From class waivers to precision medicine in paediatric oncology

Key Pharmacokinetic Parameters of 74 Pediatric Anticancer Drugs Providing Assistance in Preclinical Studies

Novel drug treatments for pediatric patients with cancer are urgently needed. Success of drug development in pediatric oncology has been promising, but many drugs still fail in translation from preclinical to clinical phases. To increase the translational potential, several improvements have been implemented, including the use of clinically achievable concentrations in the drug testing phase. Although pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters of numerous investigated drugs are published, a comprehensive PK overview of the most common drugs in pediatric oncology could guide preclinical trial design and improve the translatability into clinical trials. A review of the literature was conducted for PK parameters of 74 anticancer drugs, from the drug sensitivity profiling library of the INdividualized Therapy FOr Relapsed Malignancies in Childhood (INFORM) registry. PK data in the pediatric population were reported and complemented by adult parameters when no pediatric data were available. In addition, blood-brain barrier (BBB)-penetration assessment of drugs was provided by using the BBB score. Maximum plasma concentration was available for 73 (97%), area under the plasma concentration-time curve for 69 (92%), plasma protein binding for 66 (88%), plasma half-life for 57 (76%), time to maximum concentration for 54 (72%), clearance for 52 (69%), volume of distribution for 37 (49%), lowest plasma concentration reached by the drug before the next dose administration for 21 (28%), and steady-state concentration for 4 (5%) of drugs. Pediatric PK data were available for 48 (65%) drugs. We provide a comprehensive review of PK data for 74 drugs studied in pediatric oncology. This data set can serve as a reference to design experiments more closely mimicking drug PK conditions in patients, and may thereby increase the probability of successful clinical translation.

Clinical research with targeted drugs in paediatric oncology

The development of targeted drugs in paediatric oncology has been notoriously slow, in part due to the peculiarities of this rare and highly heterogeneous population. To provide therapeutic breakthroughs for the highest risk subgroups of childhood cancer, innovative research solutions have been implemented in the last several years by different international collaborative groups and regulators. Here, we discuss and summarise some of these approaches, as well as challenges and unmet needs that are still being addressed. A wide range of topics were covered in this review including molecular diagnosis optimisation, innovative research methodologies, big data approaches, trial enrolment strategies, and improvements in regulation and preclinical research platforms.

Combination Early-Phase Trials of Anticancer Agents in Children and Adolescents

PURPOSE

There is an increasing need to evaluate innovative drugs for childhood cancer using combination strategies. Strong biological rationale and clinical experience suggest that multiple agents will be more efficacious than monotherapy for most diseases and may overcome resistance mechanisms and increase synergy. The process to evaluate these combination trials needs to maximize efficiency and should be agreed by all stakeholders.

METHODS

After a review of existing combination trial methodologies, regulatory requirements, and current results, a consensus among stakeholders was achieved.

RESULTS

Combinations of anticancer therapies should be developed on the basis of mechanism of action and robust preclinical evaluation, and may include data from adult clinical trials. The general principle for combination early-phase studies is that, when possible, clinical trials should be dose- and schedule-confirmatory rather than dose-exploratory, and every effort should be made to optimize doses early. Efficient early-phase combination trials should be seamless, including dose confirmation and randomized expansion. Dose evaluation designs for combinations depend on the extent of previous knowledge. If not previously evaluated, limited evaluation of monotherapy should be included in the same clinical trial as the combination. Randomized evaluation of a new agent plus standard therapy versus standard therapy is the most effective approach to isolate the effect and toxicity of the novel agent. Platform trials may be valuable in the evaluation of combination studies. Patient advocates and regulators should be engaged with investigators early in a proposed clinical development pathway and trial design must consider regulatory requirements.

CONCLUSION

An optimized, agreed approach to the design and evaluation of early-phase pediatric combination trials will accelerate drug development and benefit all stakeholders, most importantly children and adolescents with cancer.

Desmoplastic small round cell tumor: from state of the art to future clinical prospects

INTRODUCTION

Desmoplastic small round cell tumor (DSRCT) is an extremely rare and highly aggressive soft tissue sarcoma, presenting mainly in male adolescents and young adults with multiple nodules disseminated within the abdominopelvic cavity. Despite a multimodal approach including aggressive cytoreductive surgery, intensive multi-agent chemotherapy, and postoperative whole abdominopelvic radiotherapy, the prognosis for DSRCT remains dismal. Median progression-free survival ranges between 4 and 21 months, and overall survival between 17 and 60 months, with the 5-year overall survival rate in the range of 10-20%.

AREA COVERED

This review discusses the treatment strategies used for DSRCT over the years, the state of the art of current treatments, and future clinical prospects.

EXPERT OPINION

The unsatisfactory outcomes for patients with DSRCT warrant investigations into innovative treatment combinations. An international multidisciplinary and multi-stakeholder collaboration, involving both pediatric and adult sarcoma communities, is needed to propel preclinical model generation and drug development, and innovative clinical trial designs to enable the timely testing of treatments involving novel agents guided by biology to boost the chances of survival for patients with this devastating disease.

