Developments in the Design, Conduct, and Reporting of Child Health Trials.

To identify priority areas to improve the design, conduct, and reporting of pediatric clinical trials, the international expert network, Standards for Research (StaR) in Child Health, was assembled and published the first 6 Standards in Pediatrics in 2012. After a recent review summarizing the 247 publications by StaR Child Health authors that highlight research practices that add value and reduce research "waste," the current review assesses the progress in key child health trial methods areas: consent and recruitment, containing risk of bias, roles of data monitoring committees, appropriate sample size calculations, outcome selection and measurement, and age groups for pediatric trials. Although meaningful change has occurred within the child health research ecosystem, measurable progress is still disappointingly slow. In this context, we identify and review emerging trends that will advance the agenda of increased clinical usefulness of pediatric trials, including patient and public engagement, Bayesian statistical approaches, adaptive designs, and platform trials. We explore how implementation science approaches could be applied to effect measurable improvements in the design, conducted, and reporting of child health research.

Medical cannabis for children: Evidence and recommendations.

Interest in using cannabis products for a medical purpose in children under the age of 18 years is increasing. There are many medical cannabis products available that can include cannabidiol (CBD) or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), or both. Despite many therapeutic claims, there are few rigorous studies to inform the dosing, safety, and efficacy of medical cannabis in paediatric clinical practice. This statement reviews the current evidence and provides recommendations for using medical cannabis in children. Longer-term (2-year) reports support the sustained tolerability and efficacy of cannabidiol therapy for patients with Lennox-Gastaut and Dravet syndromes. CBD-enriched cannabis extracts containing small amounts of THC have been evaluated in a small number of paediatric patients, and further research is needed to inform clinical practice guidelines. Given the widespread use of medical cannabis in Canada, paediatricians should be prepared to engage in open, ongoing discussions with families about its potential benefits and risks, and develop individualized plans that monitor efficacy, reduce harms, and mitigate drug-drug interactions.

Les données probantes et les recommandations sur le cannabis à des fins médicales chez les enfants.

L'intérêt envers l'utilisation des produits du cannabis à des fins médicales chez les enfants de moins de 18 ans augmente. De nombreux produits du cannabis à des fins médicales contiennent du cannabidiol, du delta-9-tétrahydrocannabinol ou ces deux produits. Malgré les nombreuses prétentions thérapeutiques, peu d'études rigoureuses guident la posologie, l'innocuité et l'efficacité du cannabis à des fins médicales en pédiatrie clinique. Le présent document de principes passe en revue les données probantes à jour et expose les recommandations sur l'utilisation du cannabis à des fins médicales chez les enfants. Les rapports à plus long terme (deux ans) souscrivent à la tolérabilité et à l'efficacité soutenues d'un traitement au cannabidiol chez les patients ayant le syndrome de Lennox-Gastaut ou le syndrome de Dravet. Les extraits de cannabis enrichis de cannabidiol qui renferment de petites quantités de delta-9-tétrahydrocannabinol ont été évalués auprès d'un petit nombre de patients d'âge pédiatrique, et d'autres recherches devront être réalisées pour éclairer les guides de pratique clinique. Étant donné l'utilisation répandue du cannabis à des fins médicales au Canada, les pédiatres devraient être prêts à participer à des échanges ouverts et continus avec les familles au sujet de ses avantages potentiels et de ses risques, ainsi qu'à préparer des plans individuels en vue d'en surveiller l'efficacité, de réduire les méfaits et de limiter les interactions médicamenteuses.

The use of prescription medications and non-prescription medications during lactation in a prospective Canadian cohort study.

