The ethical justification for inclusion of neonates in pragmatic randomized clinical trials for emergency newborn care

Management of the infant born to a mother with tuberculosis: a systematic review and consensus practice guideline

Infants born to mothers with tuberculosis disease are at increased risk of developing tuberculosis disease themselves. We reviewed published studies and guidelines on the management of these infants to inform the development of a consensus practice guideline. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library from database inception to Dec 1, 2022, for original studies reporting the management and outcome of infants born to mothers with tuberculosis. Of the 521 published papers identified, only three met inclusion criteria and no evidence-based conclusions could be drawn from these studies, given their narrow scope, variable aims, descriptive nature, inconsistent data collection, and high attrition rates. We also assessed a collection of national and international guidelines to inform a consensus practice guideline developed by an international panel of experts from different epidemiological contexts. The 16 guidelines reviewed had consistent features to inform the expert consultation process. Two management algorithms were developed-one for infants born to mothers considered potentially infectious at the time of delivery and another for mothers not considered infectious at the time of delivery-with different guidance for high and low tuberculosis incidence settings. This systematic review and consensus practice guideline should facilitate more consistent clinical management, support the collection of better data, and encourage the development of more studies to improve evidence-based care.

Rescue designs in analgesic trials from 0 to 2 years of age: scoping review

Pediatric analgesic trials are challenging, especially in newborns and infants. Following an FDA-academic consensus meeting, we analyzed pragmatic rescue designs in postoperative trials of local anesthetics, acetaminophen, opioids, and NSAIDs involving children ages 0-2 years and assessed surgical volumes to provide trial design recommendations. Searches of PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were conducted. A scoping approach identified trends in analgesic trials with an emphasis on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) utilizing immediate rescue designs. Age-specific surgical volumes were estimated from French national databases. Of 3563 studies identified, 23 RCTs used study medication(s) of interest and immediate rescue paradigms in children ages 0-2 years. A total of 270 studies met at least one of these criteria. Add-on and head-to-head designs were common and often used sparing of non-opioid or opioid rescue medication as a primary outcome measure. According to French national data, inguinal and penile surgeries were most frequent in ages 1 month to 2 years; abdominal and thoracic surgeries comprise approximately 75% of newborn surgeries. Analgesic trials with rescue sparing paradigm are currently sparse among children ages 0-2 years. Future trials could consider age-specific surgical procedures and use of add-on or head-to-head designs. IMPACT: Clinical trials of analgesic medications have been challenging in pediatrics, especially in the group from newborns to 2 years of age. Following an FDA-academic workshop, we analyzed features of completed analgesic trials in this age group. Studies using immediate rescue in placebo control, add-on, and head-to-head trial designs are pragmatic approaches that can provide important information regarding clinical effectiveness, side effects, and safety. Using a French national dataset with a granular profile of inpatient, outpatient, and short-stay surgeries, we provide information to future investigators on relative frequencies of different operations in neonates and through the first 2 years of life.

Neonatal withdrawal syndrome following in utero exposure to antidepressants: a disproportionality analysis of VigiBase, the WHO spontaneous reporting database

BACKGROUND

Evidence on neonatal withdrawal syndrome following antidepressant intrauterine exposure is limited, particularly for antidepressants other than selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRIs).

METHODS

In our case/non-case pharmacovigilance study, based on VigiBase®, the WHO database of suspected adverse drug reactions, we estimated reporting odds ratio (ROR) and the Bayesian information component (IC) with 95% confidence/credibility intervals (CI) as measures of disproportionate reporting of antidepressant-related neonatal withdrawal syndrome. Antidepressants were first compared to all other medications, then to methadone, and finally within each class of antidepressants: SSRIs, tricyclics (TCA) and other antidepressants. Antidepressants were ranked in terms of clinical priority, based on semiquantitative score ratings. Serious v. non-serious reports were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 406 reports of neonatal withdrawal syndrome in 379 neonates related to 15 antidepressants were included. Disproportionate reporting was detected for antidepressants as a group as compared to all other drugs (ROR: 6.18, 95% CI 5.45-7.01, IC: 2.07, 95% CI 1.92-2.21). Signals were found for TCAs (10.55, 95% CI 8.02-13.88), followed by other antidepressants (ROR: 5.90, 95% CI 4.74-7.36) and SSRIs (ROR: 4.68, 95% CI 4.04-5.42). Significant disproportionality emerged for all individual antidepressants except for bupropion, whereas no disproportionality for any antidepressant was detected v. methadone. Eleven antidepressants had a moderate clinical priority score and four had a weak one. Most frequent symptoms included respiratory symptoms (n = 106), irritability/agitation (n = 75), tremor (n = 52) and feeding problems (n = 40).

