Paediatric strategy forum for medicinal product development of PI3-K, mTOR, AKT and GSK3ß inhibitors in children and adolescents with cancer.

Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3-K) signalling pathway is a crucial path in cancer for cell survival and thus represents an intriguing target for new paediatric anti-cancer drugs. However, the unique clinical toxicities of targeting this pathway (resulting in hyperglycaemia) difficulties combining with chemotherapy, rarity of mutations in childhood tumours and concomitant mutations have resulted in major barriers to clinical translation of these inhibitors in treating both adults and children. Mutations in PIK3CA predict response to PI3-K inhibitors in adult cancers. The same mutations occur in children as in adults, but they are significantly less frequent in paediatrics. In children, high-grade gliomas, especially diffuse midline gliomas (DMG), have the highest incidence of PIK3CA mutations. New mutation-specific PI3-K inhibitors reduce toxicity from on-target PI3-Kα wild-type activity. The mTOR inhibitor everolimus is approved for subependymal giant cell astrocytomas. In paediatric cancers, mTOR inhibitors have been predominantly evaluated by academia, without an overall strategy, in empiric, mutation-agnostic clinical trials with very low response rates to monotherapy. Therefore, future trials of single agent or combination strategies of mTOR inhibitors in childhood cancer should be supported by very strong biological rationale and preclinical data. Further preclinical evaluation of glycogen synthase kinase-3 beta inhibitors is required. Similarly, even where there is an AKT mutation (∼0.1 %), the role of AKT inhibitors in paediatric cancers remains unclear. Patient advocates strongly urged analysing and conserving data from every child participating in a clinical trial. A priority is to evaluate mutation-specific, central nervous system-penetrant PI3-K inhibitors in children with DMG in a rational biological combination. The choice of combination, should be based on the genomic landscape e.g. PTEN loss and resistance mechanisms supported by preclinical data. However, in view of the very rare populations involved, innovative regulatory approaches are needed to generate data for an indication.

The Virtual Child.

SUMMARY: We are building the world's first Virtual Child-a computer model of normal and cancerous human development at the level of each individual cell. The Virtual Child will "develop cancer" that we will subject to unlimited virtual clinical trials that pinpoint, predict, and prioritize potential new treatments, bringing forward the day when no child dies of cancer, giving each one the opportunity to lead a full and healthy life.

Advancing childhood cancer research through young investigator and advocate collaboration.

Cancer advocates and researchers share the same goal of driving science forward to create new therapies to cure more patients. The power of combining cancer researchers and advocates has become of increased importance due to their complementary expertise. Therefore, advocacy is a critical component of grant structures and has become embedded into the Stand Up 2 Cancer (SU2C) applications. To date, the optimal way to combine these skillsets and experiences to benefit the cancer community is currently unknown. The Saint Baldrick's Foundation (SBF)-SU2C now called St. Baldrick's Empowering Pediatric Immunotherapies for Childhood Cancer (EPICC) Team is comprised of a collaborative network across nine institutions in the United States and Canada. Since SU2C encourages incorporating advocacy into the team structure, we have assembled a diverse team of advocates and scientists by nominating a young investigator (YI) and advocate from each site. In order to further bridge this interaction beyond virtual monthly and yearly in person meetings, we have developed a questionnaire and conducted interviews. The questionnaire is focused on understanding each member's experience at the intersection between science/advocacy, comparing to previous experiences, providing advice on incorporating advocacy into team science and discussing how we can build on our work. Through creating a YI and advocate infrastructure, we have cultivated a supportive environment for meaningful conversation that impacts the entire research team. We see this as a model for team science by combining expertise to drive innovation forward and positively impact pediatric cancer patients, and perhaps those with adult malignancies. Significance: Questionnaire results show both advocates and YI's see this structure to be valuable and beneficial. YI's communicated their research to a non-scientific audience and learned advocate's experience. This was their first advocacy experience for most YIs. Advocates learned more about the research being conducted to provide hope. They can also aid with fundraising, publicity and lobbying. This collaboration improves science communication, designing patient-friendly clinical trials and sharing experience across institutions.