Impact of the EU Paediatric Medicine Regulation on new anti-cancer medicines for the treatment of children and adolescents

The European Paediatric Medicine Regulation was launched in 2007, aiming to provide better medicines for children. However, its benefit for paediatric patients with cancer has been questioned and the European Paediatric and Orphan Regulations have been under review since November, 2020. To ascertain the effect of the European Paediatric Medicine Regulation, all paediatric anti-cancer medicines assessed by the European Medicines Agency from 1995 to 2022 were identified and reviewed using the agency's public assessment reports, and all Paediatric Investigation Plans granted since 2007 were analysed. 16 new molecular entities (NMEs; ie, a drug that contains an active moiety that had never been approved before) have been approved since the regulation was launched in 2007. The number of paediatric marketing authorisations increased from 2007 but represented the same 17% of all anti-cancer drug marketing authorisations before and after 2007. After 2007, nine (56%) of 16 NMEs were first authorised both in adults and children. For seven NMEs, a first paediatric indication was approved with a median lag time of 6·4 years (range 1·2-21·5 years) after the first authorisation in adults. Half of NMEs were authorised for the treatment of malignancies responsible for only 5·4% of all European childhood cancer deaths, including three medicines for melanoma and thyroid cancer-adult cancers occurring very rarely in children. The increased number of paediatric anti-cancer NMEs after 2007 is a result of the major increase in new medicines authorised for adult cancers since 2005 rather than a direct effect of the Paediatric Regulation. Paediatric development of these NMEs was driven by their adult market and did not address major unmet medical needs of children and adolescents with cancer. An improved, fit-for-purpose regulatory environment that incentivises paediatric drug development based on mechanism of action, better incentives, and a systematic multi-stakeholder engagement, with greater investment from industry, public funding, and non-governmental organisations, will increase the number of new medicines approved in the future to cure more children and adolescents with cancer.

Available information about paediatric use of onco-haematological drugs authorized by EMA since 2016

BACKGROUND

The treatment options available to children with cancer are limited. This is why for more than 10 years, the European Medicine Agency (EMA) has stated that all drugs to be marketed must be tested on the paediatric population in accordance with the Paediatric Investigation Plan (PIP). The objective of this study is to make a cross sectional analysis of the information related to the use of cancer drugs authorised on the European market in the paediatric population.

METHOD

The European Public Assessment Reports and PIPs have been considered. The following data were extracted for onco-haematological drugs approved since 2016: paediatric indications, information about the paediatric population in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) and presence and characteristics of PIPs. A descriptive analysis of the characteristics of the drugs was made from the point of view of the paediatric population.

RESULTS

Forty-eight drugs with onco-haematological indications have been authorised for marketing since 2016, 7 (15%) of these have paediatric indications. Two (4%) drugs have no paediatric indication but have information related to the paediatric population within SmPC. Forty-one (85%) drugs have no reference to the paediatric population in SmPC. Seventeen (35%) drugs out of 48 do not have PIPs and 11 have been granted a waiver to present the results of paediatric studies. The other 19 active ingredients have a total of 28 PIPs.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

Most of the onco-haematological drugs approved by EMA since 2016 have neither paediatric indications nor mentions about paediatric use in SmPC. PIPs represent an opportunity, but demand for the paediatric population is still huge.

Biologicals as theranostic vehicles in paediatric oncology

Biologicals, such as antibodies or antibody-fragments e.g. nanobodies, have changed the landscape of cancer therapy and can be used in combination with traditional cancer treatments. They have been demonstrated to be excellent vehicles for molecular imaging. Several biologicals for nuclear imaging of adult cancer may be used in combination with (nuclear) therapy. Though it's great potential, molecular imaging using biologicals is rarely applied in paediatric oncology. This paper describes the current status of biologicals as radiopharmaceuticals for childhood cancer. Furthermore, the importance and potential for developing additional biological theranostics as opportunity to image and treat childhood cancer is discussed.

Mandatory requirements for pediatric drug development in the EU and the US for novel drugs—A comparative study

Mandatory pediatric legislation has been implemented in the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) to increase research and the availability of drugs for the pediatric population. Differences in the legislative framework can cause different pediatric requirements for similar indications granted for similar drugs across jurisdictions. This cross-sectional study compares the pediatric requirements for therapeutic indications granted at the time of initial approval for novel drugs approved in the two regions from 2010 to 2018. We collected the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decisions to grant a waiver and/or to agree on a pediatric development plan and deferrals hereof at marketing authorization (MA) from publicly available documents. An agreed pediatric development plan was required for 66% (N = 188/285) and 63% (N = 134/212) of the indications granted in the EU and the US at the time of approval, respectively. Almost all (EU; 98%, US; 89%) were deferred until after MA. Based on the broad scope of the EU Pediatric Regulation, an additional 36 PIPs originated from the indications granted at MA. In the subset of indications granted for drugs approved in both the EU and the US (N = 232), significantly more indications resulted in an agreed pediatric development plan for one or more subsets of the pediatric population in the EU (N = 185) as compared to the US (N = 82). This was based on the exemption of orphan designated drugs in the US and the broader scope of the EU Pediatric Regulation. However, indications subject to the mandatory pediatric legislation in both regions (N = 131) most often had similar regulatory requirements for the inclusion of the pediatric population from the EMA and the US FDA (83%, N = 109). In conclusion, when comparing mandatory pediatric requirements, more pediatric development plans were agreed upon in the EU than in the US, in line with the broader mandates of the EU Pediatric Regulation. However, authorities most often had similar regulatory requirements when an indication was subject to pediatric legislation in both regions.