BACKGROUND: A lack of safety data on postpartum medication use presents a potential barrier to breastfeeding and may result in infant exposure to medications in breastmilk. The type and extent of medication use by lactating women requires investigation. METHODS: Data were collected from the CHILD Cohort Study which enrolled pregnant women across Canada between 2008 and 2012. Participants completed questionnaires regarding medications and non-prescription medications used and breastfeeding status at 3, 6 and 12 months postpartum. Medications, along with self-reported reasons for medication use, were categorized by ontologies [hierarchical controlled vocabulary] as part of a large-scale curation effort to enable more robust investigations of reasons for medication use. RESULTS: A total of 3542 mother-infant dyads were recruited to the CHILD study. Breastfeeding rates were 87.4%, 75.3%, 45.5% at 3, 6 and 12 months respectively. About 40% of women who were breastfeeding at 3 months used at least one prescription medication during the first three months postpartum; this proportion decreased over time to 29.5% % at 6 months and 32.8% at 12 months. The most commonly used prescription medication by breastfeeding women was domperidone at 3 months (9.0%, n = 229/2540) and 6 months (5.6%, n = 109/1948), and norethisterone at 12 months (4.1%, n = 48/1180). The vast majority of domperidone use by breastfeeding women (97.3%) was for lactation purposes which is off-label (signifying unapproved use of an approved medication). Non-prescription medications were more often used among breastfeeding than non-breastfeeding women (67.6% versus 48.9% at 3 months, p < 0.0001), The most commonly used non-prescription medications were multivitamins and Vitamin D at 3, 6 and 12 months postpartum. CONCLUSIONS: In Canada, medication use is common postpartum; 40% of breastfeeding women use prescription medications in the first 3 months postpartum. A diverse range of medications were used, with many women taking more than one prescription and non-prescription medicines. The most commonly used prescription medication by breastfeeding women were domperidone for off-label lactation support, signalling a need for more data on the efficacy of domperidone for this indication. This data should inform research priorities and communication strategies developed to optimize care during lactation.

Removing barriers to accessing medical cannabis for paediatric patients.

Medical cannabis (MC) may offer therapeutic benefits for children with complex neurological conditions and chronic diseases. In Canada, parents, and caregivers frequently report encountering barriers when accessing MC for their children. These include negative preconceived notions about risks and benefits, challenges connecting with a knowledgeable healthcare provider (HCP), the high cost of MC products, and navigating MC product shortages. In this manuscript, we explore several of these barriers and provide recommendations to decision-makers to enable a family-centered and evidence-based approach to MC medicine and research for children.

Co-designing clinical trials alongside youth with chronic pain.

Youth have a right to participate in research that will inform the care that they receive. Engagement with children and young people has been shown to improve rates of enrollment and retention in clinical trials as well as reduce research waste. The aim of the study is to gain practical insight on the design of trials specifically on (1) recruitment and retention preferences, (2) potential barriers to research, and (3) study design optimization. Based on this youth engagement, we will co-design two clinical trials in headaches with youth. Two recruitment strategies were used to recruit 16 youth from across Canada (aged 15-18 years) from an existing youth group, the KidsCan Young Persons' Research Advisory Group (YPRAG) and a new youth group in collaboration with Solutions for Kids in Pain (SKIP). Four virtual, semi-structured discussion groups were held between April and December 2020, which included pre-circulated materials and utilized two distinct upcoming planned trials as examples for specific methods feedback. Individual engagement evaluations were completed following the final group session using the Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool. Descriptive results were shared with participants prior to publication to ensure appropriate interpretation. The discussion was centred around three themes: recruitment and retention preferences, potential barriers to participation, and study design optimization. Youth indicated that they would prefer to be contacted for a potential study directly by their physician (not over social media), that they would like to develop rapport with study staff, and that one of the barriers to participation is the time commitment. The youth also provided feedback on the design of the clinical trial including outcome measurement tools, data collection, and engagement methods. Feedback on the virtual format of the engagement events indicated that participants appreciated the ease of the online discussion and that the open-ended discussion allowed for easy exchange of ideas. They felt that despite a gender imbalance (towards females) it was an overall inclusive environment. All participants reported believing that their engagement will make a difference to the work of the research team in designing the clinical trials. Perspectives from a diverse group of youth meaningfully improved the design and conduct of two clinical trials for headaches in children. This study provides a framework for future researchers to engage youth in the co-design of clinical trials using online engagement sessions.

