Gap between pediatric and adult approvals of molecular targeted drugs

Pediatric oncology drug development and dosage optimization

Oncology drug discovery and development has always been an area facing many challenges. Phase 1 oncology studies are typically small, open-label, sequential studies enrolling a small sample of adult patients (i.e., 3-6 patients/cohort) in dose escalation. Pediatric evaluations typically lag behind the adult development program. The pediatric starting dose is traditionally referenced on the recommended phase 2 dose in adults with the incorporation of body size scaling. The size of the study is also small and dependent upon the prevalence of the disease in the pediatric population. Similar to adult development, the dose is escalated or de-escalated until reaching the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) that also provides desired biological activities or efficacy. The escalation steps and identification of MTD are often rule-based and do not incorporate all the available information, such as pharmacokinetic (PK), pharmacodynamic (PD), tolerability and efficacy data. Therefore, it is doubtful if the MTD approach is optimal to determine the dosage. Hence, it is important to evaluate whether there is an optimal dosage below the MTD, especially considering the emerging complexity of combination therapies and the long-term tolerability and safety of the treatments. Identification of an optimal dosage is also vital not only for adult patients but for pediatric populations as well. Dosage-finding is much more challenging for pediatric populations due to the limited patient population and differences among the pediatric age range in terms of maturation and ontogeny that could impact PK. Many sponsors defer the pediatric strategy as they are often perplexed by the challenges presented by pediatric oncology drug development (model of action relevancy to pediatric population, budget, timeline and regulatory requirements). This leads to a limited number of approved drugs for pediatric oncology patients. This review article provides the current regulatory landscape, incentives and how they impact pediatric drug discovery and development. We also consider different pediatric cancers and potential clinical trial challenges/opportunities when designing pediatric clinical trials. An outline of how quantitative methods such as pharmacometrics/modelling & simulation can support the dosage-finding and justification is also included. Finally, we provide some reflections that we consider helpful to accelerate pediatric drug discovery and development.

Clinical trial considerations for pediatric cancer drug development

Oncology has been one of the most active therapeutic areas in medicinal products development. Despite this fact, few drugs have been approved for use in pediatric cancer patients when compared to the number approved for adults with cancer. This disparity could be attributed to the fact that many oncology drugs have had orphan drug designation and were exempt from Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA) requirements. On August 18, 2017, the RACE for Children Act, i.e. Research to Accelerate Cures and Equity Act, was signed into law as Title V of the 2017 FDA Reauthorization Act (FDARA) to amend the PREA. Pediatric investigation is now required if the drug or biological product is intended for the treatment of an adult cancer and directed at a molecular target that FDA determines to be "substantially relevant to the growth or progression of a pediatric cancer." This paper discusses the specific considerations in clinical trial designs and statistical methodologies to be implemented in oncology pediatric clinical programs.

Pediatric Drug Development: Reviewing Challenges and Opportunities by Tracking Innovative Therapies

The paradigm of pediatric drug development has been evolving in a "carrot-and-stick"-based tactic to address population-specific issues. However, the off-label prescription of adult medicines to pediatric patients remains a feature of clinical practice, which may compromise the age-appropriate evaluation of treatments. Therefore, the United States and the European Pediatric Formulation Initiative have recommended applying nanotechnology-based delivery systems to tackle some of these challenges, particularly applying inorganic, polymeric, and lipid-based nanoparticles. Connected with these, advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) have also been highlighted, with optimistic perspectives for the pediatric population. Despite the results achieved using these innovative therapies, a workforce that congregates pediatric patients and/or caregivers, healthcare stakeholders, drug developers, and physicians continues to be of utmost relevance to promote standardized guidelines for pediatric drug development, enabling a fast lab-to-clinical translation. Therefore, taking into consideration the significance of this topic, this work aims to compile the current landscape of pediatric drug development by (1) outlining the historic regulatory panorama, (2) summarizing the challenges in the development of pediatric drug formulation, and (3) delineating the advantages/disadvantages of using innovative approaches, such as nanomedicines and ATMPs in pediatrics. Moreover, some attention will be given to the role of pharmaceutical technologists and developers in conceiving pediatric medicines.