Outcomes and endpoints in clinical trials supporting the marketing authorisation of treatments in paediatric acute lymphoblastic leukaemia

The improvement in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) treatment has led research efforts to focus on the unmet medical needs of an increasingly smaller patient cohort with resistant leukaemia and to develop more-targeted agents. Survival and response rates remain the most-prevalent endpoints in paediatric ALL research, but other intermediate clinical endpoints and molecular biomarkers for efficacy and mid- and long-term safety endpoints are also being investigated. The success of current ALL treatment appears to be driving new paradigms to optimise clinical drug development, while at the same time, regulatory tools in place are supporting meaningful drug development in the area.

Guidance for pediatric use in prescription information for novel medicinal products in the EU and the US

Pediatric legislations in the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) have increased medicines approved for use in the pediatric population. Despite many similarities between these frameworks, the EU Paediatric Regulation more often provides regulators with a mandate to require pediatric drug development for novel medicinal products compared to US regulators. If used, this could give rise to differences in the guidance for pediatric use provided for clinicians in the two regions. However, the level of discordance in the guidance for pediatric use between the two regions is unknown. This cross-sectional study compares guidance for pediatric use in the EU Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) and the US Prescription Information (USPI) on the level of indications granted for novel medicinal products approved after the pediatric legislations came in to force in both regions. For all indications granted as of March 2020 for novel medicinal products approved in both regions between 2010 and 2018, we compared the guidance for pediatric use in the EU SmPC and the USPI. The guidance for pediatric use differed for 18% (61/348) of the listed indications covering 21% (45/217) of the products, but without the guidance being contradictory. Where guidance differed, an equal share was observed for indications with a higher level of information for pediatric use in one region over the other (49% (30/61) in the US; 51% (31/61) in the EU). The discrepancies in pediatric information could be explained by differences in regulations for 21% (13/61) of the indications. Only a few conditions and diseases (EU n = 4; US n = 1) were observed to cover potential pediatric use outside the approved adult indication. Although the EU Paediatric Regulation more often provides regulators a mandate for requiring pediatric drug development as compared to the US PREA, this was not reflected in the prescription information approved by the two regulatory authorities.

The Challenges of Crizotinib Treatment in a Child With Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma

Survival in cases involving childhood malignancy is reaching nearly 80% in high-income countries, yet cancer remains one of the leading disease-related causes of death in children. In adult oncology the role of targeted therapies is established, but information regarding the use of these therapies in children is limited, largely because targeted therapies were developed in the context of adult pathologies. The few pediatric reports regarding crizotinib, an anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor, seem promising. This case of an 8-year-old male with an ALK-positive anaplastic large cell lymphoma highlights the challenges of treating children with crizotinib. Our experience with crizotinib was more challenging than described in the limited pediatric reports. Not only was the tumor response poorer than described in the reports, but a substantial amount of side-effects and practical difficulties, such as the method of administration and dosing, made management challenging. Many challenges for the use of targeted therapy in pediatric care currently persist. The limited research in pediatric populations leaves uncertainty regarding efficacy and short- and long-term side effects as well as practical difficulties. Despite a clear underlying biological rationale for certain targeted therapies, their contribution toward improving the outcome of childhood cancer remains largely unclear.

Navigating the Regulatory Landscape to Develop Pediatric Oncology Drugs: Expert Opinion Recommendations

Regulatory changes have been enacted in the United States (US) and European Union (EU) to encourage the development of new treatments for pediatric cancer. Here, we review some of the factors that have hampered the development of pediatric cancer treatments and provide a comparison of the US and EU regulations implemented to address this clinical need. We then provide some recommendations for each stage of the oncology drug development pathway to help researchers maximize their chance of successful drug development while complying with regulations. A key recommendation is the engagement of key stakeholders such as regulatory authorities, pediatric oncologists, academic researchers, patient advocacy groups, and a Pediatric Expert Group early in the drug development process. During drug target selection, sponsors are encouraged to consult the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the FDA target list, in addition to relevant US and European consortia that have been established to characterize and prioritize oncology drug targets. Sponsors also need to carefully consider the resourcing requirements for preclinical testing, which include ensuring appropriate access to the most relevant databases, clinical samples, and preclinical models (cell lines and animal models). During clinical development, sponsors can account for the pharmacodynamic (PD)/pharmacokinetic (PK) considerations specific to a pediatric population by developing pediatric formulations, selecting suitable PD endpoints, and employing sparse PK sampling or modeling/simulation of drug exposures where appropriate. Additional clinical considerations include the specific design of the clinical trial, the potential inclusion of children in adult trials, and the value of cooperative group trials.

