EJC paediatric oncology最新文献

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Introduction

Methods

Conclusion

Background

Despite the positive changes brought by the Paediatric Regulation in the European Union (EU) in 2007, drug development in children remains challenging.

Methods

To better understand the issues encountered to reach an authorisation for paediatric patients, we reviewed the pathway of the 11 Paediatric Investigational Plans (PIPs) with indications targeting paediatric solid tumours granted by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) between 2007 and 2022.

Results

On average 5,5 years were necessary to reach approval after a PIP was agreed. All the PIPs underwent at least one modification (median 3 modifications per PIP). The use of single arm trials, in the context of refractory/relapsed disease in absence of standard of care treatment, was supportive for granting a paediatric indication in the majority of the cases. In 6 out of 11 approved products, extrapolation from adults was used. For 2/11 the approval focused on an older population first compared to the initial age group agreed in the PIP due to the development of a suitable formulation for younger children still ongoing at the time of first approval. Scientific advice sought on paediatric development use of extrapolation from adults, major objections raised by CHMP and post-marketing requirements were examined.

Conclusion

Analysing the process necessary to reach an authorisation for paediatric patients, we highlight the major challenges faced in the paediatric approval process and the positive examples of successful drug development that reached final approval. Our analysis is expected to provide useful insights to drug developers, investigators and regulators.

Introduction

Data-driven research has improved paediatric cancer outcomes for children. However, challenges in sharing data between institutions prevent the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to address substantial unmet needs in children diagnosed with cancer. Harmonising collected data can enable the application of AI for a greater understanding of paediatric cancers. The main goal of the paper was to analyse the currently used childhood cancer databases to identify a core of variables able to capture the most relevant data on the diagnosis and treatment of children and adolescents with cancer.

Methods

We arbitrarily identified different types of existing databases dedicated to collecting data of patients with solid tumours, Umbrella, FAR-RMS; PARTNER; ERN PAEDCAN Registry; INSTRUCT and INRG; the common data elements for Rare Disease by Joint Research Centre. The different elements of the CRFs were analysed and ranked “essential” and “good to have”. Domains that included a group of variables structurally connected were identified. Each variable was defined by name, data type, description, and permissible values.

Results

We identified six structural domains: Patient registration, Personal information, Disease History, Diagnosis, Treatment, and Follow-up and Events. For each of them, “essential” and “good to have” variables were defined.

Discussion

Data harmonisation is essential for enhancing integration and comparability in research. By standardizing data formats and variables, researchers can facilitate data sharing, collaboration, and analysis across multiple studies and datasets. Embracing data harmonization practices will advance application of AI, scientific knowledge, improve research reproducibility, and contribute to evidence-based decision-making in various fields.

Introduction

As 15 % of childhood cancers are still incurable, early phase clinical trials are essential in developing better therapies for children with cancer. Accessing relevant trials can be challenging, exacerbated by increasingly specialized therapies which are not available in every country. Copenhagen houses the main early phase trial center for children with cancer in the Nordic region, with about half of trial participants coming from abroad. We explored factors facilitating cross-border access to early phase pediatric cancer trials in Copenhagen.

Methods and materials

Interviews were conducted with 11 family members from five families and nineteen healthcare providers on socio-cultural aspects of traveling for the trial. A thematic analysis was conducted.

Results

Three major themes were identified: proximity to a trial center, facilitation of referral and logistics, and families’ and providers’ perceptions. Both geographic proximity and socio-cultural proximity facilitated access. Provider networks facilitated referrals and sponsors paid for travel, improving feasibility for families. Finally, families’ feelings of hope and providers’ positive perceptions of experimental therapy also promoted access to early phase trials.

Conclusions

Our findings highlight the importance of fully supporting families through logistics, expenses, and challenges associated with traveling to a clinical trial, the value of robust provider networks in facilitating referrals, and the need for awareness of potential socio-cultural bias in referring patients. While factors like geography and attitude also mitigate access, many barriers can be overcome by comprehensive support for families, improving access to early phase trials for children with cancer.