A Study of Regulatory Challenges of Pediatric Oncology Phase I/II Trial Submissions and Guidance on Protocol Development.

The purpose of this study was to identify key deficiencies in pediatric oncology early phase clinical trial protocols in Germany and to provide guidance for efficient trial protocol development. A systematic review of the response letters of German competent authorities (CAs) and Ethics Committees to phase I/II pediatric oncology trial submissions in the period from 2014 to 2019 was performed. Documents were requested from all five Society for Paediatric Oncology and Haematology in Germany (GPOH) phase I/II trial networks plus all nine German Innovative Therapies for Children with Consortium Cancer (ITCC) centers. A blinded dataset containing aggregated data from 33 studies was analyzed for validation. All deficiencies were reviewed, listed, and weighted using a structured matrix according to frequency, category, significance, and feasibility. In total, documents of 17 trials from 6 different sites were collected. Two hundred fifty deficiencies identified by the CAs were identified and categorized into eight categories. "Toxicity and safety" was the most prominent category (27.6%), followed by "Manufacturing and Import" (18%). The majority of deficiencies were categorized as minor and potential measures as easy to address, but an important group of major and difficult to implement deficiencies was also identified. The blinded validation dataset confirmed these findings. The majority of the EC deficiencies could be resolved by changing the wording in the patient-facing documents. In conclusion, this study was able to detect a pattern of key deficiencies. Most of the shortcomings can be anticipated by minor changes in the protocol and increased awareness can prevent time-consuming revisions, withdrawals, or even rejections. A corresponding guideline describing key regulatory aspects is provided.

New paradigm for expediting drug development in Asia.

Some Asian regulators currently require Phase I data in Asians before joining global Phase II/III trials. Here, we discuss inherent limitations of Phase I ethnic sensitivity studies (ESS) to identify potential interethnic differences. We review recent new drug applications (NDAs) for Japan and China to critically assess the value of separate ESSs in Asian populations. Given that the observed value of ESS was limited, we propose a new global drug development paradigm: if relevant safety, pharmacokinetic (PK), and pharmacogenetic (PG) data are available from the original Phase I study population, it might be possible to extrapolate those data to Asian populations for their inclusion in Phase II/III trials, without an ESS. This could help to streamline drug development in Asia while still addressing regulatory requirements.

A Tool for Predicting Regulatory Approval After Phase II Testing of New Oncology Compounds.

We developed an algorithm (ANDI) for predicting regulatory marketing approval for new cancer drugs after phase II testing has been conducted, with the objective of providing a tool to improve drug portfolio decision-making. We examined 98 oncology drugs from the top 50 pharmaceutical companies (2006 sales) that first entered clinical development from 1999 to 2007, had been taken to at least phase II development, and had a known final outcome (research abandonment or regulatory marketing approval). Data on safety, efficacy, operational, market, and company characteristics were obtained from public sources. Logistic regression and machine-learning methods were used to provide an unbiased approach to assess overall predictability and to identify the most important individual predictors. We found that a simple four-factor model (activity, number of patients in the pivotal phase II trial, phase II duration, and a prevalence-related measure) had high sensitivity and specificity for predicting regulatory marketing approval.

Potential factors correlating to the PMDA's decision to waive Japanese Phase 2 and 3 studies for oncology drugs New Drug Application in Japan.

Current status of oncology drugs approved in Japan without supporting Japanese Phase 2 and 3 clinical trial (J-P2/3) data and potential factors correlating to the decision of Japanese health agency Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) to waive J-P2/3 data were investigated. Approximately 15 % of 61 investigated recently-approved oncology drugs were granted a J-P2/3 waiver. Drugs that were designated as Fast Track in the United States tended to be granted a J-P2/3 waiver. The orphan drug designation in Japan was also suggested to be correlated with the decision of J-P2/3 waiver, even though the trend was not significant. Specific factors related to the clinical importance, such as the designation of US Fast Track status, may have a correlation with the likelihood of J-P2/3 waiver, suggesting that the clinical importance of the drug is common in both countries. If the key criteria used to determine the waiving of Japanese clinical trial data were clearly disclosed by the regulatory agency, the development of some clinically important oncology drugs could be further expedited.

Early phase clinical trials in pediatric hematology and oncology.