Prioritising research funding for cardiovascular disease and diabetes in Australia.

The Targeted Translation Research Accelerator program was created to address cardiovascular disease and diabetes in Australia. To maximise the impact of the considerable investment in this program, a structured prioritisation project was undertaken to determine the highest priority health and medical unmet needs in cardiovascular disease and diabetes. The project was led by Monash University's Behaviour Works Australia in collaboration with Australian National University, Research Australia, and MTPConnect. We conducted an online survey with 318 experts and community representatives to generate a 'long list' of unmet needs for (1) cardiovascular disease; (2) diabetes; and (3) interactions in the pathogenesis of Type 1 diabetes, Type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. We then convened roundtables of clinical, research, and community leaders to discuss survey results. They prioritised unmet needs against six predefined criteria then discussed results. We present the final priority areas for funding. We demonstrate how a feasible, reproducible, and collaborative prioritisation methodology can be used when designing research funding programs. Such approaches can ensure that funding is directed towards projects that are valuable to the community and reflective of expert opinion.

Protocol for a randomized control trial of the Building Regulation in Dual Generations Program (BRIDGE): preventing the intergenerational transmission of mental illness in at-risk preschool children.

BACKGROUND: Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the worldwide prevalence of maternal depression has risen sharply; it is now estimated that one quarter of mothers experience clinically significant depression symptoms. Exposure to maternal depression during early childhood increases the risk for the development of childhood mental illness (MI) in offspring, with altered parenting practices mediating the association between maternal depression and child outcomes. Dual-generation interventions, which aim to simultaneously treat parent and child mental health, show promise for improving outcomes for mothers with depression and their young children. The Building Regulation in Dual Generations (BRIDGE) program combines Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) and parenting skills training to concurrently treat maternal depression and improve parenting practices. In pilot within-group studies, BRIDGE has led to large reductions in maternal depression and child MI symptoms. The aim of the current study is to evaluate the efficacy of BRIDGE in reducing maternal depression and child MI symptoms (primary outcomes) as well as parenting stress and harsh parenting (secondary outcomes). METHODS: A three-armed randomized control trial with equal group sizes will be conducted to compare the efficacy of (1) BRIDGE (DBT + parenting skills), (2) DBT skills training, and (3) services-as-usual. Participants (n = 180) will be mothers of 3- to 5-year-old children who report elevated depression symptoms. Those randomized to BRIDGE or DBT skills training will complete a 16-week group therapy intervention. Assessments will be administered at pre-intervention(T1) post-intervention (T2), and 6-month follow-up (T3). DISCUSSION: Dual-generation programs offer an innovative approach to prevent the intergenerational transmission of mental illness. The current study will add to the evidence base for BRIDGE by comparing it to a stand-alone mental health intervention and a services-as-usual group. These comparisons will provide valuable information on the relative efficacy of including parenting support in a mental health intervention for parents. The results will contribute to our understanding of how maternal depression affects children's development and how intervening at both a mental health and parenting level may affect child and family outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Name of registry: Clinical Trials Protocol Registration and Results System; trial registration number: NCT05959538; date of registry: July 24, 2023; available: https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT05959538.

Cannabinoids for symptom management in children with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread use of medical cannabis, little is known regarding the safety, efficacy, and dosing of cannabis products in children with cancer. The objective of this study was to systematically appraise the existing published literature for the use of cannabis products in children with cancer. METHODS: This systematic review, registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42020187433), searched four databases: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library. Abstracts and full texts were screened in duplicate. Data on types of cannabis products, doses, formulations, frequencies, routes of administration, indications, and clinical and demographic details as well as reported efficacy outcomes were extracted. Data on cannabinoid-related adverse events were also summarized. RESULTS: Out of 34,611 identified citations, 19 unique studies with a total of 1927 participants with cancer were included: eight retrospective chart reviews, seven randomized controlled trials, two open-label studies, and two case reports. The included studies reported the use of various cannabis products for the management of symptoms. Cannabinoids were commonly used for the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (11 of 19 [58%]). In controlled studies, somnolence, dizziness, dry mouth, and withdrawal due to adverse events were more commonly associated with the use of cannabinoids. Across all included studies, no serious cannabis-related adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is evidence to support the use of cannabis for symptom management, in children with cancer, there is a lack of rigorous evidence to inform the dosing, safety, and efficacy of cannabinoids. Because of the increasing interest in using cannabis, there is an urgent need for more research on medical cannabis in children with cancer.

