Search

Introduction: Regulatory decisions on paediatric investigation plans (PIPs) aim at making effective and safe medicines timely available for children with high unmet medical need. At the same time, scientific knowledge progresses continuously leading frequently to the identification of new molecular targets in the therapeutic area of oncology. This, together with further efforts to optimise next generation medicines, results in novel innovative products in development pipelines. In the context of global regulatory development requirements for these growing pipelines of innovative products (e.g. US RACE for children Act), it is an increasing challenge to complete development efforts in paediatric oncology, a therapeutic area of rare and life-threatening diseases with high unmet needs.Objective: Regulators recognise feasibility challenges of the regulatory obligations in this context. Here, we explain the EU regulatory decision making strategy applied to paediatric oncology, which aims fostering evidence generation to support developments based on needs and robust science. Because there is a plethora of products under development within given classes of or within cancer types, priorities need to be identified and updated as evidence evolves. This also includes identifying the need for third or fourth generation products to secure focused and accelerated drug development.Conclusion: An agreed PIP, as a plan, is a living document which can be modified in light of new evidence. For this to be successful, input from the various relevant stakeholders, i.e. pa-tients/parents, clinicians and investigators is required. To efficiently obtain this input, the EMA is co-organising with ACCELERATE oncology stakeholder engagement platform meet-ings.(c) 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The acceptability of pediatric pharmaceutical products to patients and their caregivers can have a profound impact on the resulting therapeutic outcome. However, existing methodology and approaches used for acceptability assessments for pediatric products is fragmented, making robust and consistent product evaluations difficult. A pediatric formulation development workshop took place in Washington, DC in June 2016 through the University of Maryland's Center of Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation (M-CERSI). A session at the workshop was dedicated to acceptability assessments and focused on two major elements that affect the overall acceptability of oral medicines, namely swallowability and palatability. The session started with presentations to provide an overview of literature, background and current state on swallowability and palatability assessments. Five parallel breakout discussions followed the presentations on each element, focusing on three overarching themes, risk-based approaches, methodology and product factors. This article reports the key outcomes of the workshop related to swallowability and palatability assessments.