International Consensus on Minimum Preclinical Testing Requirements for the Development of Innovative Therapies For Children and Adolescents with Cancer

Cancer remains the leading cause of disease-related death in children. For the many children who experience relapses of their malignant solid tumors, usually after very intensive first-line therapy, curative treatment options are scarce. Preclinical drug testing to identify promising treatment elements that match the molecular make-up of the tumor is hampered by the fact that (i) molecular genetic data on pediatric solid tumors from relapsed patients and thus our understanding of tumor evolution and therapy resistance are very limited to date and (ii) for many of the high-risk entities, no appropriate and molecularly well-characterized patient-derived models and/or genetic mouse models are currently available. However, recent regulatory changes enacted by the European Medicines Agency (class waiver changes) and the maturation of the RACE for Children act with the FDA, will require a significant increase in preclinical pediatric cancer research and clinical development must occur. We detail the outcome of a pediatric cancer international multistakeholder meeting whose output aims at defining an international consensus on minimum preclinical testing requirements for the development of innovative therapies for children and adolescents with cancer. Recommendations based on the experience of the NCI funded PPTP/C (www.ncipptc.org) and the EU funded ITCC-P4 public private partnership (www.itccp4.eu) are provided for the use of cell-based and mouse models for pediatric solid malignancies, as well as guidance on the scope and content of preclinical proof-of-concept data packages to inform clinical development dependent on clinical urgency. These recommendations can serve as a minimal guidance necessary to jumpstart preclinical pediatric research globally.

Thioridazine requires calcium influx to induce MLL-AF6-rearranged AML cell death

In pediatric acute myeloid leukemia (AML), intensive chemotherapy and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation are the cornerstones of treatment in high-risk cases, with severe late effects and a still high risk of disease recurrence as the main drawbacks. The identification of targeted, more effective, safer drugs is thus desirable. We performed a high-throughput drug-screening assay of 1280 compounds and identified thioridazine (TDZ), a drug that was highly selective for the t(6;11)(q27;q23) MLL-AF6 (6;11)AML rearrangement, which mediates a dramatically poor (below 20%) survival rate. TDZ induced cell death and irreversible progress toward the loss of leukemia cell clonogenic capacity in vitro. Thus, we explored its mechanism of action and found a profound cytoskeletal remodeling of blast cells that led to Ca2+ influx, triggering apoptosis through mitochondrial depolarization, confirming that this latter phenomenon occurs selectively in t(6;11)AML, for which AF6 does not work as a cytoskeletal regulator, because it is sequestered into the nucleus by the fusion gene. We confirmed TDZ-mediated t(6;11)AML toxicity in vivo and enhanced the drug's safety by developing novel TDZ analogues that exerted the same effect on leukemia reduction, but with lowered neuroleptic effects in vivo. Overall, these results refine the MLL-AF6 AML leukemogenic mechanism and suggest that the benefits of targeting it be corroborated in further clinical trials.

Bromodomain and extra-terminal inhibitors-A consensus prioritisation after the Paediatric Strategy Forum for medicinal product development of epigenetic modifiers in children-ACCELERATE

Based on biology and pre-clinical data, bromodomain and extra-terminal (BET) inhibitors have at least three potential roles in paediatric malignancies: NUT (nuclear protein in testis) carcinomas, MYC/MYCN-driven cancers and fusion-driven malignancies. However, there are now at least 10 BET inhibitors in development, with a limited relevant paediatric population in which to evaluate these medicinal products. Therefore, a meeting was convened with the specific aim to develop a consensus among relevant biopharmaceutical companies, academic researchers, as well as patient and family advocates, about the development of BET inhibitors, including prioritisation and their specific roles in children. Although BET inhibitors have been in clinical trials in adults since 2012, the first-in-child study (BMS-986158) only opened in 2019. In the future, when there is strong mechanistic rationale or pre-clinical activity of a class of medicinal product in paediatrics, early clinical evaluation with embedded correlative studies of a member of the class should be prioritised and rapidly executed in paediatric populations. There is a strong mechanistic and biological rationale to evaluate BET inhibitors in paediatrics, underpinned by substantial, but not universal, pre-clinical data. However, most pan-BET inhibitors have been challenging to administer in adults, since monotherapy results in only modest anti-tumour activity and provides a narrow therapeutic index due to thrombocytopenia. It was concluded that it is neither scientifically justified nor feasible to undertake simultaneously early clinical trials in paediatrics of all pan-BET inhibitors. However, there is a clinical need for global access to BET inhibitors for patients with NUT carcinoma, a very rare malignancy driven by bromodomain fusions, with proof of concept of clinical benefit in a subset of patients treated with BET inhibitors. Development and regulatory pathway in this indication should include children and adolescents as well as adults. Beyond NUT carcinoma, it was proposed that further clinical development of other pan-BET inhibitors in children should await the results of the first paediatric clinical trial of BMS-986158, unless there is compelling rationale based on the specific agent of interest. BDII-selective inhibitors, central nervous system-penetrant BET inhibitors (e.g. CC-90010), and those dual-targeting BET/p300 bromodomain are of particular interest and warrant further pre-clinical investigation. This meeting emphasised the value of a coordinated and integrated strategy to drug development in paediatric oncology. A multi-stakeholder approach with multiple companies developing a consensus with academic investigators early in the development of a class of compounds, and then engaging regulatory agencies would improve efficiency, productivity, conserve resources and maximise potential benefit for children with cancer.

