain drug metabolism pathways. Third, the use of modelling and simulation to support dosing recommendations for children is supported by both the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration. This may even do away with the need for a paediatric trial. Physiologically based pharmacokinetics models, which include age‐specific physiological information are, therefore, increasingly being used, not only to aid paediatric drug development but also to improve existing drug therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]