2018
DOI: 10.1177/2168479017750129
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Juvenile Animal Testing: Assessing Need and Use in the Drug Product Label

Abstract: It is hopeful that the new ICH S11 guideline "Nonclinical Safety Testing in Support of Development of Pediatric Medicines" currently in preparation will aid drug developers in clarifying the need for juvenile animal studies as well as in promoting a move away from toxicology studies with a conventional design. This would permit more focused testing to examine identified areas of toxicity or safety concerns and clarify the presentation/interpretation of juvenile animal study findings for proper risk assessment … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In a recent survey on European Pediatric Investigation Plan (PIP) decisions (2007-2017, 229 drugs) with juvenile animal requests, general toxicological studies were the most applicable study designs, with infectious diseases, endocrinology, neurology and cardiovascular diseases being the most common therapeutic areas. As anticipated, about 80% of these studies were in rats, while studies in pigs were limited (4.2%) [22]. Interestingly, a recent European Medicines Agency (EMA) analysis on juvenile animal studies in the field of anticancer drug research documented that juvenile models also generated evidence regarding new target organ toxicity (kidney, central and peripheral nervous system, impaired learning or memory, cardiac system) or increased severity of toxicity (including mortality rate) [23].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…In a recent survey on European Pediatric Investigation Plan (PIP) decisions (2007-2017, 229 drugs) with juvenile animal requests, general toxicological studies were the most applicable study designs, with infectious diseases, endocrinology, neurology and cardiovascular diseases being the most common therapeutic areas. As anticipated, about 80% of these studies were in rats, while studies in pigs were limited (4.2%) [22]. Interestingly, a recent European Medicines Agency (EMA) analysis on juvenile animal studies in the field of anticancer drug research documented that juvenile models also generated evidence regarding new target organ toxicity (kidney, central and peripheral nervous system, impaired learning or memory, cardiac system) or increased severity of toxicity (including mortality rate) [23].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…The current selection of toxicology animal models usually includes time of physiological development and organ development similar to humans, costs, and ease of obtaining experimental animals [ 32 ]. In this study, we selected SD rats for the safety investigation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of juvenile animal models might bridge that gap. Despite the increase in juvenile animal trials thanks to the pediatric legislations, almost all juvenile studies mentioned in the PIPs from 2007 to mid-2017 were general toxicology studies (Baldrick, 2018). Besides toxicology studies, there is a need for more pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) juvenile studies in the desired age category without any previous adult human or animal data.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Selecting the most appropriate animal species is crucial and the rat (57.5%) is still the most commonly used juvenile species, followed by dog (8%), mouse (4.5%), monkey (4%), pig (2%), sheep (1%), rabbit (1%), and hamster (0.5%). Unfortunately, in 21.5% of the cases, no species was mentioned (Baldrick, 2018). However, this does not mean that the rat is the most appropriate animal model to evaluate pediatric PK/PD and safety characteristics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%