Medical cannabis in schools: A qualitative study on the experiences of clinicians.

Objectives: Guidance is lacking for medical cannabis use in Canadian schools in both legislation and approach; the impact of ambiguous policy on patient care is unknown. A qualitative study was undertaken to explore the experiences of clinicians who care for school-aged children who take medical cannabis. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative content analysis performed using the Dedoose qualitative software ascribed meaning units and codes, which were further consolidated into categories and subcategories. Results: Thirteen physicians were interviewed virtually, representing seven provinces in Canada. The physicians provided care for between five and hundreds of school-aged children who took medical cannabis. The most common indications were refractory seizure disorders and autism. The interviews provided rich descriptions on perceptions of medical cannabis in schools, and in general. Five overarching categories were identified across both domains including variability, challenges (subcategories: lack of knowledge, stigma, lack of policy, and pragmatic challenges), potential solutions (subcategories: treat it like other medications, communication, education, and family support), positive experiences and improvements over time. Conclusion: In Canada, cannabis-based medicine use in schools still faces important challenges. Effective education, communication, family support and policy refinements that allow cannabis to be treated like other prescription medications are recommended to improve the status quo. These findings will guide the C4T Medical Cannabis in Schools Working Group's future priorities and initiatives.

Medical cannabis in schools: The experiences of caregivers.

Objectives: Implementing medical cannabis (MC) into a child's daily routine can be challenging and there is a lack of guidance for its therapeutic use in schools in Canada. Our objective was to learn about the experiences of caregivers of school-aged children who require MC. Methods: Qualitative description was used and caregivers were interviewed about MC in schools and in general. The transcripts were entered into Dedoose software for qualitative analysis and content analysis was performed. Sentences and statements were ascribed line by line into meaning units and labelled with codes, and organized according to categories and subcategories. Results: Twelve caregivers of school-aged children who take MC participated. The most common reasons for treatment were drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE), autism, or other developmental disorders. Approximately half of the participants' children (n = 6) took MC during the school day and most (5/6) perceived their experiences to be positive or neutral but reported a lack of knowledge about MC. While data saturation was not reached regarding MC in schools, rich dialogues were garnered about MC in general and three categories were identified: challenges (subcategories stigma, finding an authorizer, cost, dosing, and supply); parents as advocates (subcategories required knowledge, attitudes, skills, and sources of information); and caregiver relief for positive outcomes. Conclusions: Caregivers demonstrate remarkable tenacity despite the many challenges associated with MC use. Education and practice change are needed to ensure that children using MC can benefit from or continue to experience its positive outcomes within the school environment and beyond.

The Building Emotional Awareness and Mental health (BEAM) program developed with a community partner for mothers of infants: protocol for a feasibility randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Drastic increases in the rates of maternal depression and anxiety have been reported since the COVID-19 pandemic began. Most programs aim to improve maternal mental health or parenting skills separately, despite it being more effective to target both concurrently. The Building Emotional Awareness and Mental health (BEAM) program was developed to address this gap. BEAM is a mobile health program aiming to mitigate the impacts of pandemic stress on family well-being. Since many family agencies lack infrastructure and personnel to adequately treat maternal mental health concerns, a partnership will occur with Family Dynamics (a local family agency) to address this unmet need. The study's objective is to examine the feasibility of the BEAM program when delivered with a community partner to inform a larger randomized controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: A pilot RCT will be conducted with mothers who have depression and/or anxiety with a child 6-18 months old living in Manitoba, Canada. Mothers will be randomized to the 10 weeks of the BEAM program or a standard of care (i.e., MoodMission). Back-end App data (collected via Google Analytics and Firebase) will be used to examine feasibility, engagement, and accessibility of the BEAM program; cost-effectiveness will also be examined. Implementation elements (e.g., maternal depression [Patient Health Questionnaire-9] and anxiety [Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7]) will be piloted to estimate the effect size and variance for future sample size calculations. DISCUSSION: In partnership with a local family agency, BEAM holds the potential to promote maternal-child health via a cost-effective and an easily accessible program designed to scale. Results will provide insight into the feasibility of the BEAM program and will inform future RCTs. TRIAL REGISTRATION {2A}: This trial was retrospectively registered with ClinicalTrial.gov ( NCT05398107 ) on May 31st, 2022.

