The influence of the European paediatric regulation on marketing authorisation of orphan drugs for children

Profiling gene expression dynamics underpinning conventional testing approaches to better inform pre-clinical evaluation of an age appropriate spironolactone formulation

There is a need to accelerate paediatric formulation evaluation and enhance quality of early stage data in drug development to alleviate the information pinch point present between formulation development and clinical evaluation. This present work reports application of DNA microarrays as a high throughput screening tool identifying markers for prediction of bioavailability and formulation driven physiological responses. With a focus on enhancing paediatric medicine provision, an oral liquid spironolactone suspension was formulated addressing a paediatric target product profile. Caco-2 cells cultured on transwell inserts were implemented in transport assays in vitro and DNA microarrays were used to examine gene expression modulation. Wistar rats were used to derive in vivo bioavailability data. In vitro, genomic, and in vivo data sets were concurrently evaluated linking drug transport and the genomic fingerprint generated by spironolactone formulation exposure. Significant changes in gene expression are reported as a result of formulation exposure. These include genes coding for ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters, solute carrier (SLC) transporters, cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes, and carboxylesterase enzymes. Genomic findings better inform pre-clinical understanding of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic responses to spironolactone and its active metabolites than current in vitro drug transport assays alone.

Orphan Medicines for Pediatric Use: A Focus on the European Union

PURPOSE

European policy makers have provided a number of incentives for the development of medicines for orphan diseases as early as 1999 through the Orphan Regulation and created obligations for medicines developers to investigate their products in children through the Paediatric Regulation adopted in 2006. This article describes the challenges that developers of orphan medicines are facing with pediatric indications, discusses the interplay between the Orphan Regulation and the Paediatric Regulation, and provides some recommendations on how to optimize drug development under the current European Union regulatory framework.

METHODS

This article discusses the European Union's Orphan Regulation, Paediatric Regulation, and the implications of the intersection of the regulations on the development of orphan medicines for pediatric use.

FINDINGS

Although these regulations have been successful in meeting their objectives separately, different regulatory frameworks entail separate governance, multiple assessments, varying approaches and priorities to unmet medical needs, and joined-up regulatory process coordination. Better integration of regulatory pathways would therefore be helpful in stimulating more global drug development of pediatric orphan medicines, including optimizing the interaction between both regulations, using innovative drug development approaches while considering alternatives to randomized clinical trials, better identification and prioritization of unmet medical needs in pediatrics, and ensuring the alignment of regulatory processes.

IMPLICATIONS

Rare diseases are categorized as "orphan diseases" because their occurrence in a small number of patients means that, regardless of the apparent high unmet medical need, there is limited public and market interest to justify the high development risk and significant investment to develop new treatments. However, unexplored potential within the area, as well as a conducive regulatory environment, can further support the development of medicines to treat rare diseases, including for children.

More medicines for children: impact of the EU paediatric regulation

INTRODUCTION

This paper focuses on the authorisation of new medicines, new indications and new pharmaceutical forms or strengths for use in children and also on the availability of paediatric information in the product information of centrally authorised medicinal products following the enforcement of the Paediatric Regulation on 26 January 2007.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether the Paediatric Regulation has led to more medicines available for children in the European Union (EU) and if more information on paediatric use is now available in the product information of medicines authorised via the centralised procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analysed the centrally authorised medicinal products in the EU that had an approval for an initial marketing authorisation, a type II variation, or a line extension during the years 2004-2006 and 2012-2014. Medicinal products not subjected to the obligations of the Paediatric Regulation were excluded.

RESULTS

In 2004-2006, 20 new medicines and 10 new indications were centrally authorised for paediatric use compared with 26 new medicines and 37 new indications in 2012-2014. The number of medicines with a new pharmaceutical form or strength for use in children was eight in 2004-2006 and seven in 2012-2014. There was a huge increase in the number of products with changes of paediatric relevance in the summary of product characteristics in 2012-2014 compared with 2004-2006.

CONCLUSIONS

The entry into force of the Paediatric Regulation has had a positive impact on paediatric drug development with more medicines available for children in the EU and substantially more information available for clinicians on paediatric use in the product information.

Comparative analysis of the scope of European Union paediatric investigation plans with corresponding orphan designations

BACKGROUND

Market forces may not be sufficient to stimulate research and development of medicines for small patient populations, such as children and patients with rare diseases. Both the European Union Orphan and Paediatric Regulations were introduced to address the unmet public health needs of these smaller patient populations through the use of incentives, rewards and obligations. Developers for new medicines for rare diseases must agree a paediatric investigation plan (PIP) or waiver with the European Medicines Agency's (EMA) Paediatric Committee (PDCO), and can also apply for an orphan designation (OD) from the EMA's Committee of Orphan Medicinal Products (COMP). The scope of both the OD and the PIP (or waiver) is defined by the agreed condition.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to analyse the approach of PDCO and COMP in defining the appropriate condition for a PIP or OD, respectively, in order to investigate potential challenges in the paediatric development of orphan medicines which have to meet the requirements of both legislations.

