Search

We characterized the size of the premarket safety population for 278 small-molecule new molecular entities (NMEs) and 61 new therapeutic biologics (NTBs) approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between October 1, 2002, and December 31, 2014, evaluating the relationship of premarket safety population size to regulatory characteristics and postmarket safety outcomes. The median size of the safety population was 1,044, and was lower for NTBs than NMEs (median: 920 vs. 1,138, P = 0.04), orphan products than nonorphan products (393 vs. 1,606, P < 0.001), and for products with fast-track designation (617 vs. 1,455, P < 0.001), priority review (630 vs. 1,735, P < 0.001), and accelerated approval (475 vs. 1,164, P < 0.001), than products without that designation. The median number of postmarket safety label updates and issues added to the label were higher with larger premarket exposure among nonorphan products, but not among orphan products. Products with accelerated approval using a surrogate end point had a higher median number of safety issues added to the label than those with full approval, but this did not vary with the size of the safety population; fast-track and priority review were not associated with the number of safety issues added to the label. A smaller safety population size was associated with a longer time to first safety outcome for nonorphan products but not orphan products. For orphan and nonorphan products combined, smaller premarket safety population size is not associated with the number or timing of postmarket safety outcomes, regardless of expedited program participation., (Published 2021. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.)

The European Union's Pediatric Regulation has strengthened the development of medicines for children in Europe through its system of obligations and rewards. However, opportunities remain to further optimize pediatric medicine developments, notably in relation to the implementation of the regulatory framework. This paper therefore describes bottlenecks identified by industry that occur during the medicinal development process, including those relating to the scientific advice process, pediatric investigation plan (PIP) development, compliance checks, and study submissions, and offers some considerations and insights to address these. Considerations, which are workable within the current legislative framework, focus on an integrated scientific discussion, optimization of PIP procedures and compliance checks, and an alignment of study-reporting requirements., (© 2021 Sanofi. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

The "Pediatric Dose Selection" workshop was held in October 2020 and sponsored by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the University of Maryland Center for Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation. A summary of the presentations in the context of pediatric drug development is summarized in this article., (© 2021, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Precision dosing is progressing beyond the conceptual and proof-of-concept stages toward implementation. As the availability of dosing algorithms, tools, and platforms increases, so do the investment in technology services and actual implementation of clinical services offering these solutions to patients. Nowhere is this needed more than in pediatric populations, which are still reliant on adult drug development and bridging strategies to support dosing, often in the absence of actual dose-finding studies in the target pediatric population. Still, there is more work to be done to ensure that proper governance of these services is maintained, and that sustainability of these early implementations is guided by new science as it evolves and meaningful outcome data to confirm that such services deliver on both clinical and economic return on investment. In addition, the field should ensure that all approaches beyond a therapeutic drug monitoring-driven, pharmacokinetic-centric approach should be considered as the tools and services evolve, especially when pediatric-specific pharmacokinetic/pharmacodyamic and pharmacogenetic data are available and shown to be useful to guide dosing. This review evaluates current pediatric precision dosing efforts, highlighting their utility, longevity, and sustainability and assesses the current process for implementing such approaches examining current barriers that stand in the way of broader implementation and the stakeholders that must engage to ensure its ultimate success., (© 2021, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Pediatric safety evaluations are an essential part of a pediatric drug development program. Communication of the results of these safety evaluations is primarily accomplished by labeling of the drug either during the initial pediatric drug development program, or during the postmarketing period after drug approval for pediatric patients. During drug development, the dose-adverse drug event (ADE) relationship is an important part of the evaluation, but a consideration for pediatric ADEs that are unrelated to drug dosage must be maintained. Examples of dose-related and non-dose-related ADEs are presented. The failure to label a product for pediatric use has been safety related for a number of development programs. The US Food and Drug Administration's Pediatric Advisory Committee is a primary source of the pediatric postmarketing safety review and has been associated with a number of labeling changes through its ongoing review process. Pediatric drug safety remains a critical part of the assessment of dose-effect relationship in the pediatric patient population during the drug development and postmarketing surveillance process., (© 2021, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Dosing is a critical aspect of drug development in pediatrics that has led to trial failures and the inability to label the drug for pediatric use by the US Food and Drug Administration. Developing a structured approach for pediatric dose selection requires knowledge of the current approaches and their success or failure. This study describes the current experience with pediatric dosing methods from 2012 to 2020 and had 2 primary objectives: (1) to identify how the initial pediatric dose was selected and (2) to identify the pivotal dosing strategy used to identify the initially selected dose for safety and efficacy for pediatric clinical trials. Through September 2020, a total of 275 pediatric drug development programs were characterized for initial and pivotal dosing strategies. The success rate for labeling for pediatric use was 76.4%. The most common initial dosing strategy was previous experience with the product, followed by allometric scaling and exposure matching with adults. The most common pivotal dosing strategy was titration to target response in 33% of programs, with the second and third most common being pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic studies (30%) and exposure matching (20%), respectively. Additionally, about one-half of pediatric programs incorporated model-informed drug development. The emergence of titration to target response may signal a shift toward precision medicine in pediatric patients. Future work in pediatric drug dose selection should move toward the development of a structured pediatric dose selection approach., (Published 2021. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.)

