Search

The seventh multi-stakeholder Paediatric Strategy Forum focused on chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cells for children and adolescents with cancer. The development of CAR T-cells for patients with haematological malignancies, especially B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (BCP-ALL), has been spectacular. However, currently, there are scientific, clinical and logistical challenges for use of CAR T-cells in BCP-ALL and other paediatric malignancies, particularly in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), lymphomas and solid tumours. The aims of the Forum were to summarise the current landscape of CAR T-cell therapy development in paediatrics, too identify current challenges and future directions, with consideration of other immune effector modalities and ascertain the best strategies to accelerate their development and availability to children. Although the effect is of limited duration in about half of the patients, anti-CD19 CAR T-cells produce high response rates in relapsed/refractory BCP-ALL and this has highlighted previously unknown mechanisms of relapse. CAR T-cell treatment as first- or second-line therapy could also potentially benefit patients whose disease has high-risk features associated with relapse and failure of conventional therapies. Identifying patients with very early and early relapse in whom CAR T-cell therapy may replace haematopoietic stem cell transplantation and be definitive therapy versus those in whom it provides a more effective bridge to haematopoietic stem cell transplantation is a very high priority. Development of approaches to improve persistence, either by improving T cell fitness or using more humanised/fully humanised products and co-targeting of multiple antigens to prevent antigen escape, could potentially further optimise therapy. Many differences exist between paediatric B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (B-NHL) and BCP-ALL. In view of the very small patient numbers with relapsed lymphoma, careful prioritisation is needed to evaluate CAR T-cells in children with Burkitt lymphoma, primary mediastinal B cell lymphoma and other NHL subtypes. Combination trials of alternative targets to CD19 (CD20 or CD22) should also be explored as a priority to improve efficacy in this population. Development of CD30 CAR T-cell immunotherapy strategies in patients with relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma will likely be most efficiently accomplished by joint paediatric and adult trials. CAR T-cell approaches are early in development for AML and T-ALL, given the unique challenges of successful immunotherapy actualisation in these diseases. At this time, CD33 and CD123 appear to be the most universal targets in AML and CD7 in T-ALL. The results of ongoing or planned first-in-human studies are required to facilitate further understanding. There are promising early results in solid tumours, particularly with GD2 targeting cell therapies in neuroblastoma and central nervous system gliomas that represent significant unmet clinical needs. Further understanding of biology is critical to success. The comparative benefits of autologous versus allogeneic CAR T-cells, T-cells engineered with T cell receptors T-cells engineered with T cell receptor fusion constructs, CAR Natural Killer (NK)-cell products, bispecific T-cell engager antibodies and antibody-drug conjugates require evaluation in paediatric malignancies. Early and proactive academia and multi-company engagement are mandatory to advance cellular immunotherapies in paediatric oncology. Regulatory advice should be sought very early in the design and preparation of clinical trials of innovative medicines, for which regulatory approval may ultimately be sought. Aligning strategic, scientific, regulatory, health technology and funding requirements from the inception of a clinical trial is especially important as these are very expensive therapies. The model for drug development for cell therapy in paediatric oncology could also involve a ‘later stage handoff’ to industry after early development in academic hands. Finally, and very importantly, strategies must evolve to ensure appropriate ease of access for children who need and could potentially benefit from these therapies.

OBJECTIVES: Access to medicines in Europe depends on a benefit-risk decision taken by regulators and a relative effectiveness assessment performed by health technology assessment bodies (HTABs) to inform, as one element, a reimbursement decision. Although various similarities in evidence needs exist, understanding of their needs is currently suboptimal and therefore the evidence generated does not always meet their needs. Subsequently, delays in decision making can be expected, negatively affecting access. To overcome this, this study reviewed the evidentiary needs of European regulators and HTABs at European level and analyzed how their collaboration can further facilitate optimal evidence generation plans, evidence use, and evidence presentation.METHODS: Through systematic literature review, expert interviews, and pairwise comparison of assessment reports by the European Medicines Agency and European network for health technology assessment, respective clinical evidence requirements and impact of product-specific collaboration between European Medicines Agency and HTABs were established.RESULTS: Clinical evidence needs are quite similar but differences exist in comparator choice, preferred efficacy endpoints, and target population. Results of the impact of collaboration to date were mixed: preapproval joint advice procedures were successful and highly valued by all stakeholders; information exchange at the time of regulatory decision is coming together, yet the European Public Assessment Report can be further optimized; and collaboration on postlicensing evidence generation requirements shows potential but needs solidifying.CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate the potential to further improve the evidence utilization across stakeholders to avoid duplication and streamline decision making, to ultimately improve access to medicines for European patients.