METHODS

A comparative analysis of PIP conditions and OD conditions was performed for medicines that have been reviewed by both Committees.

RESULTS

We found that in the substantial majority of cases there is no divergence between the conclusions of COMP and PDCO with regard to the condition for which a medicine is to be developed.

CONCLUSION

These findings demonstrate that a collaborative approach allows both Regulations to work synergistically to foster pharmaceutical development for rare diseases in childhood.

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.

Dealing with Uncertainty and Accounting for Social Value Judgments in Assessments of Orphan Drugs: Evidence from Four European Countries

OBJECTIVES

To better understand the reasons for differences in reimbursement decisions for orphan drugs in four European countries that were not readily apparent from health technology assessment (HTA) reports and operating procedures.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews with representatives of HTA bodies in England, Scotland, Sweden, and France were conducted. An interview topic guide was developed on the basis of findings from a systematic comparison of HTA decisions for 10 orphan drugs. Qualitative thematic data analysis was applied to the interview transcripts using the framework approach.

RESULTS

Eight representatives from the four HTA bodies were interviewed between March and June 2015. Evidentiary requirements and approaches to dealing with imperfect or incomplete evidence were explored, including trial design and duration, study population and subgroups, comparators, and end points. Interviewees agreed that decisions regarding orphan drugs are made in a context of lower quality evidence, and the threshold of acceptable uncertainty varied by country. Some countries imposed higher evidentiary standards for greater clinical claims, which may be more challenging for orphan diseases. The acceptability of surrogate end points was not consistent across countries nor were the validation requirements. The most common social value judgments identified related to innovation, disease severity, and unmet need. Differences were seen in the way these concepts were defined and accounted for across countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Although agreement was seen in evidentiary requirements or preferences, there were subtle differences in the circumstances in which uncertain evidence may be considered acceptable, possibly explaining differences in HTA recommendations across countries.

Moving toward a paradigm shift in the regulatory requirements for pediatric medicines

Over the past two decades, there has been growing concern over the lack of proper medication for children. This review attempts to evaluate the current progress of EU Pediatric Regulation made since 2007. The lack of properly evaluated pediatric medication has for long been a source of concern in the European Union. The drugs that were used in the past were often not properly evaluated, and dosage was arbitrarily calculated. Therefore, it was necessary to establish the Pediatric Regulation (EC no. 1901/2006) in the EU which would mandate research for pediatric drugs. Current legislations in place not only require mandatory research by pharma industry but also have guidelines to direct the quality of pediatric research performed. The main aim of this regulation was to advance high-quality research and development of pediatric drugs, thereby increasing the availability of safe and effective drugs for children. It also aimed to improve the information available on existing pediatric drugs. It has been 9 years since the pediatric regulation was framed. The pharma industry now sees pediatric research as an integral process of development. Drug companies which develop plans for a new drug, new form of drug, new indication, or new route of administration for adults are obliged to integrate in their development plan similar research for pediatric populations as well.

CONCLUSION

It is hoped that the implementation of the current legislation will be reflected better in the future by the marketing of better and safer drugs for the pediatric population. The upcoming assessment to the European Commission in 2017 will further inform us on the impact after 10 years implementation of the legislation. What is Known: • The lack of properly evaluated pediatric medication has for long been a source of concern in the European Union. • Therefore, it was necessary to establish the EU Pediatric Regulation which would mandate research for pediatric drugs. What is New: • It has been 9 years since the pediatric regulation was framed, and the teething problems are slowly being overcome and the regulation is being used with increasing confidence. • As the Regulation is due for revision in 2017, this paper gives a current perspective on the impact of the regulation on availability and access to medicine for children.

Pharmacological Management of Childhood-Onset Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a rare, severe, multisystem autoimmune disorder. Childhood-onset SLE (cSLE) follows a more aggressive course with greater associated morbidity and mortality than adult-onset SLE. Its aetiology is yet to be fully elucidated. It is recognised to be the archetypal systemic autoimmune disease, arising from a complex interaction between the innate and adaptive immune systems. Its complexity is reflected by the fact that there has been only one new drug licensed for use in SLE in the last 50 years. However, biologic agents that specifically target aspects of the immune system are emerging. Immunosuppression remains the cornerstone of medical management, with glucocorticoids still playing a leading role. Treatment choices are led by disease severity. Immunosuppressants, including azathioprine and methotrexate, are used in mild to moderate manifestations. Mycophenolate mofetil is widely used for lupus nephritis. Cyclophosphamide remains the first-line treatment for patients with severe organ disease. No biologic therapies have yet been approved for cSLE, although they are being used increasingly as part of routine care of patients with severe lupus nephritis or with neurological and/or haematological involvement. Drugs influencing B cell survival, including belimumab and rituximab, are currently undergoing clinical trials in cSLE. Hydroxychloroquine is indicated for disease manifestations of all severities and can be used as monotherapy in mild disease. However, the management of cSLE is hampered by the lack of a robust evidence base. To date, it has been principally guided by best-practice guidelines, retrospective case series and adapted adult protocols. In this pharmacological review, we provide an overview of current practice for the management of cSLE, together with recent advances in new therapies, including biologic agents.