One of the biggest challenges in pediatric drug development is defining a safe and effective dose in pediatric populations, which span across a wide age and development range from neonates to adolescents. Model-informed drug development approaches are particularly suited to address knowledge gaps including data leveraging to increase the success of pediatric studies. Considering the often limited number of patients available for study and logistic difficulties to collect the necessary data in pediatric populations, the application of pharmacometrics and modeling and simulation techniques can improve clinical trial efficiency, increase the probability of regulatory success, and optimize therapeutic individualization in support of dedicated trials. This review describes the state of pediatric model-informed drug development to define the right dose for children and provides suggestions for future development., (© 2021, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Getting the right dose regimen for children and adolescents is important but poses great scientific, practical, and ethical challenges. At the same time, the availability of data in adults is a huge advantage and needs to be used optimally when designing studies in children and analyzing pediatric data. Furthermore, the processes of maturation and growth are always key when selecting doses for children. All the above make study adaptations and model-informed approaches imperative for dose exposure-response characterization and dose selection in children. This article summarizes the experience gained in the European Medicines Agency on this topic and proposes some general guiding principles for defining objectives, study designs, and methodology tools for pediatric dose selection., (© 2021, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Potential treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are being investigated at unprecedented speed, and successful treatments will rapidly be used in tens or hundreds of thousands of patients. To ensure safe and effective use in all those patents it is essential also to develop, at unprecedented speed, a means to provide frequently updated, optimal dosing information for all patient subgroups. Success will require immediate collaboration between drug developers, academics, and regulators., (© 2020 The Authors. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

The unprecedented challenges posed by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlight the urgency for applying clinical pharmacology and model-informed drug development in (i) dosage optimization for COVID-19 therapies, (ii) approaching therapeutic dilemmas in clinical trial settings, and (iii) maximizing value of information from impacted non-COVID-19 trials. More than ever, we have a responsibility for adaptive evidence synthesis with a Totality of Evidence mindset in this race against time across biomedical research, clinical practice, drug development, and regulation., (© 2020 The Authors Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics © 2020 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

The noncompartmental analysis (NCA) of pharmacokinetic (PK) data is important throughout all phases of clinical drug development. Although there are numerous regulatory guidances and articles in the literature concerned with best practices for the modeling of PK data, there are relatively few sources of information on how to conduct a high-quality NCA. This article provides a systematic review of issues related to the estimation of plasma and urine PK parameters with the intent of encouraging rigor in the performance of NCAs so as to provide reliable and informative analysis results., (© 2020, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