Guidelines for Reporting Outcomes in Trial Reports: The CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 Extension.

Importance: Clinicians, patients, and policy makers rely on published results from clinical trials to help make evidence-informed decisions. To critically evaluate and use trial results, readers require complete and transparent information regarding what was planned, done, and found. Specific and harmonized guidance as to what outcome-specific information should be reported in publications of clinical trials is needed to reduce deficient reporting practices that obscure issues with outcome selection, assessment, and analysis. Objective: To develop harmonized, evidence- and consensus-based standards for reporting outcomes in clinical trial reports through integration with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 statement. Evidence Review: Using the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) methodological framework, the CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement was developed by (1) generation and evaluation of candidate outcome reporting items via consultation with experts and a scoping review of existing guidance for reporting trial outcomes (published within the 10 years prior to March 19, 2018) identified through expert solicitation, electronic database searches of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Methodology Register, gray literature searches, and reference list searches; (2) a 3-round international Delphi voting process (November 2018-February 2019) completed by 124 panelists from 22 countries to rate and identify additional items; and (3) an in-person consensus meeting (April 9-10, 2019) attended by 25 panelists to identify essential items for the reporting of outcomes in clinical trial reports. Findings: The scoping review and consultation with experts identified 128 recommendations relevant to reporting outcomes in trial reports, the majority (83%) of which were not included in the CONSORT 2010 statement. All recommendations were consolidated into 64 items for Delphi voting; after the Delphi survey process, 30 items met criteria for further evaluation at the consensus meeting and possible inclusion in the CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 extension. The discussions during and after the consensus meeting yielded 17 items that elaborate on the CONSORT 2010 statement checklist items and are related to completely defining and justifying the trial outcomes, including how and when they were assessed (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 6a), defining and justifying the target difference between treatment groups during sample size calculations (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 7a), describing the statistical methods used to compare groups for the primary and secondary outcomes (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 12a), and describing the prespecified analyses and any outcome analyses not prespecified (CONSORT 2010 statement checklist item 18). Conclusions and Relevance: This CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement provides 17 outcome-specific items that should be addressed in all published clinical trial reports and may help increase trial utility, replicability, and transparency and may minimize the risk of selective nonreporting of trial results.

Guidelines for Reporting Outcomes in Trial Protocols: The SPIRIT-Outcomes 2022 Extension.