Opportunities and Challenges in Drug Development for Pediatric Cancers

The use of targeted small-molecule therapeutics and immunotherapeutics has been limited to date in pediatric oncology. Recently, the number of pediatric approvals has risen, and regulatory initiatives in the United States and Europe have aimed to increase the study of novel anticancer therapies in children. Challenges of drug development in children include the rarity of individual cancer diagnoses and the high prevalence of difficult-to-drug targets, including transcription factors and epigenetic regulators. Ongoing pediatric adaptation of biomarker-driven trial designs and further exploration of agents targeting non-kinase drivers constitute high-priority objectives for future pediatric oncology drug development. SIGNIFICANCE: Increasing attention to drug development for children with cancer by regulators and pharmaceutical companies holds the promise of accelerating the availability of new therapies for children with cancer, potentially improving survival and decreasing the acute and chronic toxicities of therapy. However, unique approaches are necessary to study novel therapies in children that take into account low patient numbers, the pediatric cancer genomic landscape and tumor microenvironment, and the need for pediatric formulations. It is also critical to evaluate the potential for unique toxicities in growing hosts without affecting the pace of discovery for children with these life-threatening diseases.

Systematic review of phase-I/II trials enrolling refractory and recurrent Ewing sarcoma: Actual knowledge and future directions to optimize the research

BACKGROUND

Optimal Phase-II design to evaluate new therapies in refractory/relapsed Ewing sarcomas (ES) remains imperfectly defined.

OBJECTIVES

Recurrent/refractory ES phase-I/II trials analysis to improve trials design.

METHODS

Comprehensive review of therapeutic trials registered on five databases (who.int/trialsearch, clinicaltrials.gov, clinicaltrialsregister.eu, e-cancer.fr, and umin.ac.jp) and/or published in PubMed/ASCO/ESMO websites, between 2005 and 2018, using the criterion: (Ewing sarcoma OR bone sarcoma OR sarcoma) AND (Phase-I or Phase-II).

RESULTS

The 146 trials identified (77 phase-I/II, 67 phase-II, and 2 phase-II/III) tested targeted (34%), chemo- (23%), immune therapies (19%), or combined therapies (24%). Twenty-three trials were ES specific and 48 had a specific ES stratum. Usually multicentric (88%), few trials were international (30%). Inclusion criteria cover the recurrent ES age range for only 12% of trials and allowed only accrual of measurable diseases (RECIST criteria). Single-arm design was the most frequent (88%) testing mainly single drugs (61%), only 5% were randomized. Primary efficacy outcome was response rate (RR=CR+PR; Complete+Partial response) (n = 116/146; 79%), rarely progression-free or overall survival (16% PFS and 3% OS). H0 and H1 hypotheses were variable (3%-25% and 20%-50%, respectively). The 62 published trials enrolled 827 ES patients. RR was poor (10%; 15 CR=1.7%, 68 PR=8.3%). Stable disease was the best response for 186 patients (25%). Median PFS/OS was of 1.9 (range 1.3-14.7) and 7.6 months (5-30), respectively. Eleven (18%) published trials were considered positive, with median RR/PFS/OS of 15% (7%-30%), 4.5 (1.3-10), and 16.6 months (6.9-30), respectively.

CONCLUSION

This review supports the need to develop the international randomized phase-II trials across all age ranges with PFS as primary endpoint.

Gap between pediatric and adult approvals of molecular targeted drugs

To clarify the approval status of molecular targeted antineoplastic drugs in the United States (U.S.), the European Union (E.U.), and Japan (JP), we checked the status of pediatric indications according to the package insert of each drug. A total of 103 drugs were approved for adult patients in at least one of the three regions whereas only 19 drugs were approved for pediatric patients. Sixty-six of 103 drugs (64.1%) had adult indications in the U.S., the E.U., and JP, whereas only three drugs had pediatric indications in all three regions. Abnormalities in six genes (NRAS, ABL1, JAK2, KIT, ALK and BRAF) were common in childhood cancers as well as adult cancers, for which at least one approved drug could be a potentially actionable drug. Although there were 16 candidate drugs that had adult indications for these abnormalities, only three drugs (18.8%) had pediatric indications. We confirmed that there were few molecular targeted antineoplastic drugs with pediatric indications in the U.S., the E.U., and JP compared with the number of approved drugs for adults. Drugs targeting genomic abnormalities which were common in both adult and pediatric cancers were considered to be good candidates for expansion of their indication for pediatric patients.

