Search

Objective: This study aimed to validate the newly developed composite acceptability endpoint to investigate acceptability of oral pediatric drug formulations that integrates swallowability and palatability assessments. Methods: In this open-label study acceptability of oral formulations was tested in three age groups (1-<6 months, 6-<12 years, and 12-<18 years) with a 2-way cross-over design in children aged 1-<6 months (syrup and mini-tablets), and with an incomplete block design of four sequences with three out of four formulations (syrup, mini-tablets, oblong tablet, and round tablet) each in children aged 6-<18 years. The primary endpoint was acceptability derived from the composite acceptability endpoint. Secondary endpoints were palatability and acceptability derived from swallowability. Results: A total of 320 children were stratified into three age groups (80 children aged 1-<6 months, 120 children aged 6-<12 years, and 120 children aged 12-<18 years). All participants completed the study. Age-specific differences were observed in acceptability derived from the composite acceptability endpoint. Mini-tablets had the highest acceptability in participants aged 1-<6 months and 6-<12 years while the oblong tablet was leading in adolescent participants (12-<18 years). Conclusion: This study demonstrated that the composite acceptability endpoint method integrating both swallowability and palatability assessments is a sensitive method to assess acceptability of drug formulations in children of different age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the acceptability of a medicine can significantly impact therapeutic outcomes, this study aimed to determine and compare the preferences of children, parents, and healthcare professionals for the most commonly used pediatric oral medicine formulations (syrup, mini-tablets, oblong tablets, round tablets) addressing all pediatric age groups, 0–<18 years (y). This survey study employed sex-, age-, and participant group-adapted questionnaires for eight cohorts of participants, i.e., children 6–<12 y, adolescents 12–<18 y, parents of children in four age groups (0–<2 y, 2–<6 y, 6–<12 y, and 12–<18 y), nurses, and pediatricians. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis. In the age groups 0–<2 y and 2–<6 y, mini-tablets were preferred over syrup by all participants. In the age group 6–12 y, solid dosage forms were also preferred over syrup by all participants. In the age group 12–<18 y, healthcare professionals preferred solid dosage forms over syrup. Parents preferred higher amounts of mini-tablets and syrup compared to round and oblong tablets, while adolescents' preferences did not differentiate between these formulations. Based on the study results and in contrast to current practice, it is suggested to consider solid dosage forms for future age-appropriate medicinal products already for younger age groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Plain language resources (PLR) are lay summaries of clinical trial results or plain language summaries of publications, in digital/visual/language formats. They aim to provide accurate information in jargon-free, and easy-to-understand language that can meet the health information needs of the general public, especially patients and caregivers. These are typically developed by the study sponsors or investigators, or by national public health bodies, research hospitals, patient organizations, and non-profit organizations. While the usefulness of PLR seems unequivocal, they have never been analyzed from the perspective of ethics. In this commentary, we do so and reflect on whether PLR are categorically advantageous or if they solve certain issues but raise new problems at the same time. Ethical concerns that PLR can potentially address include but are not limited to individual and community level health literacy, patient empowerment and autonomy. We also highlight the ethical issues that PLR may potentially exacerbate, such as fair balanced presentation and interpretation of medical knowledge, positive publication bias, and equitable access to information. PLR are important resources for patients, with promising implications for individual as well as community health. However, they require appropriate oversight and standards to optimize their potential value. Hence, we also highlight recommendations and best practices from our reading of the literature, that aim to minimize these biases. Plain language resources (PLR) are a way to make medical research information easier for everyone to understand. They can be summaries of clinical trial results, articles, or presentations. PLR can also be made as videos, brochures, or infographics. They can help patients understand their health better and take care of themselves. However, there are some things to be careful about. PLR may only report the good results and not mention the negative ones, which could be biased. Also, some people with disabilities or who don't speak the language well might have a hard time understanding PLR. To make sure PLR are helpful and fair, there should be standard