Duration of Pediatric Clinical Trials Submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration

Abstract

IMPORTANCE The increasing prevalence of pediatric chronic disease has resulted in increased exposure to long-term drug therapy in children. The duration of recently completed drug trials that support approval for drug therapy in children with chronic diseases has not been systematically evaluated. Such information is a vital first step in forming safety pharmacovigilance strategies for drugs used for long-term therapy in children. OBJECTIVE To characterize the duration of clinical trials submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for pediatric drug approvals, with a focus on drugs used for long-term therapy. DESIGN AND SETTING A review was performed of all safety and efficacy clinical trials conducted under the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act or the Pediatric Review Equity Act and submitted to the FDA from September 1, 2007, to December 31, 2014, to support the approval of drugs frequently used for long-term therapy in children. Statistical analysis was performed from July 1, 2015, to December 31, 2017. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Maximum duration of trials submitted to support FDA approval of drugs for children. RESULTS A total of 306 trials supporting 86 drugs intended for long-term use in children were eligible for the primary analysis. The drugs most commonly evaluated were for treatment of neurologic (25 [29%]), pulmonary (16 [19%]), and anti-infective (14 [16%]) indications. The median maximum trial duration by drug was 44 weeks (minimum, 1.1 week; maximum, 364 weeks). For nearly two-thirds of the drugs (52 [61%]), the maximum trial duration was less than 52 weeks. For 10 of the drugs (12%), the maximum trial duration was 3 years or more. Maximum duration of trials did not vary by therapeutic category, minimum age of enrollment, calendar year, or legislative mandate. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Pediatric clinical trials designed to sufficiently investigate drug safety and efficacy to support FDA approval are of relatively limited duration. Given the potential long-term exposure of patients to these drugs, the clinical community should consider whether new approaches are needed to better understand the safety associated with long-term use of these drugs.

Childhood cancer drugs in China: An overview and comparison of regulatory approvals in China and the United States

“…While policy and legislation have contributed to childhood cancer drug approvals in the United States, the lack of evidence on drug safety and efficacy evidence is still concerning. 4 Previous research has pointed out that 61% of clinical trials submitted to support FDA approvals of drugs for paediatric use were shorter than 1 year, 56 which is one-third of the median study duration for overall survival endpoints used to approve adult cancer indications. 57 We found that approvals of paediatric indications of targeted medications were mainly supported by single arm pivotal trials with various efficacy outcomes.…”

Gaining insight into irrational off‐label use of vidarabine through analysis of a spontaneous reporting system in China

“…The assumption that children presenting conditions similar to adults will respond similarly to treatment has led to the use of many medications approved for adults to treat children, without appropriate studies to justify such use 1 . This may result in therapeutic failure or toxic effects attributed to the differences between children and adults in drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, different stages of ontogenesis of drug receptors, and immaturity of biotransformation pathways 2 . This kind of off‐label drug use has developed as an important issue worldwide 3,4 .…”

Commentary on the EMA Reflection Paper on the use of extrapolation in the development of medicines for paediatrics

“…This section of the Reflection Paper acknowledges the benefits of continuing to address residual scientific uncertainties in the target population even once efficacy and a positive risk‐benefit having been established. Given the potential long‐term exposure of patients to these drugs, it is essential to consider whether new approaches are needed to better understand the safety of long‐term use of these drugs . Examples might be where long‐term follow‐up studies are required to address uncertainties related to growth and maturation and specific uncertainties related to the understanding of therapeutic efficacy and/or safety that have implications for understanding the benefit‐risk of a medicine with the potential to inform better use of the medicine in clinical practice.…”