Pediatric Trials for Cancer Therapies With Targets Potentially Relevant to Pediatric Cancers

The Research to Accelerate Cures and Equity (RACE) for Children Act was enacted in 2017 to authorize the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to require pediatric studies for new cancer drugs that have a molecular target relevant to the growth or progression of a pediatric cancer. To assess the possible scope of this new policy, we examined all 78 adult cancer drugs approved by the FDA from 2007 to 2017. Only 17 (21.8%) drugs received any pediatric labeling information. Based on the FDA's Pediatric Molecular Target List, we found that the RACE Act could have increased the proportion of cancer drugs potentially subject to pediatric study requirements from 0% to 78.2%. However, the actual effect of the legislation will depend on how often regulators require pediatric trials and on timely completion of such trials.

From patent to patient: analysing access to innovative cancer drugs

Analysis of cancer drugs licensed through the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in 2000-2016 shows that the number of authorisations increased over that timeframe. The median number of licensed drugs each year rose from six for 2000-2008 to 13.5 for 2009-2016. Over 2000-2016, there were 64 drug authorisations for haematological, 15 for breast, and 12 for skin cancer, but none for oesophageal, brain, bladder, or uterine cancer. Only 6% of authorisations included a paediatric indication. The average time for a drug to progress from patent priority date to availability on the National Health Service (NHS) increased from 12.8 years for drugs first licensed in 2000-2008 to 14.0 years for those licensed in 2009-2016. There was evidence that the most innovative drugs were not being prioritised for EMA licensing and NICE approval.

Sorafenib in pediatric hepatocellular carcinoma from a clinician perspective

Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) is a rare tumor in children and normally carries poor outcomes. The most frequently employed chemotherapy regimen includes cisplatin and doxorubicin (PLADO), but this combination offers limited efficacy. Sorafenib is a multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor which, following positive studies in adults with HCC, has begun to be introduced in conjunction with PLADO in pediatric oncology with some encouraging results. Based on these findings, the use of sorafenib is become more common in children with unresectable and/or metastatic HCC. The care of patients receiving sorafenib requires appropriate expertise and standardized pediatric guidelines are lacking. An increasing number of children with HCC are expected to receive sorafenib in the years to come. Pediatric oncology clinicians have a key role in identifying side effects early and clinicians caring for children receiving sorafenib need to be familiar with these. This review article provides suitable and practical information on sorafenib for educational development to optimize clinical care and facilitate enhanced patient/parent education. The article addresses specific areas including mechanisms of action, pre-clinical and clinical evidence, dosing and drug administration and toxicities of sorafenib. Clinical research and recommendations for managing sorafenib-related side effects are discussed. Underpinned by research, this article provides pediatric oncology clinicians with the knowledge required to deliver optimal care to children receiving sorafenib.

Pharmacovigilance of anti-cancer medicines: opportunities and challenges

INTRODUCTION

The foundations of pharmacovigilance are the monitoring of drug safety in real-world medicine, and identification of new adverse effects, unknown at the time of market approval. Cancer patients are prone to adverse drug reactions due to the complexity of the neoplastic disease and its treatment. Pharmacovigilance of anti-cancer medicines is further complicated because patients have comorbidities, as for elderly patients. It is even more challenging when complete safety and risk data for a drug are lacking, as may occur for new molecules or when it comes to drugs for children.

AREAS COVERED

This article introduces the field of pharmacovigilance of anti-cancer drugs, describing the various layers of complexity that make the recognition of adverse drug events in oncology particularly problematic, including the type of medicines, the phenomenon of underreporting and polypharmacy. Finally, it reviews new digital tools to help pharmacovigilance activities in oncology.

EXPERT OPINION

The authors outline some crucial challenges and opportunities that can be useful for pharmacovigilance to keep up with the times and follow the current technological and scientific progress. In addition to the evaluations made by researchers, it will, of course, be necessary to have an equality important concrete response from the institutions and regulatory bodies.

Tumour-agnostic drugs in paediatric cancers

The recognition that new cancer drugs can be truly tumour-agnostic based on mechanism-of-action is important for paediatric cancers, where access to novel targeted therapies developed for adult indications has sometimes been problematic. The recently approved drug larotrectinib is an excellent case study of the development of a tumour-agnostic drug relevant to children.

Pharmacokinetic Targets for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Small Molecule Kinase Inhibitors in Pediatric Oncology

In recent years new targeted small molecule kinase inhibitors have become available for pediatric patients with cancer. Relationships between drug exposure and treatment response have been established for several of these drugs in adults. Following these exposure-response relationships, pharmacokinetic (PK) target minimum plasma rug concentration at the end of a dosing interval (C_min ) values to guide therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in adults have been proposed. Despite the fact that variability in PK may be even larger in pediatric patients, TDM is only sparsely applied in pediatric oncology. Based on knowledge of the PK, mechanism of action, molecular driver, and pathophysiology of the disease, we bridge available data on the exposure-efficacy relationship from adults to children and propose target C_min values to guide TDM for the pediatric population. Dose adjustments in individual pediatric patients can be based on these targets. Nevertheless, further research should be performed to validate these targets.