The seventh multi-stakeholder Paediatric Strategy Forum focused on chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cells for children and adolescents with cancer. The development of CAR T-cells for patients with haematological malignancies, especially B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (BCP-ALL), has been spectacular. However, currently, there are scientific, clinical and logistical challenges for use of CAR T-cells in BCP-ALL and other paediatric malignancies, particularly in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), lymphomas and solid tumours. The aims of the Forum were to summarise the current landscape of CAR T-cell therapy development in paediatrics, too identify current challenges and future directions, with consideration of other immune effector modalities and ascertain the best strategies to accelerate their development and availability to children. Although the effect is of limited duration in about half of the patients, anti-CD19 CAR T cells produce high response rates in relapsed/refractory BCP-ALL and this has highlighted previously unknown mechanisms of relapse. CAR T-cell treatment as first-or second-line therapy could also potentially benefit patients whose disease has high-risk features associated with relapse and failure of conventional therapies. Identifying patients with very early and early relapse in whom CAR T-cell therapy may replace haematopoietic stem cell transplanta-tion and be definitive therapy versus those in whom it provides a more effective bridge to hae-matopoietic stem cell transplantation is a very high priority. Development of approaches to improve persistence, either by improving T cell fitness or using more humanised/fully huma-nised products and co-targeting of multiple antigens to prevent antigen escape, could potentially further optimise therapy. Many differences exist between paediatric B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (B-NHL) and BCP-ALL. In view of the very small patient numbers with relapsed lymphoma, careful prior-itisation is needed to evaluate CAR T-cells in children with Burkitt lymphoma, primary medi-astinal B cell lymphoma and other NHL subtypes. Combination trials of alternative targets to CD19 (CD20 or CD22) should also be explored as a priority to improve efficacy in this pop-ulation. Development of CD30 CAR T-cell immunotherapy strategies in patients with relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma will likely be most efficiently accomplished by joint paediatric and adult trials.CAR T-cell approaches are early in development for AML and T-ALL, given the unique challenges of successful immunotherapy actualisation in these diseases. At this time, CD33 and CD123 appear to be the most universal targets in AML and CD7 in T-ALL. The results of ongoing or planned first-in-human studies are required to facilitate further understanding. There are promising early results in solid tumours, particularly with GD2 targeting cell ther-apies in neuroblastoma and central nervous system gliomas that represent significant unmet clinical needs. Further understanding of biology is critical to success.The comparative benefits of autologous versus allogeneic CAR T-cells, T-cells engineered with T cell receptors T-cells engineered with T cell receptor fusion constructs, CAR Natural Killer (NK)-cell products, bispecific T-cell engager antibodies and antibody-drug conjugates require evaluation in paediatric malignancies.Early and proactive academia and multi-company engagement are mandatory to advance cellular immunotherapies in paediatric oncology. Regulatory advice should be sought very early in the design and preparation of clinical trials of innovative medicines, for which regu-latory approval may ultimately be sought. Aligning strategic, scientific, regulatory, health technology and funding requirements from the inception of a clinical trial is especially impor-tant as these are very expensive therapies.The model for drug development for cell therapy in paediatric oncology could also involve a 'later stage handoff' to industry after early development in academic hands. Finally, and very importantly, strategies must evolve to ensure appropriate ease of access for children who need and could potentially benefit from these therapies. 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

The understanding of the benefit risk profile, and relative effectiveness of a new medicinal product, are initially established in a circumscribed patient population through clinical trials. There may be uncertainties associated with the new medicinal product that cannot be, or do not need to be resolved before launch. Postlicensing or postlaunch evidence generation (PLEG) is a term for evidence generated after the licensure or launch of a medicinal product to address these remaining uncertainties. PLEG is thus part of the continuum of evidence development for a medicinal product, complementing earlier evidence, facilitating further elucidation of a product's benefit/risk profile, value proposition, and/or exploring broader aspects of disease management and provision of healthcare. PLEG plays a role in regulatory decision making, not only in the European Union but also in other jurisdictions including the USA and Japan. PLEG is also relevant for downstream decision-making by health technology assessment bodies and payers. PLEG comprises studies of different designs, based on data collected in observational or experimental settings. Experience to date in the European Union has indicated a need for improvements in PLEG. Improvements in design and research efficiency of PLEG could be addressed through more systematic pursuance of Scientific Advice on PLEG with single or multiple decision makers. To date, limited information has been available on the rationale, process or timing for seeking PLEG advice from regulators or health technology assessment bodies. This article sets out to address these issues and to encourage further uptake of PLEG advice. ispartof: British Journal Of Clinical Pharmacology vol:86 issue:6 pages:1034-1051 ispartof: location:England status: Published online

