Joint recommendations on cost calculation and estimation in paediatric clinical trials.

The conduct of clinical trials in paediatrics is essential to improve drug therapy in children. In Europe, paediatric clinical trials have been supported by the European Paediatric Regulation since 2007, but there is still a great need for high-quality clinical trials. The personnel and time required to conduct clinical trials in accordance with EU Regulations 536/2014 and 745/2017 is considerably higher compared to other studies, such as observational studies. It is important that this additional workload for the trial centre is fully compensated, also taking into account EU state aid rules. In paediatric trials, it is necessary to take into account the special requirements of paediatric and adolescent medicine when calculating the additional costs. Within the framework of the pan-European paediatric study network c4c/GermanNetPaeT, a working group dealt with specific aspects of cost calculation in order to support paediatric study centres in internal cost calculation as well as in the subsequent preparation of financing requirements for industrial sponsors or public funders. In several workshops the working group developed a cost calculation template with the content derived from the "Joint recommendations for a total services account as a factor in simplifying contracts" of the Deutsche Hochschulmedizin (DHM, German University Medicine), the Netzwerk der Koordinierungszentren für Klinische Studien (KKS Network, Network of Coordinating Centres for Clinical Trials) and the Verband Forschender Arzneimittelhersteller (vfa, German Association of Research-Based Pharmaceutical Companies). By estimating the specific time required for measures and investigations as part of a sample study, the background to the increased time required was discussed and a list with aspects to be considered for cost calculation was compiled together with the study centres. The paediatrics-specific aspects mentioned in detail are intended to increase understanding of the particular problem of higher costs for clinical trials involving children and adolescents and the need for correspondingly appropriate remuneration. This transparent and comprehensible presentation of the higher financial requirements for both the study centres and the financial supporters is intended to promote the high-quality conduct of clinical trials in paediatric study centres in the long term.

Safety of clonidine used for long-term sedation in paediatric intensive care: A systematic review.

AIM: Although not approved, the α-adrenoceptor agonist clonidine is considered an option for long-term sedation protocols in paediatric intensive care. We reviewed adverse effects of clonidine occurring in this indication. METHODS: Relevant literature was systematically identified from PubMed and Embase. We included interventional and observational studies on paediatric patients admitted to intensive care units and systemically long-term sedated with clonidine-containing regimes. In duplicates, we conducted standardised and independent full-text assessment and extraction of safety data. RESULTS: Data from 11 studies with 909 patients were analysed. The studies were heterogeneous regarding patient characteristics (age groups, comorbidity, or comedication) and sedation regimes (dosage, route, duration, or concomitant sedatives). Just four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and one observational study had comparison groups, using placebo or midazolam. For safety outcomes, our validity evaluation showed low risk of bias only in three studies. All studies focused on haemodynamic problems, particularly bradycardia and hypotension. Observed incidences or subsequent interventions never caused concerns. However, only two RCTs allowed meaningful comparisons with control groups. Odds ratios showed no significant difference between the groups, but small sample sizes (50 and 125 patients) must be considered; pooled analyses were not reasonable. CONCLUSION: All evaluated studies concluded that the use of clonidine in paediatric intensive care units is safe. However, a valid characterisation of the safety profile remains challenging due to limited, biased and heterogeneous data and missing investigation of long-term effects. This evaluation demonstrates the lack of data, which prevents reliable conclusions on the safety of clonidine for long-term sedation in critically ill children. For an evidence-based use, further studies are needed.