New approaches to therapeutic drug development for childhood cancers

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We provide an overview of the current landscape of drug development relevant to childhood cancers. We present recent and ongoing efforts to identify therapeutic targets in pediatric cancers. We describe efforts to improve the approach to clinical trials and highlight the role regulatory changes and multistakeholder platforms play in advancing pediatric cancer drug development.

RECENT FINDINGS

Expanding knowledge of the genetic landscape of pediatric malignancies through clinical genomics studies has yielded an increasing number of potential targets for intervention. In parallel, new therapies for children with cancer have shifted from cytotoxic agents to targeted therapy, with examples of striking activity in patients with tumors driven by oncogenic kinase fusions. Innovative trial designs and recent governmental policies provide opportunities for accelerating development of targeted therapies in pediatric oncology.

SUMMARY

Novel treatment strategies in pediatric oncology increasingly utilize molecularly targeted agents either as monotherapy or in combination with conventional cytotoxic agents. The interplay between new target identification, efforts to improve clinical trial design and new government regulations relevant to pediatric cancer drug development has the potential to advance novel agents into frontline care of children with cancer.

Molecular characteristics and therapeutic vulnerabilities across paediatric solid tumours

The spectrum of tumours arising in childhood is fundamentally different from that seen in adults, and they are known to be divergent from adult malignancies in terms of cellular origins, epidemiology, genetic complexity, driver mutations and underlying mutational processes. Despite the immense knowledge generated through sequencing efforts and functional characterization of identified (epi-)genetic alterations over the past decade, the clinical implications of this knowledge have so far been limited. Novel preclinical platforms such as the European Innovative Therapies for Children with Cancer-Paediatric Preclinical Proof-of-Concept Platform and the US-based Pediatric Preclinical Testing Consortium are being developed to try to change this by aiming to recapitulate the extensive heterogeneity of paediatric tumours and thereby, hopefully, improve the ability to predict clinical benefit. Numerous studies have also been established worldwide to provide patients with access to real-time molecular profiling and the possibility of more precise mechanism-of-action-based treatments. In addition to tumour-intrinsic findings and mechanisms, ongoing studies are investigating features such as the immune microenvironment of paediatric tumours in comparison with adult cancers - currently of very timely clinical relevance. However, there is an ongoing need for rigorous preclinical biomarker and target validation to feed into the next generation of molecularly stratified clinical trials. This Review aims to provide a comprehensive state-of-the-art overview of the molecular landscape of paediatric solid tumours, including their underlying genomic alterations and interactions with the microenvironment, complemented with our current understanding of potential therapeutic vulnerabilities and how these can be preclinically tested using more accurate predictive methods. Finally, we provide an outlook on the challenges and opportunities associated with translating this overwhelming scientific progress into real clinical benefit.

Rational Use of Medicine in Children-The Conflict of Interests Story. A Review

BACKGROUND

United States (US) and European Union (EU) legislation attempts to counterbalance the presumed discrimination in pediatric drug treatment and development.

METHODS

We analyzed the history of drug development, US/EU pediatric laws, and pediatric studies required by US/EU regulatory authorities and reviewed relevant literature.

RESULTS

The US and EU definitions of a child are defined administratively (rather than physiologically) as being aged <17 years and <18 years, respectively. However, children mature physiologically well before their seventeenth or eighteenth birthdays. The semantic blur for these differing definitions may indicate certain conflicts of interest.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric healthcare today is better than ever. Regulatory-related requirements for "pediatric" studies focus on labeling. Most of these studies lack medical usefulness and may even harm "pediatric" patients through administration of placebo and/or substandard treatment, despite the resultant publications, networking, patent extensions, and strengthened regulatory standing. Clinicians, parents, and ethics committees should be aware of these issues. New rules are needed to determine new pharmaceutical dose estimates in prepubescent patients, and when/how to clinically confirm them. Internet-based structures to divulge this information should be established between drug developers, clinicians, and regulatory authorities. A prerequisite for the rational use of pharmaceuticals in children would be to correct the flawed concept that children are discriminated against in drug treatment and development, and to abandon separate "pediatric" drug approval processes.

Timing of first-in-child trials of FDA-approved oncology drugs

AIM

The lag time between initial human studies of oncology agents and the first-in-child clinical trials of these agents has not been defined.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic analysis of time from first-in-human trials to first-in-child trials (age of eligibility <18 years) of agents first approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for any oncology indication from 1997 to 2017. We used clinical trial registry data, published literature and oncology abstracts to identify relevant trials and start dates.