Importance: Complete information in a trial protocol regarding study outcomes is crucial for obtaining regulatory approvals, ensuring standardized trial conduct, reducing research waste, and providing transparency of methods to facilitate trial replication, critical appraisal, accurate reporting and interpretation of trial results, and knowledge synthesis. However, recommendations on what outcome-specific information should be included are diverse and inconsistent. To improve reporting practices promoting transparent and reproducible outcome selection, assessment, and analysis, a need for specific and harmonized guidance as to what outcome-specific information should be addressed in clinical trial protocols exists. Objective: To develop harmonized, evidence- and consensus-based standards for describing outcomes in clinical trial protocols through integration with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) 2013 statement. Evidence Review: Using the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) methodological framework, the SPIRIT-Outcomes 2022 extension of the SPIRIT 2013 statement was developed by (1) generation and evaluation of candidate outcome reporting items via consultation with experts and a scoping review of existing guidance for reporting trial outcomes (published within the 10 years prior to March 19, 2018) identified through expert solicitation, electronic database searches of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Methodology Register, gray literature searches, and reference list searches; (2) a 3-round international Delphi voting process (November 2018-February 2019) completed by 124 panelists from 22 countries to rate and identify additional items; and (3) an in-person consensus meeting (April 9-10, 2019) attended by 25 panelists to identify essential items for outcome-specific reporting to be addressed in clinical trial protocols. Findings: The scoping review and consultation with experts identified 108 recommendations relevant to outcome-specific reporting to be addressed in trial protocols, the majority (72%) of which were not included in the SPIRIT 2013 statement. All recommendations were consolidated into 56 items for Delphi voting; after the Delphi survey process, 19 items met criteria for further evaluation at the consensus meeting and possible inclusion in the SPIRIT-Outcomes 2022 extension. The discussions during and after the consensus meeting yielded 9 items that elaborate on the SPIRIT 2013 statement checklist items and are related to completely defining and justifying the choice of primary, secondary, and other outcomes (SPIRIT 2013 statement checklist item 12) prospectively in the trial protocol, defining and justifying the target difference between treatment groups for the primary outcome used in the sample size calculations (SPIRIT 2013 statement checklist item 14), describing the responsiveness of the study instruments used to assess the outcome and providing details on the outcome assessors (SPIRIT 2013 statement checklist item 18a), and describing any planned methods to account for multiplicity relating to the analyses or interpretation of the results (SPIRIT 2013 statement checklist item 20a). Conclusions and Relevance: This SPIRIT-Outcomes 2022 extension of the SPIRIT 2013 statement provides 9 outcome-specific items that should be addressed in all trial protocols and may help increase trial utility, replicability, and transparency and may minimize the risk of selective nonreporting of trial results.

Medical Cannabis in Canadian Schools: A Scoping Review of Existing Policies.

Objective: An increasing number of children and youth in Canada are taking medical cannabis for complex medical conditions. While they deserve safe and consistent access to pharmacotherapy throughout the day, administrative policies on cannabis use in schools are inconsistent. A scoping review identified policies and publications associated with medical cannabis in Canadian schools. Methods: Five databases (Scopus, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Web of Science) were searched to identify scientific literature. Legislation in each province and territory and Ministry of Education webpages were reviewed for pertinent laws and policies regarding cannabis use in schools. Results: The scientific search resulted in 1289 articles. The five included articles pertain to implications for school nurses in the United States, which are not relevant to the Canadian context. A search of Ministry of Education websites identified only one policy with information regarding medical cannabis in schools (from Ontario). Federal legislation (the Cannabis Act) does not specifically address medical cannabis in schools, and there is a lack of consistency in terminology and clarity within provincial and territorial laws. All provinces and territories prohibit smoking and vaping of cannabis on school property and some provinces prohibit any method of cannabis consumption. Conclusions: In Canada, there is a lack of guidance for medical cannabis administration, storage, and disposal in schools, with some policies explicitly prohibiting this type of treatment. This shifts the burden to families to individually create plans school by school. A federally harmonized approach to supporting children who take cannabis for medical purposes ought to be explored.