guidelines for how they are made and shared. This will make sure that PLR are useful and don't cause any problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In Silico Trials methodologies will play a growing and fundamental role in the development and de-risking of new medical devices in the future. While the regulatory pathway for Digital Patient and Personal Health Forecasting solutions is clear, it is more complex for In Silico Trials solutions, and therefore deserves a deeper analysis. In this position paper, we investigate the current state of the art towards the regulatory system for in silico trials applied to medical devices while exploring the European regulatory system toward this topic. We suggest that the European regulatory system should start a process of innovation: in principle to limit distorted quality by different internal processes within notified bodies, hence avoiding that the more innovative and competitive companies focus their attention on the needs of other large markets, like the USA, where the use of such radical innovations is already rapidly developing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), such as enalapril, are a cornerstone of treatment for pediatric heart failure which is still used off-label. Using a novel age-appropriate formulation of enalapril orodispersible minitablets (ODMTs), phase II/III open-label, multicenter pharmacokinetic (PK) bridging studies were performed in pediatric patients with heart failure due to dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and congenital heart disease (CHD) in five participating European countries. Children were treated for 8 weeks with ODMTs according to an age-appropriate dosing schedule. The primary objective was to describe PK parameters (area under the curve (AUC), maximal concentration (Cmax), time to reach maximal concentration (t-max)) of enalapril and its active metabolite enalaprilat. Of 102 patients, 89 patients (n = 26, DCM; n = 63 CHD) were included in the primary PK endpoint analysis. Rate and extent of enalapril and its active metabolite enalaprilat were described and etiology and age could be identified as potential PK modifying factors. The dosing schedule appeared to be tolerated well and did not result in any significant drug-related serious adverse events. The PK analysis and the lack of severe safety events supports the applied age-appropriate dosing schedule for the enalapril ODMTs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to propose a more precise definition and explore how to reduce ethical losses in randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs), we set out to identify trial participants who do not contribute to demonstrating that the treatment in the experimental arm is superior to that in the control arm. RCTs emerged mid-last century as the gold standard for assessing efficacy, becoming the cornerstone of the value of new therapies, yet their ethical grounds are a matter of debate. We introduce the concept of unnecessary participants in RCTs, the sum of non-informative participants and non-responders. The non-informative participants are considered not informative with respect to the efficacy measured in the trial in contrast to responders who carry all the information required to conclude on the treatment's efficacy. The non-responders present the event whether or not they are treated with the experimental treatment. The unnecessary participants carry the burden of having to participate in a clinical trial without benefiting from it, which might include experiencing side effects. Thus, these unnecessary participants carry the ethical loss that is inherent to the RCT methodology. On the contrary, responders to the experimental treatment bear its entire efficacy in the RCT. Starting from the proportions observed in a real placebo-controlled trial from the literature, we carried out simulations of RCTs progressively increasing the proportion of responders up to 100%. We show that the number of unnecessary participants decreases steadily until the RCT's ethical loss reaches a minimum. In parallel, the trial sample size decreases (presumably its cost as well), although the trial's statistical power increases as shown by the increase of the chi-square comparing the event rates between the two arms. Thus, we expect that increasing the proportion of responders in RCTs would contribute to making them more ethically acceptable, with less false negative outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The evolution of postgraduate vocational education and training in pharmaceutical medicine is described alongside the growth of this scientific-medical discipline and profession for the development of new medicines. Over the past 50 years, whilst the training of competent professionals for their work has been paramount, this has paralleled the need to engage with the rapid and complex changes in R&D technologies, patient and healthcare system needs, and the ethical and regulatory obligations applied to the development of medicines throughout their lifecycle. The move from unstructured training to formal programs