The diagnosis and management of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) remains a challenge in clinical trials in drug development. The qualification of emerging biomarkers capable of predicting DILI soon after the initiation of treatment, differentiating DILI from underlying liver disease, identifying the causal entity, and assigning appropriate treatment options after DILI is diagnosed are needed. Qualification efforts have been hindered by lack of properly stored and consented biospecimens that are linked to clinical data relevant to a specific context of use. Recommendations are made for biospecimen collection procedures, with the focus on clinical trials, and for specific emerging biomarkers to focus qualification efforts., (© 2019 International Consortium for Innovation and Quality in Pharmaceutical Development. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Therapeutic product development, licensing and reimbursement may seem a well-oiled machine, but continuing high attrition rates, regulatory refusals, and patients' access issues suggest otherwise; despite serious efforts, gaps persist between stakeholders' stated evidence requirements and actual evidence supplied. Evidentiary deficiencies and/or human tendencies resulting in avoidable inefficiencies might be further reduced with fresh institutional cultures/mindsets, combined with a context-adaptable practices framework that integrates emerging innovations. Here, Structured Evidence Planning, Production, and Evaluation (SEPPE) posits that evidence be treated as something produced, much like other manufactured goods, for which "built-in quality" (i.e., "people" and "process") approaches have been successfully implemented globally. Incorporating proactive, iterative feedback-and-adjust loops involving key decision-makers at critical points could curtail avoidable evidence quality and decision hazards-pulling needed therapeutic products with high quality evidence of beneficial performance through to approvals. Critical for success, however, is dedicated, long-term commitment to systemic transformation., (© 2019 Health Canada. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Drug developers are required to demonstrate substantial evidence of effectiveness through the conduct of adequate and well-controlled (A&WC) studies to obtain marketing approval of their medicine. What constitutes A&WC is interpreted as the conduct of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, these trials are sometimes unfeasible because of their size, duration, and cost. One way to reduce sample size is to leverage information on the control through a prior. One consideration when forming data-driven prior is the consistency of the external and the current data. It is essential to make this process less susceptible to choosing information that only helps improve the chances toward making an effectiveness claim. For this purpose, propensity score methods are employed for two reasons: (1) it gives the probability of a patient to be in the trial, and (2) it minimizes selection bias by pairing together treatment and control within the trial and control subjects in the external data that are similar in terms of their pretreatment characteristics. Two matching schemes based on propensity scores, estimated through generalized boosted methods, are applied to a real example with the objective of using external data to perform Bayesian augmented control in a trial where the allocation is disproportionate. The simulation results show that the data augmentation process prevents prior and data conflict and improves the precision of the estimator of the average treatment effect., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Renal function is the most commonly applied patient-specific quantitative variable used to determine drug doses. Measurement of renal function is not practical in most clinical settings; therefore, clinicians often rely on estimates when making dosing decisions. Similarly, renal function estimates are used to assign subjects in phase 1 pharmacokinetic studies, which inform dosing in late-phase clinical trials and ultimately the product label. The Cockcroft-Gault estimate of creatinine clearance has been the standard renal function metric; however, this paradigm is shifting toward the Modification of Diet in Renal Diseases (MDRD) estimate of the glomerular filtration rate (GFR). The proportion of approved new drug labels with dosing recommendations based on the MDRD equation was 16.7% in 2015, 70.0% in 2016, and 46.7% in 2017. Disharmonious recommendations from the United States Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency will continue to increase this heterogeneity in the assessment of renal function in drug development and negatively impact industry, health systems, and clinicians. In this review, we discuss the current regulatory guidance for the conduct of renal impairment pharmacokinetic studies and review the implications of this guidance across the medication use system with 3 recently approved antibiotics: ceftazidime/avibactam, delafloxacin, and meropenem/vaborbactam. Finally, we suggest measuring GFR in phase 1 studies and employing the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation to integrate data across clinical trials. This will help to harmonize CKD staging, population pharmacokinetic analyses, and dosing by estimated renal function., (© 2018, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Merck & Co, Inc (Kenilworth, NJ) is investing in approaches to enrich clinical trial data and augment decision making through use of digital health technologies, outpatient sampling, and real-time data access. As part of this strategy, a phase I study was conducted to explore a few technologies of interest. In this fixed-sequence two-period trial, 16 healthy subjects were administered 50-mg once-daily sitagliptin packaged in a bottle that electronically captured the date and time study medication was dispensed (period 1) and in a traditional pharmacy bottle (period 2). Dried blood spot samples were collected for sitagliptin concentration analysis on select study days, both in clinic and at home, with collection time recorded using an electronic diary in period 1 and by clinic staff in period 2. Study results demonstrated the feasibility and subject acceptance of collecting digital adherence data and outpatient dried blood spot samples in clinical trials and highlighted areas for future improvements., (© 2018 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Graphics are at the core of exploring and understanding data, communicating results and conclusions, and supporting decision-making. Increasing our graphical expertise can significantly strengthen our impact as professional statisticians and quantitative scientists. In this article, we present a concerted effort to improve the way we create graphics at Novartis. We provide our vision and guiding principles, before describing seven work packages in more detail. The actions, principles, and experiences laid out in this paper are applicable generally, also beyond drug development, which is our field of work. The purpose of this article is to share our experiences and help foster the use of good graphs in pharmaceutical statistics and beyond. A Graphics Principles "Cheat Sheet" is available online at https://graphicsprinciples.github.io/., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) revises its guideline on minimizing risk in first-in-human trials to reflect changing practice and in light of a recent tragic incident., (© 2017 The Authors Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling is a valuable tool in drug development and regulatory assessment, as it offers the opportunity to simulate the pharmacokinetics of a compound, with a mechanistic understanding, in a variety of populations and situations. This work reviews the use and impact of such modeling in selected regulatory procedures submitted to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) before the end of 2015, together with its subsequent reflection in public documents relating to the assessment of these procedures. It is apparent that the reference to PBPK modeling in regulatory public documents underrepresents its use. A positive trend over time of the number of PBPK models submitted is shown, and in a number of cases the results of these may impact the decision-making process or lead to recommendations in the product labeling. These results confirm the need for regulatory guidance in this field, which is currently under development by the EMA., (© 2016 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)