scholarly journals Methods Used for Pediatric Dose Selection in Drug Development Programs Submitted to the US FDA 2012‐2020

2021 ◽  
Vol 61 (S1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis G. Green ◽  
Kyunghun Park ◽  
Gilbert J. Burckart

2021 ◽  
Vol 61 (S1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jian Wang ◽  
John N. den Anker ◽  
Gilbert J. Burckart




Pharmaceutics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. 685 ◽  
Author(s):  
John N. Van den Anker ◽  
Susan McCune ◽  
Pieter Annaert ◽  
Gerri R. Baer ◽  
Yeruk Mulugeta ◽  
...  

Drug dosing in neonates should be based on integrated knowledge concerning the disease to be treated, the physiological characteristics of the neonate, and the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of a given drug. It is critically important that all sources of information be leveraged to optimize dose selection for neonates. Sources may include data from adult studies, pediatric studies, non-clinical (juvenile) animal models, in vitro studies, and in silico models. Depending on the drug development program, each of these modalities could be used to varying degrees and with varying levels of confidence to guide dosing. This paper aims to illustrate the variability between neonatal drug development programs for neonatal diseases that are similar to those seen in other populations (meropenem), neonatal diseases related but not similar to pediatric or adult populations (clopidogrel, thyroid hormone), and diseases unique to neonates (caffeine, surfactant). Extrapolation of efficacy from older children or adults to neonates is infrequently used. Even if a disease process is similar between neonates and children or adults, such as with anti-infectives, additional dosing and safety information will be necessary for labeling, recognizing that dosing in neonates is confounded by maturational PK in addition to body size.



Author(s):  
Richard N. Spivey ◽  
Judith K. Jones ◽  
William Wardell ◽  
William W. Vodra


2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (12) ◽  
pp. 4334-4338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehul U. Mehta ◽  
Ramana S. Uppoor ◽  
Dale P Conner ◽  
Paul Seo ◽  
Jayabharathi Vaidyanathan ◽  
...  


Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 1219
Author(s):  
Philip S. Bernard ◽  
Whitney Wooderchak-Donahue ◽  
Mei Wei ◽  
Steven M. Bray ◽  
Kevin C. Wood ◽  
...  

Patients with breast cancer often receive many drugs to manage the cancer, side effects associated with cancer treatment, and co-morbidities (i.e., polypharmacy). Drug–drug and drug–gene interactions contribute to the risk of adverse events (AEs), which could lead to non-adherence and reduced efficacy. Here we investigated several well-characterized inherited (germline) pharmacogenetic (PGx) targets in 225 patients with breast cancer. All relevant clinical, pharmaceutical, and PGx diplotype data were aggregated into a single unifying informatics platform to enable an exploratory analysis of the cohort and to evaluate pharmacy ordering patterns. Of the drugs recorded, there were 38 for which high levels of evidence for clinical actionability with PGx was available from the US FDA and/or the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC). These data were associated with 10 pharmacogenes: DPYD, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6, CYP3A5, CYP4F2, G6PD, MT-RNR1, SLCO1B1, and VKORC1. All patients were taking at least one of the 38 drugs and had inherited at least one actionable PGx variant that would have informed prescribing decisions if this information had been available pre-emptively. The non-cancer drugs with PGx implications that were common (prescribed to at least one-third of patients) included anti-depressants, anti-infectives, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and proton pump inhibitors. Based on these results, we conclude that pre-emptive PGx testing may benefit patients with breast cancer by informing drug and dose selection to maximize efficacy and minimize AEs.



Author(s):  
Richard N Spivey ◽  
Judith K Jones ◽  
William Wardell ◽  
William Vodra


2021 ◽  
Vol 61 (S1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara Kim ◽  
Kyunghun Park ◽  
Ann W. McMahon ◽  
Francis G. Green ◽  
Dionna J. Green ◽  
...  


2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. e810-e817 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth A. Kern

Breakthrough therapy designation (BTD) is a new approach created by the US Congress and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as part of the FDA Innovation and Safety Act of 2012 to expedite the drug development process for serious illness, including cancer. By law, to qualify for BTD, a new molecular entity must demonstrate substantial clinical improvement over existing therapies. Although the administrative requirements for granting BTD have been made available by the FDA, the actual trial designs, end points, and quantitative therapeutic thresholds involved in the granting process have not been made public. This literature review evaluates nine oncology new molecular entities granted BTD involved in 10 accelerated approvals and summarizes the key factors in clinical trial design leading to successful BTD applications. This information can be used by oncology research teams to set goals for BTD when developing clinical trial designs and thresholds in expedited drug development programs.



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document