with syllabus, curricula and assessments for certification, has been accompanied by educational changes to outcomes-based, learner-centered, competency-based programs. The evolution of education and training along with the development of the set of 57 core competencies for professional practitioners in pharmaceutical medicine are described within the competence framework of seven domains: discovery of medicines and early development; clinical development and clinical trials; medicines regulation; drug safety and surveillance; ethics and subject protection; healthcare marketplace; communication and management. The application of the core competencies in a harmonized, international platform of education and training in medicines development at the undergraduate, postgraduate and continuing professional development levels would invigorate the potential for having a competent workforce with the intent to provide faster access to better and appropriate medicines for patients worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The growing complexity of the drug development process requires globally recognized professionals who have not only completed the cognitive path of competence, i.e. the specialized post graduate course in Pharmaceutical Medicine, but suggests that these individuals should join a vocational training program in order to consolidate the seven competencies which characterize a competent Pharmaceutical Professional. The Specialist in Medicines Development (SMD) program developed by the IMI project PharmaTrain and further supported by the IMI project IMI-TRAIN can be considered a prototype vocational program. In order to test the SMD value, it was implemented in two countries, Japan and Italy. The preliminary results, after three years of its implementation, are here summarized, and some initial recommendations are offered to all other countries which may consider to establish this program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Question: Are progesterone vaginal pessaries 400 mg twice a day (bid) non-inferior to progesterone vaginal gel (90 mg) once a day (od) in the primary endpoint of clinical pregnancy rate after 38 days of luteal phase support in women undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF)?Summary Answer: Non-inferiority of progesterone vaginal pessaries 400 mg bid to progesterone 8% vaginal gel (90 mg od) was shown for clinical pregnancy rate after 38 days of luteal phase support.What Is Known Already: To maximise successful embryo transfer after IVF, additionally administered progesterone is used for proper endometrium transformation in the luteal phase. Vaginally administered progesterone results in adequate secretory transformation of the endometrium.Study Design, Size, Duration: This multicentre, multinational, open, randomised, two-parallel group, non-inferiority Phase 3 clinical trial was carried out at 17 study sites in five European countries (Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary and Serbia) between October 2013 and August 2014. An interactive web response system (IWRS) was implemented for treatment allocation at the sites. Power analysis, based on the assumptions of a non-inferiority margin of -9%, a significance level of α 2.5% (one-sided), power 90%, at a reference pregnancy rate for the progesterone vaginal gel group of 30%, as well as applying a dropout rate of 10%, yielded a total number of 766 patients to be randomised.Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: Women aged between 18 and 40 years with a clinical indication for IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) and embryo transfer were eligible to participate. The clinical pregnancy rate was assessed by fetal heart movement measured by transvaginal ultrasound at day 38 (D38) (primary endpoint) and D70. Also assessed were biochemical pregnancy rate (assessed by serum β-hCG ≥25 IU/L), clinical implantation rates at D38, patient evaluation of vaginal bleeding and discharge (assessed by diary) and adverse event (AE) incidence, severity and relationship to study medication.Main Results and the Role Of Chance: A total of 769 female patients were randomised to progesterone 400 mg vaginal pessaries bid (n = 385, 50.1%) or progesterone 90 mg vaginal gel od (n = 384, 49.9%). Patients receiving progesterone vaginal pessaries and progesterone vaginal gel were comparable in demographics, baseline characteristics and number of retrieved oocytes. In the full analysis set (FAS; n = 369 progesterone vaginal pessaries and n = 368 progesterone vaginal gel), clinical pregnancy rates on D38 were 38.3% for progesterone vaginal pessaries and 39.9% for progesterone vaginal gel. In the per protocol analysis set (PP; n = 357 progesterone vaginal pessaries and n = 356 progesterone vaginal gel), clinical pregnancy rates on D38 were 38.1% for progesterone vaginal pessaries and 40.4% for progesterone vaginal gel. For the differences in pregnancy rates between the progesterone vaginal pessaries group and the progesterone vaginal gel, the lower limit of the 97.5% CI was -8.6 and -9.5% for the FAS and PP datasets, respectively. The