Target therapy for high-risk neuroblastoma treatment: integration of regulatory and scientific tools is needed

Introduction

Several new active substances (ASs) targeting neuroblastoma (NBL) are under study. We aim to describe the developmental and regulatory status of a sample of ASs targeting NBL to underline the existing regulatory gaps in product development and to discuss possible improvements.

Methods

The developmental and regulatory statuses of the identified ASs targeting NBL were investigated by searching for preclinical studies, clinical trials (CTs), marketing authorizations, pediatric investigation plans (PIPs), waivers, orphan designations, and other regulatory procedures.

Results

A total of 188 ASs were identified. Of these, 55 were considered 'not under development' without preclinical or clinical studies. Preclinical studies were found for 115 ASs, of which 54 were associated with a medicinal product. A total of 283 CTs (as monotherapy or in combination) were identified for 70 ASs. Of these, 52% were at phases 1, 1/2, and 2 aimed at PK/PD/dosing activity. The remaining ones also included efficacy. Phase 3 studies were limited. Studies were completed for 14 ASs and suspended for 11. The highest rate of ASs involved in CTs was observed in the RAS-MAPK-MEK and VEGF groups. A total of 37 ASs were granted with a PIP, of which 14 involved NBL, 41 ASs with a waiver, and 18 ASs with both PIPs and waivers, with the PIP covering pediatric indications different from the adult ones. In almost all the PIPs, preclinical studies were required, together with early-phase CTs often including efficacy evaluation. Two PIPs were terminated because of negative study results, and eight PIPs are in progress. Variations in the SmPC were made for larotrectinib sulfate/Vitrakvi® and entrectinib/Rozlytrek® with the inclusion of a new indication. For both, the related PIPs are still ongoing. The orphan designation has been largely adopted, while PRIME designation has been less implemented.

Discussion

Several ASs entered early phase CTs but less than one out of four were included in a regulatory process, and only two were granted a pediatric indication extension. Our results confirm that it is necessary to identify a more efficient, less costly, and time-consuming "pediatric developmental model" integrating predictive preclinical study and innovative clinical study designs. Furthermore, stricter integration between scientific and regulatory efforts should be promoted.

The potential of PARP as a therapeutic target across pediatric solid malignancies

BACKGROUND

Pediatric cancer is the leading cause of disease-related death in children and the need for better therapeutic options remains urgent. Due to the limited number of patients, target and drug development for pediatrics is often supplemented by data from studies focused on adult cancers. Recent evidence shows that pediatric cancers possess different vulnerabilities that should be explored independently from adult cancers.

METHODS

Using the publicly available Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer database, we explore therapeutic targets and biomarkers specific to the pediatric solid malignancies Ewing sarcoma, medulloblastoma, neuroblastoma, osteosarcoma, and rhabdomyosarcoma. Results are validated using cell viability assays and high-throughput drug screens are used to identify synergistic combinations.

RESULTS

Using published drug screening data, PARP is identified as a drug target of interest across multiple different pediatric malignancies. We validate these findings, and we show that efficacy can be improved when combined with conventional chemotherapeutics, namely topoisomerase inhibitors. Additionally, using gene set enrichment analysis, we identify ribosome biogenesis as a potential biomarker for PARP inhibition in pediatric cancer cell lines.

CONCLUSION

Collectively, our results provide evidence to support the further development of PARP inhibition and the combination with TOP1 inhibition as a therapeutic approach in solid pediatric malignancies. Additionally, we propose ribosome biogenesis as a component to PARP inhibitor sensitivity that should be further investigated to help maximize the potential utility of PARP inhibition and combinations across pediatric solid malignancies.

