Search

The regulatory standards of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) require substantial evidence of effectiveness from adequate and well-controlled trials, for drugs developed in both adults and children. However, when scientifically justified, relying on extrapolation may be acceptable. Historically, the FDA's extrapolation approach was based on draft guidance published in 2014, which introduced the categories of full, partial, and no extrapolation. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) took a different view on pediatric extrapolation. To better understand the use of extrapolation to support pediatric drug development and approval, we reviewed the pediatric labeling changes published by the FDA, focusing on the labeling updates between 1/1/2015 and 7/31/2021, the period where the extrapolation approach is in transition to harmonize with the EMA. Within this time window, among the 265 drugs and biological products with pediatric labeling changes, 169 (63.8%) were identified where extrapolation was used. This includes 64 (24.2%) labeling changes, where full extrapolation was used, and 105 (39.6%) labeling changes, where partial extrapolation was used. The major disease areas that extrapolation was used include neuroscience (40/53, 75.5%) and infectious disease (20/28, 71.4%). The extrapolation approach was identified in terms of source population beyond the use of adult as well as extrapolation from clinical trials conducted in the same drug class. The use of extrapolation increased the rates of new and expanded pediatric indication in the period. This review gives the most recent landscape of pediatric labeling changes using extrapolation. With the released ICH (International Council for Harmonization) E11A guidance in April 2022, the paper also provides insights for future pediatric drug development programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Interleukin (IL)-17A has emerged as pivotal in driving tissue pathology in immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. The role of IL-17F, sharing 50% sequence homology and overlapping biological function, remains less clear. We hypothesised that IL-17F, together with IL-17A, contributes to chronic tissue inflammation, and that dual neutralisation may lead to more profound suppression of inflammation than inhibition of IL-17A alone.Methods: Preclinical experiments assessed the role of IL-17A and IL-17F in tissue inflammation using disease-relevant human cells. A placebo-controlled proof-of-concept (PoC) clinical trial randomised patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) to bimekizumab (n=39) or placebo (n=14). Safety, pharmacokinetics and clinical efficacy of multiple doses (weeks 0, 3, 6 (240 mg/160 mg/160 mg; 80 mg/40 mg/40 mg; 160 mg/80 mg/80 mg and 560 mg/320 mg/320 mg)) of bimekizumab, a humanised monoclonal IgG1 antibody neutralising both IL-17A and IL-17F, were investigated.Results: IL-17F induced qualitatively similar inflammatory responses to IL-17A in skin and joint cells. Neutralisation of IL-17A and IL-17F with bimekizumab more effectively suppressed in vitro cytokine responses and neutrophil chemotaxis than inhibition of IL-17A or IL-17F alone. The PoC trial met both prespecified efficacy success criteria and showed rapid, profound responses in both joint and skin (pooled top three doses vs placebo at week 8: American College of Rheumatology 20% response criteria 80.0% vs 16.7% (posterior probability >99%); Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 100% response criteria 86.7% vs 0%), sustained to week 20, without unexpected safety signals.Conclusions: These data support IL-17F as a key driver of human chronic tissue inflammation and the rationale for dual neutralisation of IL-17A and IL-17F in PsA and related conditions.Trial Registration Number: NCT02141763; Results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]