RESULTS

From 1997 to 2017, 126 drugs received initial FDA approval for an oncology indication. Of these, 117 were non-hormonal agents used in subsequent analyses. Fifteen of 117 drugs (12.8%) did not yet have a paediatric trial, and six of 117 drugs (5.1%) had an initial approval that included children. The median time between the first-in-human trial and first-in-child trial was 6.5 years (range 0-27.7 years). The median time from initial FDA approval to the first-in-child clinical trial was -0.66 years (range -43 to +19 years). These values were stable regardless of year of initial FDA approval, drug class and initial approved disease indication.

CONCLUSION

The median lag time from first-in-human to first-in-child trials of oncology agents that were ultimately approved by FDA was 6.5 years. These results provide a benchmark against which to evaluate recent initiatives designed to hasten drug development relevant to children with cancer.

Ushering in the next generation of precision trials for pediatric cancer

Cancer treatment decisions are increasingly based on the genomic profile of the patient’s tumor, a strategy called “precision oncology.” Over the past few years, a growing number of clinical trials and case reports have provided evidence that precision oncology is an effective approach for at least some children with cancer. Here, we review key factors influencing pediatric drug development in the era of precision oncology. We describe an emerging regulatory framework that is accelerating the pace of clinical trials in children as well as design challenges that are specific to trials that involve young cancer patients. Last, we discuss new drug development approaches for pediatric cancers whose growth relies on proteins that are difficult to target therapeutically, such as transcription factors.

New Approaches to the Management of Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

Traditional treatment regimens for adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia, including allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation, result in an overall survival of approximately 40%, a figure hardly comparable with the extraordinary 80% to 90% cure rate currently reported in children. When translated to the adult setting, modern pediatric-type regimens improve the survival to approximately 60% in young adults. The addition of tyrosine kinase inhibitors for patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive disease and the measurement of minimal residual disease to guide risk stratification and postremission approaches has led to additional improvements in outcomes. Relapsed disease and treatment toxicity-sparing no patient but representing a major concern especially in the elderly-are the most critical current issues awaiting further therapeutic advancement. Recently, there has been considerable progress in understanding the disease biology, specifically the Philadelphia-like signature, as well as other high-risk subgroups. In addition, there are several new agents that will undoubtedly contribute to additional improvement in the current outcomes. The most promising agents are monoclonal antibodies, immunomodulators, and chimeric antigen receptor T cells, and, to a lesser extent, several new drugs targeting key molecular pathways involved in leukemic cell growth and proliferation. This review examines the evidence supporting the increasing role of the new therapeutic tools and treatment options in different disease subgroups, including frontline and relapsed or refractory disease. It is now possible to define the best individual approach on the basis of the emerging concepts of precision medicine.

Too many targets, not enough patients: rethinking neuroblastoma clinical trials

Neuroblastoma is a rare solid tumour of infancy and early childhood with a disproportionate contribution to paediatric cancer mortality and morbidity. Combination chemotherapy, radiation therapy and immunotherapy remains the standard approach to treat high-risk disease, with few recurrent, actionable genetic aberrations identified at diagnosis. However, recent studies indicate that actionable aberrations are far more common in relapsed neuroblastoma, possibly as a result of clonal expansion. In addition, although the major validated disease driver, MYCN, is not currently directly targetable, multiple promising approaches to target MYCN indirectly are in development. We propose that clinical trial design needs to be rethought in order to meet the challenge of providing rigorous, evidence-based assessment of these new approaches within a fairly small patient population and that experimental therapies need to be assessed at diagnosis in very-high-risk patients rather than in relapsed and refractory patients.

Orphan Drug Regulation: A missed opportunity for children and adolescents with cancer

BACKGROUND

Oncology represents a major sector in the field of orphan drug development in Europe. The objective was to evaluate whether children and adolescents with cancer benefited from the Orphan Drug Regulation.

METHODS

Data on orphan drug designations (ODDs) and registered orphan drugs from 8th August 2000 to 10th September 2016 were collected from the Community Register of medicinal products for human use. Assessment history, product information and existence of paediatric investigation plans were searched and retrieved from the European Medicine Agency website.

RESULTS

Over 16 years, 272 of 657 oncology ODDs (41%) concerned a malignant condition occurring both in adults and children. The five most common were acute myeloid leukaemia, high-grade glioma, acute lymphoblastic leukaemia, graft-versus-host disease and soft-tissue sarcomas. 74% of 31 marketing authorisations (MAs) for an indication both in adults and children (26 medicines) had no information for paediatric use in their Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) at the time of the first MA. Furthermore, 68% still have no paediatric information in their most recently updated SmPC, at a median of 7 years after. Only 15 ODDs (2%) pertained to a malignancy occurring specifically in children and only two drugs received an MA: Unituxin for high-risk neuroblastoma and Votubia for sub-ependymal giant-cell astrocytoma.

CONCLUSION

The Orphan Drug Regulation failed to promote the development of innovative therapies for malignancies occurring in children. Major delays and waivers occurred through the application of the Paediatric Medicines Regulation. The European regulatory environment needs to be improved to accelerate innovation for children and adolescents dying of cancer.