Pediatric cancer research: Surviving COVID-19.

A diverse panel of pediatric cancer advocates and experts, whose collective experience spans the continuum of international academic medicine, industry, government research, and cancer advocacy, recently discussed challenges for pediatric cancer research in the context of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Specifically, this special report addresses the following focus areas: (a) the critical role that translational research has played in transforming pediatric cancer outcomes; (b) the current and potential future impact of COVID-19 on pediatric cancer research; (c) target areas of COVID-19 research that may have application in immunity, oncogenesis, and therapeutic discovery; and (d) future considerations and directions in maintaining pediatric cancer research during and after COVID-19.

Changing incentives to ACCELERATE drug development for paediatric cancer.

BACKGROUND: More effective incentives are needed to motivate paediatric oncology drug development, uncoupling it from dependency on adult drug development. Although the current European and North-American legislations aim to promote drug development for paediatrics and rare diseases, children and adolescents with cancer have not benefited as expected from these initiatives and cancer remains the first cause of death by disease in children older than one. Drug development for childhood cancer remains dependent on adult cancer indications and their potential market. The balance between the investment needed to execute a Paediatric Investigation Plan (PIP) in Europe and an initial Paediatric Study Plan (iPSP) in the US, coupled with the potential financial reward has not been sufficiently attractive to incite the pharmaceutical industry to develop drugs for rare indications such as childhood cancer. METHODS: We propose changes in the timing and nature of the rewards within the European Paediatric Medicine Regulation (PMR) and Regulation on Orphan Medicinal Products (both currently under review), which would drive earlier initiation of paediatric oncology studies and provide incentives for drug development specifically for childhood indications. RESULTS: We suggest modifying the PMR to ensure mechanism-of-action driven mandatory PIP and reorganization of incentives to a stepwise and incremental approach. Interim and final deliverables should be defined within a PIP or iPSP, each attracting a reward on completion. A crucial change would be the introduction of the interim deliverable requiring production of paediatric data that inform the go/no-go decisions on whether to take a drug forward to paediatric efficacy trials. CONCLUSION: Additionally, to address the critical gap in the current framework where there is a complete lack of incentives to promote paediatric-specific cancer drug development, we propose the introduction of early rewards in the Orphan Regulation, with a variant on the US-Creating Hope Act and its priority review vouchers.

ACCELERATE - Five years accelerating cancer drug development for children and adolescents.

Rapid evaluation and subsequent regulatory approval of new drugs are critical to improving survival and reducing long-term side-effects for children and adolescents with cancer. The international multi-stakeholder organisation ACCELERATE was created to advance the timely investigation of new anti-cancer drugs. ACCELERATE has enhanced communication and understanding between academia, industry, patient advocates and regulators. It has promoted a mechanism-of-action driven drug development approach and developed Paediatric Strategy Forums. These initiatives have facilitated prioritisation of medicinal products and a focused and sequential strategy for drug development where there are multiple potential agents. ACCELERATE has championed the early assessment of promising drugs in adolescents through their inclusion in adult early phase trials. ACCELERATE has strongly supported alignment between the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration and identification of unmet medical needs through multi-stakeholder collaboration. Early engagement between all stakeholders in the development of new drugs is critical. Innovative clinical trial designs are required, necessitating early discussion with sponsors and regulators. Amplifying the patient advocate voice through inclusion across the drug development continuum will lead to better, patient-centric trials. By these means, children and adolescents with cancer can maximally and rapidly benefit from innovative products to improve outcomes and reduce burdensome sequelae.

Intercontinental collaboration in clinical trials for children and adolescents with cancer-A systematic review by ACCELERATE.

BACKGROUND: Since pediatric cancer drug development is a global enterprise, we sought to provide an overview of the landscape of intercontinental clinical trials in pediatric oncology opened over the last decade. METHODS: ClinicalTrials.gov was systematically searched to identify all clinical therapeutic trials which opened between 2010 and 2020 and recruited pediatric patients (<18 years) with cancer. RESULTS: Over the last 10 years, 295 (8.7%) of 3383 therapeutic pediatric cancer trials were international and 182 (5.4%) were intercontinental. Most intercontinental trials were phase-1 or 2, with 25% late-phase, 65% were sponsored by industry, and North America was involved in 92%. Industry-sponsored proportionally more phase-1 trials than academia (41% vs. 25%); conversely, academia sponsored more phase-2 and late-phase trials (39% and 31% vs. 36% and 21%, respectively) (p = 0.020). North America-Europe collaboration was predominantly industry sponsored as opposed to North America-Oceania and Europe-Oceania collaboration, more frequently academic (p < 0.0001). Most late-phase trials (18/20, 90%) focusing on pediatric malignancies were conducted by academic sponsors and 10 of these were conducted by Children's Oncology Group (COG)/National Cancer Institute in the United States and Oceania. There was no significant increase over time of intercontinental trials and a trend for a reduction in academic trials. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the relative rarity of childhood malignancies, especially within molecular subtypes, only 5.4% of pediatric cancer trials were intercontinental. The number of intercontinental trials remains small, with no significant increase over the last decade. The ACCELERATE International Collaboration Working Group aims to identify existing hurdles and propose solutions to improve intercontinental collaboration in clinical research for the benefit of children and adolescents with cancer.