Clinician views on and ethics priorities for authorizing medical cannabis in the care of children and youth in Canada: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The use of cannabis for medical purposes by pediatric patients is expanding across Canada; however, supporting evidence, federal regulations and treatment guidelines are lacking. To understand factors affecting treatment decisions in this landscape, we sought to delineate clinician perspectives, ethics priorities and values for cannabis authorization. METHODS: We sampled participants purposefully through Canadian Childhood Cannabinoid Clinical Trials listservs, which include the majority of pediatric oncologists and palliative care physicians practising in Canada, among many other pediatric physicians and clinicians. Inclusion criteria were being a practising clinician in Canada, involvement in the care of children and willingness to be interviewed regardless of stance on medical cannabis. In November and December 2020, we conducted semistructured interviews focusing on principles, values and priorities, including medical, professional, regulatory, evidentiary and social considerations, for authorizing medical cannabis to children. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed by means of deductive and inductive thematic methods. RESULTS: We conducted 18 interviews with a diverse group of clinicians representing a range of specialties within pediatric care, including neurology, palliative care, oncology, family medicine and pharmacology. The interviews yielded 4 themes and 12 subthemes related to a priori (medical, professional, regulatory, evidentiary and social themes) and emergent themes. The 4 themes of access, relationships and relational autonomy (autonomy within relationships), medically appropriate use and research priorities were grounded in principles of harm reduction. Participants described problematic authorization procedures that negatively affect patient use. Principles associated with relational autonomy were highlighted as a feature of open clinical communication. Benefits of appropriate medical uses weighed positively over risks, even in the context of potential effects on neurodevelopment. Participants expressed that more research is essential to align medical cannabis with biomedical standards. INTERPRETATION: Clinicians reported pursuing ethical use of medical cannabis for pediatric patients and prioritizing their safety under principles of harm reduction. There is a need for evidence about neurodevelopmental risks, support for research, treatment guidelines and greater knowledge about stakeholder perspectives to alleviate burdens related to use of medical cannabis for pediatric patients in Canada.

Cannabis for the Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Report of 3 Cases.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a chronic neurobehavioral disorder that is highly prevalent in children and adults. An increasing number of patients with ADHD are self-medicating with cannabis, despite a lack of evidence on efficacy and safety. This case report describes 3 males (ages 18, 22, and 23) who have integrated cannabis into their treatment regimen with positive results. Semistructured interviews conducted with the patients describe subjective improvements in symptoms and on quality of life. Improvements on validated rating scales conducted post-cannabis initiation, compared to pre-cannabis initiation obtained from the medical chart, corroborated their personal accounts. Scores on the PHQ-9 (measuring depression) improved by 8-22 points (30-81%), and the SCARED (measuring anxiety) ranged from 0 to 27 points (up to 33%). Improvements on the CEER-9 scale (measuring regulation) ranged from 2 to 7 points (22-78%), and the 9-item SNAP scale (measuring inattention) showed improvements of 2-8 points (7-30%). Mild adverse events including short-term memory problems, dry mouth, and sleepiness were reported. Blood samples were also collected from the patients to determine the plasma concentrations of the cannabinoids and relevant metabolites before and after a cannabis administration. After cannabis use, the plasma levels for CBD and THC ranged from 0 to 15.29 ng/mL and 1.32 to 13.76 ng/mL, respectively. Cannabinoids, however, were not detected prior to dosing, suggesting that cannabis played a complimentary role in the therapeutic regimen of these 3 patients. Clinical trials are recommended to confirm the efficacy of cannabis in the treatment of ADHD.

Remdesivir for the treatment of patients in hospital with COVID-19 in Canada: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of remdesivir in the treatment of patients in hospital with COVID-19 remains ill defined in a global context. The World Health Organization Solidarity randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluated remdesivir in patients across many countries, with Canada enrolling patients using an expanded data collection format in the Canadian Treatments for COVID-19 (CATCO) trial. We report on the Canadian findings, with additional demographics, characteristics and clinical outcomes, to explore the potential for differential effects across different health care systems. METHODS: We performed an open-label, pragmatic RCT in Canadian hospitals, in conjunction with the Solidarity trial. We randomized patients to 10 days of remdesivir (200 mg intravenously [IV] on day 0, followed by 100 mg IV daily), plus standard care, or standard care alone. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included changes in clinical severity, oxygen- and ventilator-free days (at 28 d), incidence of new oxygen or mechanical ventilation use, duration of hospital stay, and adverse event rates. We performed a priori subgroup analyses according to duration of symptoms before enrolment, age, sex and severity of symptoms on presentation. RESULTS: Across 52 Canadian hospitals, we randomized 1282 patients between Aug. 14, 2020, and Apr. 1, 2021, to remdesivir (n = 634) or standard of care (n = 648). Of these, 15 withdrew consent or were still in hospital, for a total sample of 1267 patients. Among patients assigned to receive remdesivir, in-hospital mortality was 18.7%, compared with 22.6% in the standard-of-care arm (relative risk [RR] 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67 to 1.03), and 60-day mortality was 24.8% and 28.2%, respectively (95% CI 0.72 to 1.07). For patients not mechanically ventilated at baseline, the need for mechanical ventilation was 8.0% in those assigned remdesivir, and 15.0% in those receiving standard of care (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.75). Mean oxygen-free and ventilator-free days at day 28 were 15.9 (± standard deviation [SD] 10.5) and 21.4 (± SD 11.3) in those receiving remdesivir and 14.2 (± SD 11) and 19.5 (± SD 12.3) in those receiving standard of care (p = 0.006 and 0.007, respectively). There was no difference in safety events of new dialysis, change in creatinine, or new hepatic dysfunction between the 2 groups. INTERPRETATION: Remdesivir, when compared with standard of care, has a modest but significant effect on outcomes important to patients and health systems, such as the need for mechanical ventilation. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT04330690.