CONCLUSIONS

Most antidepressants are associated with moderate signals of disproportionate reporting for neonatal withdrawal syndrome, which should be considered when prescribing an antidepressant during pregnancy, irrespective of class.

Non-static framework for understanding adaptive designs: an ethical justification in paediatric trials

Many drugs used in paediatric medicine are off-label. There is a rising call for the use of adaptive clinical trial designs (ADs) in responding to the need for safe and effective drugs given their potential to offer efficiency and cost-effective benefits compared with traditional clinical trials. ADs have a strong appeal in paediatric clinical trials given the small number of available participants, limited understanding of age-related variability and the desire to limit exposure to futile or unsafe interventions. Although the ethical value of adaptive trials has increasingly come under scrutiny, there is a paucity of literature on the ethical dilemmas that may be associated with paediatric adaptive designs (PADs). This paper highlights some of these ethical concerns around safety, scientific/social value and caregiver/guardian comprehension of the trial design. Against this background, the paper develops a non-static conceptual lens for understanding PADs. It shows that ADs are epistemically open and reduce some of the knowledge-associated uncertainties inherent in clinical trials as well as fast-track the time to draw conclusions about the value of evaluated drugs/treatments. On this note, the authors argue that PADs are ethically justifiable given they (1) have multiple layers of safety, exposing enrolled children to lesser potential risks, (2) create social/scientific value generally and for paediatric populations in particular, (3) specifically foster the flourishing of paediatric populations and (4) can significantly improve paediatric trial efficiency when properly designed and implemented. However, because PADs are relatively new and their regulatory, ethical and logistical characteristics are yet to be clarified in some jurisdictions, the cooperation of various public and private stakeholders is required to ensure that the interests of children, their caregivers and parents/guardians are best served while exposing paediatric research subjects to the most minimal of risks when they are enrolled in paediatric trials that use ADs.

Ethical Considerations in Neonatal Research

Children are considered a vulnerable population and have traditionally been excluded from research studies. This exclusion of children in general, and neonates in particular, from clinical research hampers the development of safe and effective therapies in this population. However, research involving children (including infants) is essential to guide therapy and optimize care. Neonatal research is complex, time intensive, difficult and expensive to conduct, and raises some unique ethical considerations. The complexity of research in this population is highlighted by the fear of causing harm to fragile sick infants which has led to the creation of special regulations on the degree of risk exposure permissible in research involving infants. This is further compounded by the inability of infants to provide informed consent or assent and the reliance on obtaining surrogate consent from parents who may themselves be vulnerable and overwhelmed by their infant's illness and the amount of information provided to them. In this review, we discuss the evolution of ethical regulations related to research, the justification for research in infants, and some of the ethical nuances of research in this population.

Challenges of a simplified opt-out consent process in a neonatal randomised controlled trial: qualitative study of parents' and health professionals' views and experiences

BACKGROUND

More effective recruitment strategies like alternative approaches to consent are needed to facilitate adequately powered trials. Witholding Enteral feeds Around Transfusion was a multicentre, randomised, pilot trial that compared withholding and continuing feeds around transfusion. The primary clinical outcome was necrotising enterocolitis. The trial used simplified opt-out consent with concise parent information and no consent form.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the views and experiences of parents and health professionals on the acceptability and feasibility of opt-out consent in randomised comparative effectiveness trials.

METHODS

A qualitative, descriptive interview-based study nested within a randomised trial. Semistructured interview transcripts were analysed using inductive thematic analysis.

SETTING

Eleven neonatal units in England.

PARTICIPANTS

Eleven parents and ten health professionals with experience of simplified consent.

RESULTS

Five themes emerged: 'opt-out consent operationalised as verbal opt-in consent', 'opt-out consent normalises participation while preserving parental choice', 'opt-out consent as an ongoing process of informed choice', 'consent without a consent form' and 'choosing to opt out of a comparative effectiveness trial', with two subthemes: 'wanting "normal care"' and 'a belief that feeding is better'.

CONCLUSION

Introducing a novel form of consent proved challenging in practice. The principle of a simplified, opt-out approach to consent was generally considered feasible and acceptable by health professionals for a neonatal comparative effectiveness trial. The priority for parents was having the right to decide about trial participation, and they did not see opt-out consent as undermining this. Describing a study as 'opt-out' can help to normalise participation and emphasise that parents can withdraw consent.