Regulatory agencies can provide advice to support developers of digital technologies for medicines use, but what are the best strategies to maximize the chance of a successful regulatory interaction? Here, EMA and industry representatives comment on the experience so far. Regulatory agencies can provide advice to support developers of digital technologies for medicines use, but what are the best strategies to maximize the chance of a successful regulatory interaction? Here, EMA and industry representatives comment on the experience so far.

In response to a recommendation from the Pharmaceutical Forum, the European Medicines Agency and the European network for Health Technology Assessment initiated a collaboration with the aim to improve the contribution regulatory assessment reports can make to the assessment of relative effectiveness of medicinal products by health technology assessment bodies. This collaboration on improving European Public Assessment Reports (EPARs) started in February 2010 and was performed over 2 years. As a result, the templates for preparing EPARs were revised to better address the needs of heath technology organizations. The better understanding of information needs was a key outcome of the collaboration. To ascertain whether these template changes led to the inclusion of relevant information, a review of a small set of EPARs for recently approved medicinal products was carried out in parallel by both the European network for Health Technology Assessment and the European Medicines Agency. This report provides an account of this project on improving EPARs, which is part of the ongoing dialogue between regulators and health technology assessment bodies on a European level to support policymaker decisions in the future.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic functional gastroinestinal disorder characterised by intestinal pain or discomfort ogether with alteration of bowel habit, abdominal distension, loating, constipation or diarrhoea [1–4]. Symptoms usually wax nd wane for many years, often resulting in reduced quality of life nd work productivity. The pathophysiology of IBS is incompletely nderstood. Despite affecting 5–20% of the Western population, no medicine as authorised in the European Union specifically for the treatent of IBS until recently. Patients and prescribers were limited o general symptomatic treatments such as laxatives, antidiarhoeals and antispasmodics, which are recommended in current uidelines but on the basis of weak evidence [1,5,6]. Alternatively, hey may use unapproved treatments such as antidepressants and on-absorbable antibiotics when lifestyle modifications such as educing stress, altering diet or psychological interventions have hown to be ineffective. On 26 November 2012, the European-wide marketing authoriation of Constella (linaclotide) was issued for adults with moderate o severe IBS with constipation (IBS-C), a common subtype of the isease. This authorisation is based on a positive recommendaion from the European Medicines Agency’s (EMA’s) Committee for edicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) [7]. The recommended ose is one capsule (290 g) once daily, to be taken at least 30 min efore a meal. Linaclotide, a synthetic 14-amino-acid peptide, is new oral compound that works by increasing intestinal fluid ecretion and accelerated transit. It stimulates guanylate-cyclaseubtype-C (GC-C) receptors on the luminal surface of the intestinal pithelium, leading to increased intraand extracellular levels of yclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP). The increase in intraellular cGMP in turn activates the cystic fibrosis transmembrane onductance regulator (CFTR), leading to secretion of chloride and icarbonate into the intestinal lumen [7–10].

In the present investigations peroral acyclovir depot tablets with internal magnets were developed. An extracorporal magnet was used to prolong the gastric residence times of the dosage forms and to influence the duration of absorption of acyclovir. The magnetic depot tablets contained 200 mg acyclovir. In a three-way cross-over in vivo study with five healthy male subjects, the plasma concentration-time profiles of acyclovir were determined. The acyclovir plasma concentrations following peroral administration of magnetic depot tablets in the presence and absence of an extracorporal magnet were determined. A commercially available immediate release preparation was used as a reference preparation. In the presence of an extracorporal magnet which was placed in the stomach region, the plasma concentrations of acyclovir were significantly higher after 7, 8, 10 and 12 h ( P U -test, Wilcoxon, Mann–Whitney). The mean area under the plasma concentration-time-curve (AUC 0–24h ), in the presence of the extracorporal magnet was 2802.7 ngh/ml. Without the extracorporal magnet a mean AUC 0–24h of 1598.8 ngh/ml was achieved. Computer simulations were carried out to show the influence of the gastric residence time of acyclovir depot preparations on the plasma concentration-time profiles of acyclovir.