original prespecified non-inferiority margin of -9% was thus met in the FAS dataset but was marginally below this in the PP dataset. However, the pregnancy rate of the comparator was higher than the anticipated rate of 30%, and a predetermined logistic regression model including treatment group, country and age group effects without interaction terms showed non-inferiority of progesterone vaginal pessaries to progesterone vaginal gel for both the FAS and PP populations, in that the lower limits of the 95% CIs were above 0.7 for both analyses. As a result of this, the relevant authorities accepted to widen the acceptable non-inferiority margin to -10%, and as such both the FAS and PP populations succeeded in showing non-inferiority. Biochemical pregnancy and clinical implantation rates were comparable for both treatments. Both treatment groups showed similar high compliance throughout the study, and the safety profiles were also comparable between the groups. Drug-related AEs occurred with frequencies of 15.1% with progesterone vaginal pessaries and 14.4% with progesterone vaginal gel.Limitations, Reasons For Caution: Clinical pregnancy rate is a surrogate for the outcome of live birth rate.Wider Implications Of the Findings: Progesterone 400 mg pessaries bid for luteal phase support is an effective, safe and tolerable treatment option for women undergoing IVF during ART.Study Funding/competing Interest(s): This work was funded by Actavis Group PTC ehf., Iceland, part of Teva Pharmaceuticals, and by L.D. Collins & Co. Ltd. Gedeon Richter plc has recently entered into a license and distribution agreement to commercialise the vaginal pessaries in the European Union (except Ireland/UK). The progesterone vaginal pessaries studied are now marketed as Cyclogest®, Amelgen®, Cyclovita®, Luteum and Cygest® throughout the EU, Asia and Middle East & North Africa. The competing interests are as follows. H.S.: employee of Gedeon Richter plc/PregLem S.A. C.K.: consultant to L.D. Collins & Co. Ltd and received consulting fees for work performed. T.D.H.: at the initiation and completion of this study, full professor at KU Leuven and Head of Leuven University Fertility Center at the University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Leuven, Belgium. In October 2015, T.D.H. became vice president of Global Medical Affairs Fertility at the pharmaceutical company Merck-marketing authorisation holder of the Progesterone vaginal gel (Crinone®)-and has remained a part-time professor at KU Leuven (Belgium) and adjunct professor at Yale University (New Haven, CT, USA). T.B.M.: at the initiation and completion of this study, employee of Actavis Group PTC ehf. I.K.: consultant to Actavis, later TEVA and received consulting fees for work performed. S.H.: at the initiation and completion of this study, employee of Actavis Group PTC ehf.Trial Registration Number: EudraCT number 2013-001105-81.Trial Registration Date: 2 July 2013.Date Of First Patient’s Enrolment: 9 October 2013. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitor enalapril is commonly used to treat chronic heart failure in children. Because some children are unable to swallow capsules or tablets, a new, age‐appropriate, orodispersible minitablet (ODMT) containing 1 mg of enalapril was developed within the EU‐funded LENA (Labeling of Enalapril from Neonates up to Adolescents) consortium. In order to support the clinical evaluation of this new formulation in children, a relative bioavailability study was performed in healthy adults, comparing the bioavailability of enalapril in the ODMT with that of a reference product (RP) Renitec, a registered standard enalapril tablet formulation. In this open‐label, randomized 3‐way crossover study, 24 healthy subjects received a 10‐mg enalapril dose administered as (1) 2 × 5‐mg tablets of the RP swallowed with water, (2) 10 × 1‐mg ODMT swallowed with water, and (3) 10 × 1 mg ODMT dispersed on the tongue. When the relative bioavailability of the ODMT formulation swallowed with water was compared with that of the RP, the estimated 90%CIs for the ratio of area under the concentration‐time curve (AUC0‐∞) and or peak concentration (Cmax) of enalapril were 92.34% to 106.49% and 91.28% to 115.72%, respectively, which are within the accepted bioequivalence limits of 80% to 125%. Following dispersion of the ODMT in the mouth, a slightly higher Cmax for enalapril was observed as compared with the RP with an upper 90%CI of 127.57%, slightly exceeding the bioequivalence limit. Taken together, it was demonstrated that the method of administration of the ODMT, swallowed or dispersed, did not significantly affect the bioavailability of enalapril. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The first formal conference of the EUropean Federation for Exploratory MEdicines Development (EUFEMED) held in London was the result of a collaborative effort of its founding associations: the Association for Applied Human Pharmacology (AGAH; Germany), the Association for Human Pharmacology in the Pharmaceutical Industry (AHPPI; UK), the Belgian Association of Phase-I Units (BAPU; Belgium), and Club Phase-I (France). The conference focused on innovation and risk management in early clinical drug development. Among other innovations, immunotherapy in oncology and inflammatory diseases were discussed as well as the importance of adaptive trial designs in early clinical drug development. Consideration was given to assessing and mitigating risk in early clinical drug development, and included a preconference workshop. Different measures to minimize risks in healthy volunteers and patients in first-in-human trials were discussed in addition to the importance of non-clinical data, the need for reliable biomarkers, improved communication on adverse events (AEs) and well-trained study sites with ready access to intensive care units and clinical specialists. The need for a European-wide system for prevention of over-volunteering was also discussed. The conference provided opportunity to discuss these developments and concerns and the changing regulatory environment with stakeholders from academia, industry, and regulatory agencies including the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Presentations given by invited speakers are published on http://www.eufemed.eu/london-conference-2017/. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Focuses on the importance of expertise in project and logistics management for the success of clinical trials in the U.S. Accounts on the preparations made for multinational multicenter trials; Importance of study planning in drug development plan; Availability of sufficient pharmacology, toxicology and clinical data.

Background : Pediatric trials to add missing data for evidence-based pharmacotherapy are still scarce. A tailored training concept appears to be a promising tool to cope with critical and complex situations before enrolling the very first patient and subsequently to ensure high-quality study conduct. The aim was to facilitate study success by optimizing the preparedness of the study staff shift. Method: An interdisciplinary faculty developed a simulation training focusing on the communication within the informed consent procedure and the conduct of the complex pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) sampling within a simulation facility. Scenarios were video-debriefed by an audio-video system and manikins with artificial blood simulating patients were used. The training was evaluated by participants' self-assessment before and during trial recruitment. Results: The simulation training identified different optimization potentials for improved informed consent process and study conduct. It facilitated the reduction of avoidable errors, especially in the early phase of a clinical study. The knowledge gained through the intervention was used to train the study teams, improve the team composition and optimize the on-ward setting for the FP-7 funded "LENA" project (grant agreement no. 602295). Self-perceived ability to communicate core elements of the trial as well as its correct performance of sample preparation increased significantly (mean, 95% CI, p ≤ 0.0001) from 3 (2.5–3.5) to four points (4.0–4.5), and from 2 (1.5–2.5) to five points (4.0–5.0). Conclusion: An innovative training concept to optimize the informed consent process and study conduct was successfully developed and enabled high-quality conduct of the pediatric trials as of the very first patient visit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Less than 10% of medicines approved by the FDA since 1980 have provided enough information as regard risks for birth defects associated with their use [1]. Nevertheless, it is estimated that over 90% of pregnant women take over-the-counter (OTC) or prescription medication [2]. Considering the fact that the use of medication in the period before conception and during lactation can also influence the development of the child, information on the impact of their usage during reproductive life is important for everyone. The lack of clear information on this topic results in situations where life-saving medication is discontinued, withheld or used in a reduced dosage by pregnant women, while on the other hand medicines with (potential) toxic effects are taken. This is unacceptable and it is a major public concern that must be addressed. Currently, Europe lacks a robust and comprehensive information system about medication use in reproductive life (preconception, pregnancy and lactation). In order to improve maternal health, and subsequently the health of our next generation, reliable and up to date information should be made available. It should be readily accessible for both health care providers and women who are considering getting pregnant or who are already pregnant. In order to tackle this gap in public health, this paper describes current knowledge of the use of medicines before and during pregnancy. It calls upon all stakeholders involved in medical care, research and medicine regulation, such as policy makers, regulators and governmental agencies, to take action to protect patients and improve public health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]