The Battlefield of Chemotherapy in Pediatric Cancers

The survival rate for pediatric cancers has remarkably improved in recent years. Conventional chemotherapy plays a crucial role in treating pediatric cancers, especially in low- and middle-income countries where access to advanced treatments may be limited. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved chemotherapy drugs that can be used in children have expanded, but patients still face numerous side effects from the treatment. In addition, multidrug resistance (MDR) continues to pose a major challenge in improving the survival rates for a significant number of patients. This review focuses on the severe side effects of pediatric chemotherapy, including doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity (DIC) and vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy (VIPN). We also delve into the mechanisms of MDR in chemotherapy to the improve survival and reduce the toxicity of treatment. Additionally, the review focuses on various drug transporters found in common types of pediatric tumors, which could offer different therapeutic options.

Genomics-Driven Precision Medicine in Pediatric Solid Tumors

Over the past decades, several study programs have conducted genetic testing in cancer patients to identify potential genetic targets for the development of precision therapeutic strategies. These biomarker-driven trials have demonstrated improved clinical outcomes and progression-free survival rates in various types of cancers, especially for adult malignancies. However, similar progress in pediatric cancers has been slow due to their distinguished mutation profiles compared to adults and the low frequency of recurrent genomic alterations. Recently, increased efforts to develop precision medicine for childhood malignancies have led to the identification of genomic alterations and transcriptomic profiles of pediatric patients which presents promising opportunities to study rare and difficult-to-access neoplasms. This review summarizes the current state of known and potential genetic markers for pediatric solid tumors and provides perspectives on precise therapeutic strategies that warrant further investigations.

The RACE for children act at one year: progress in pediatric development of molecularly targeted oncology drugs

BACKGROUND

The Research to Accelerate Cures and Equity (RACE) for Children Act of 2017 authorized the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to require pediatric clinical trials for new oncology drugs with relevant molecular targets. This study reviewed oncology drug approvals within the first year after the new legislation came into effect, to evaluate the impact on development of molecularly targeted oncology drugs for pediatric cancers.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

For new oncology drugs approved by the FDA between 08/18/2020-08/18/2021, drug approval packages, letters and prescribing information were reviewed for the submission and approval dates, indication and molecular target of the drug, and post-marketing requirements that included pediatric clinical trials.

RESULTS

Within the 1-year period, 17 new oncology drugs were approved, but only 5 had been submitted after 08/18/2020. Three of the 5 (60.0%) had requirements for pediatric trials under the RACE Act. None of the 12 submitted prior to 08/18/2020 had pediatric trial requirements, but 11 (91.7%) had molecular targets that would have made them candidates under the RACE Act. Nine of the 17 approvals (52.9%) had pediatric trials registered on clinicaltrials.gov.

CONCLUSIONS

Early evidence suggests that while some pediatric development of oncology drugs was initiated without FDA request, the RACE Act was effective at closing the loopholes of previous legislation and creating new opportunities for innovation in developing therapies for childhood cancers.

The Landscape of Pediatric Precision Oncology: Program Design, Actionable Alterations, and Clinical Trial Development

Over the last years, various precision medicine programs have been developed for pediatric patients with high-risk, relapsed, or refractory malignancies, selecting patients for targeted treatment through comprehensive molecular profiling. In this review, we describe characteristics of these initiatives, demonstrating the feasibility and potential of molecular-driven precision medicine. Actionable events are identified in a significant subset of patients, although comparing results is complicated due to the lack of a standardized definition of actionable alterations and the different molecular profiling strategies used. The first biomarker-driven trials for childhood cancer have been initiated, but until now the effect of precision medicine on clinical outcome has only been reported for a small number of patients, demonstrating clinical benefit in some. Future perspectives include the incorporation of novel approaches such as liquid biopsies and immune monitoring as well as innovative collaborative trial design including combination strategies, and the development of agents specifically targeting aberrations in childhood malignancies.