Pediatric oncology is an unrivaled success story in the recent history of medicine. This success is mostly based on a persistent refinement of evidence based therapeutic concepts. With that regard physicians and their staff are highly experience in the conduct of prospective evidence based trials and are therefore competent partners for the pharmaceutical industry. In times of personalized medicine the individual target population is diminishing and the borders of indications are not more disease based. A situation that requires new concepts from the industry. Therefore children with cancer could benefit early from the current developments as well as the pharmaceutical industry could benefit from the legislative incentives through highly recruiting and well conducted prospective trials. Pivotal is a functional platform of communication in order to maintain a close dialogue between academia and pharmaceutical companies.

[Ethical and legal aspects of including patients unable to consent in acute therapy studies. Example of a medication study for the treatment of intracerebral hemorrhage--the Heidelberg procedure]. / Ethische und juristische Aspekte beim Einschluss nicht einwilligungsfähiger Patienten in Akuttherapie-Studien. Beispiel einer Arzneimittelstudie zur Behandlung intrazerebraler Blutungen--das Heidelberger Verfahren.

Clinical trials in patients who cannot sign an informed consent are only possible under certain circumstances. The present paper explains the legal prerequisites and ethic rationales, which may allow including patients in such a trial without having signed informed consent. Translation of these prerequisites into practice needs the implementation of special inclusion procedures. These procedures will be explained using the example of the recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) trials for intracerebral hemorrhage.

Cancer trial enrollment after state-mandated reimbursement.

BACKGROUND: Recruitment of patients into cancer research studies is exceedingly difficult, particularly for early phase trials. Payer reimbursement policies are a frequently cited barrier. We examined whether state policies that ensure coverage of routine medical care costs for cancer trial participants are associated with an increase in clinical trial enrollment. METHODS: We used logistic Poisson regressions to analyze enrollment in National Cancer Institute phase II and phase III Clinical Trials Cooperative Group trials and compared changes in trial enrollment rates between 1996 and 2001 of privately insured cancer patients who resided in the four states that enacted coverage policies in 1999 with enrollment rates in states without such policies. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Trial enrollment rates increased in the coverage and noncoverage states by 24.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 22.8% to 27.0%) and 28.8% (95% CI = 27.7% to 29.8%) per year, respectively, from 1996 through 2001. After implementation of the coverage policies in 1999 in four states, there was a 21.7% (95% CI = 3.8% to 42.6%) annual increase in phase II trial enrollment in coverage states, compared with a 15.6% (95% CI = 8.8% to 21.8%) annual decrease in noncoverage states (P<.001). After accounting for secular trend, cancer type, and race in multivariable analyses, the odds ratio (OR) for a phase II trial participant residing in a coverage versus a noncoverage state after 1999 was 1.59 per year (95% CI = 1.22 to 2.07; P =.001). In a multivariable analysis of phase III trial participation, there was a decrease in the odds of residing in a coverage state after 1999 (OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.84 to 0.98; P =.011). CONCLUSION: State coverage policies were associated with a statistically significant increase in phase II cancer trial participation and did not increase phase III cancer trial enrollment.

Regulatory reforms and GCP clinical trials with new drugs in India.

Current Indian drug regulations do not allow for toxicology testing and clinical trials in India with compounds or molecules discovered abroad, except for treatments of tropical, cancer and cardiovascular diseases as part of global studies. The number of GCP Phase II/III trials by foreign sponsors has increased dramatically since 1995, attesting to the potential of India for lower cost trials and reduction in drug development costs and time, due to rapid patient recruitment. However, there have been problems with regard to intellectual property protection and adherence to informed consent guidelines. Starting in 2005, a series of regulatory reforms and patent protection will be instituted that are designed to address many of these concerns; the nature of these reforms are presented and discussed. However, sponsors need to pay close attention to informed consent and other ethical issues in Indian trials, which enroll mainly poor and uneducated patients.

Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS); methodology for coverage of phase II and phase III clinical trials sponsored by the National Institutes of Health. Office of the Secretary; DoD. Final rule.

This final rule allows the Department of Defense to waive normal requirements so that covered beneficiaries can participate in Phase II and Phase III clinical trials sponsored or approved by the National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute (NIH NCI). This waiver authority is expected to promote beneficiary access to promising new treatments and contribute to the development of such treatments.