Small sample approach, and statistical and epidemiological aspects

Recommendations and evidence for reporting items in pediatric clinical trial protocols and reports: two systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Complete and transparent reporting of clinical trial protocols and reports ensures that these documents are useful to all stakeholders, that bias is minimized, and that the research is not wasted. However, current studies repeatedly conclude that pediatric trial protocols and reports are not appropriately reported. Guidelines like SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) and CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) may improve reporting, but do not offer guidance on issues unique to pediatric trials. This paper reports two systematic reviews conducted to build the evidence base for the development of pediatric reporting guideline extensions: 1) SPIRIT-Children (SPIRIT-C) for pediatric trial protocols, and 2) CONSORT-Children (CONSORT-C) for pediatric trial reports.

METHOD

MEDLINE, the Cochrane Methodology Register, and reference lists of included studies were searched. Publications of any type were eligible if they included explicit recommendations or empirical evidence for the reporting of potential items in a pediatric protocol (SPIRIT-C systematic review) or trial report (CONSORT-C systematic review). Study characteristics, recommendations and evidence for pediatric extension items were extracted. Recurrent themes in the recommendations and evidence were identified and synthesized. All steps were conducted by two reviewers.

RESULTS

For the SPIRIT-C and CONSORT-C systematic reviews 366 and 429 publications were included, respectively. Recommendations were identified for 48 of 50 original reporting items and sub-items from SPIRIT, 15 of 20 potential SPIRIT-C reporting items, all 37 original CONSORT items and sub-items, and 16 of 22 potential CONSORT-C reporting items. The following overarching themes of evidence to support or refute the utility of reporting items were identified: transparency; reproducibility; interpretability; usefulness; internal validity; external validity; reporting bias; publication bias; accountability; scientific soundness; and research ethics.

CONCLUSION

These systematic reviews are the first to systematically gather evidence and recommendations for the reporting of specific items in pediatric protocols and trials. They provide useful and translatable evidence on which to build pediatric extensions to the SPIRIT and CONSORT reporting guidelines. The resulting SPIRIT-C and CONSORT-C will provide guidance to the authors of pediatric protocols and reports, respectively, helping to alleviate concerns of inappropriate and inconsistent reporting, and reduce research waste.

Inhaled PGE1 in neonates with hypoxemic respiratory failure: two pilot feasibility randomized clinical trials

Background

Inhaled nitric oxide (INO), a selective pulmonary vasodilator, has revolutionized the treatment of neonatal hypoxemic respiratory failure (NHRF). However, there is lack of sustained improvement in 30 to 46% of infants. Aerosolized prostaglandins I₂ (PGI₂) and E₁ (PGE₁) have been reported to be effective selective pulmonary vasodilators. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of inhaled PGE₁ (IPGE₁) in NHRF.

Methods

Two pilot multicenter phase II RCTs are included in this report. In the first pilot, late preterm and term neonates with NHRF, who had an oxygenation index (OI) of ≥15 and <25 on two arterial blood gases and had not previously received INO, were randomly assigned to receive two doses of IPGE₁ (300 and 150 ng/kg/min) or placebo. The primary outcome was the enrollment of 50 infants in six to nine months at 10 sites. The first pilot was halted after four months for failure to enroll a single infant. The most common cause for non-enrollment was prior initiation of INO. In a re-designed second pilot, co-administration of IPGE₁ and INO was permitted. Infants with suboptimal response to INO received either aerosolized saline or IPGE₁ at a low (150 ng/kg/min) or high dose (300 ng/kg/min) for a maximum duration of 72 hours. The primary outcome was the recruitment of an adequate number of patients (n = 50) in a nine-month-period, with fewer than 20% protocol violations.

Results

No infants were enrolled in the first pilot. Seven patients were enrolled in the second pilot; three in the control, two in the low-dose IPGE₁, and two in the high-dose IPGE₁ groups. The study was halted for recruitment futility after approximately six months as enrollment targets were not met. No serious adverse events, one minor protocol deviation and one pharmacy protocol violation were reported.

Conclusions

These two pilot RCTs failed to recruit adequate eligible newborns with NHRF. Complex management RCTs of novel therapies for persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn (PPHN) may require novel study designs and a longer period of time from study approval to commencement of enrollment.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov

Pilot one: NCT number: 00598429 registered on 10 January 2008. Last updated: 3 February 2011.

Pilot two: NCT number: 01467076 17 October 2011. Last updated: 13 February 2013.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-486) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Clinical trials in neonates and children: Report of the pulmonary hypertension academic research consortium pediatric advisory committee

Drug trials in neonates and children with pulmonary hypertensive vascular disease pose unique but not insurmountable challenges. Childhood is defined by growth and development. Both may influence disease and outcomes of drug trials. The developing pulmonary vascular bed and airways may be subjected to maldevelopment, maladaptation, growth arrest, or dysregulation that influence the disease phenotype. Drug therapy is influenced by developmental changes in renal and hepatic blood flow, as well as in metabolic systems such as cytochrome P450. Drugs may affect children differently from adults, with different clearance, therapeutic levels and toxicities. Toxicity may not be manifested until the child reaches physical, endocrine and neurodevelopmental maturity. Adverse effects may be revealed in the next generation, should the development of ova or spermatozoa be affected. Consideration of safe, age-appropriate tablets and liquid formulations is an obvious but often neglected prerequisite to any pediatric drug trial. In designing a clinical trial, precise phenotyping and genotyping of disease is required to ensure appropriate and accurate inclusion and exclusion criteria. We need to explore physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling and simulations together with statistical techniques to reduce sample size requirements. Clinical endpoints such as exercise capacity, using traditional classifications and testing cannot be applied routinely to children. Many lack the necessary neurodevelopmental skills and equipment may not be appropriate for use in children. Selection of endpoints appropriate to encompass the developmental spectrum from neonate to adolescent is particularly challenging. One possible solution is the development of composite outcome scores that include age and a developmentally specific functional classification, growth and development scores, exercise data, biomarkers and hemodynamics with repeated evaluation throughout the period of growth and development. In addition, although potentially costly, we recommend long-term continuation of blinded dose ranging after completion of the short-term, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial for side-effect surveillance, which should include neurodevelopmental and peripubertal monitoring. The search for robust evidence to guide safe therapy of children and neonates with pulmonary hypertensive vascular disease is a crucial and necessary goal.