c4c: Paediatric pharmacovigilance: Methodological considerations in research and development of medicines for children - A c4c expert group white paper.

Children frequently respond differently to therapies compared to adults. Differences also exist between paediatric age groups for pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in both efficacy and safety. Paediatric pharmacovigilance requires an understanding of the unique aspects of children with regard to, for example, drug response, growth and development, clinical presentation of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), how they can be detected and population-specific factors (e.g., more frequent use of off-label/unlicensed drugs). In recognition of these challenges, a group of experts has been formed in the context of the conect4children (c4c) project to support paediatric drug development. This expert group collaborated to develop methodological considerations for paediatric drug safety and pharmacovigilance throughout the life-cycle of medicinal products which are described in this article. These considerations include practical points to consider for the development of the paediatric section of the risk management plan (RMP), safety in paediatric protocol development, safety data collection and analysis. Furthermore, they describe the specific details of post-marketing pharmacovigilance in children using, for example, spontaneous reports, electronic health care records, registries and record-linkage, as well as the use of paediatric pharmacoepidemiology studies for risk characterisation. Next the details of the assessment of benefit-risk and challenges related to medicinal product formulation in the context of a Paediatric Investigation Plan (PIP) are presented. Finally, practical issues in paediatric signal detection and evaluation are included. This paper provides practical points to consider for paediatric pharmacovigilance throughout the life-cycle of medicinal products for RMPs, protocol development, safety data collection and analysis and PIPs.

Perspectives of pediatric oncologists and palliative care physicians on the therapeutic use of cannabis in children with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Children with cancer are increasingly using cannabis therapeutically. AIM: The purpose of this study was to determine the perspectives and practices of pediatric oncologists and palliative care physicians regarding the use of cannabis for medical purposes among children with cancer. METHODS: A self-administered, voluntary, cross-sectional, deidentified online survey was sent to all pediatric oncologists and palliative care physicians in Canada between June and August 2020. Survey domains included education, knowledge, and concerns about cannabis, views on its effectiveness, and the importance of cannabis-related research. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: In total, 122/259 (47.1%) physicians completed the survey. Although 62.2% of the physicians completed some form of training about medical cannabis, nearly all (95.8%) desired to know more about the dosing, side effects, and safety of cannabis. Physicians identified a potential role of cannabis in the management of nausea and vomiting (85.7%), chronic pain (72.3%), cachexia/poor appetite (67.2%), and anxiety or depression (42.9%). Only four (0.3%) physicians recognized cannabis to be potentially useful as an anticancer agent. Nearly all physicians reported that cannabis-related research for symptom relief is essential (91.5%) in pediatric oncology, whereas 51.7% expressed that future studies are necessary to determine the anticancer effects of cannabis. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that most pediatric oncologists and palliative care physicians recognize a potential role for cannabis in symptom control in children with cancer. Well-conducted studies are required to create evidence for cannabis use and promote shared decision making with pediatric oncology patients and their caregivers.