Translational biomarkers: from preclinical to clinical a report of 2009 AAPS/ACCP Biomarker Workshop.

There have been some successes in qualifying biomarkers and applying them to drug development and clinical treatment of various diseases. A recent success is illustrated by a collaborative effort among the US Food and Drug Administration, the European Medicines Agency, and the pharmaceutical industry to provide a set of seven preclinical kidney toxicity biomarkers for drug development. Other successes include, but are not limited to, clinical biomarkers for cancer treatment and clinical management of heart transplant patients. The value of fully qualified surrogate endpoints in facilitating successful drug development is undisputed, especially for diseases in which the traditional clinical outcome can only be assessed in large, multi-year trials. Emerging biomarkers, including chemical genomic or imaging biomarkers, and measurement of circulating tumor cells hold great promise for early diagnosis of disease and as prognostic tests for managing treatment of chronic diseases such as osteoarthritis, Alzheimer disease, cardiovascular disease, and cancer. To advance the success of treating and managing these diseases, efforts are needed to establish the temporal relationship between changes in inflammatory or imaging biomarkers with the progression of the chronic disease, and in the case of cancer, between the extent of circulating cancer cells and tumor progression or remission.

Qualifying biomarkers for use in drug development: a US Food and Drug Administration overview.

Despite huge investments, there are still difficulties in the development of novel therapies. This has led to a growing interest in the use of new tools, such as biomarkers, that can help overcome development hurdles while providing increased certainty about drug safety and efficacy. Until recently, no formal process has existed for qualifying biomarkers for regulatory decision making. The FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) has initiated such a process, which has led to the recent qualification of two biomarker sets for use in regulatory decisions. This article provides the reader with an overview of the CDER Biomarker Qualification Process and is shaped by the recent regulatory developments in biomarker qualification and the consideration of frequently asked questions in the area. The Biomarker Qualification Process is intended to be a mission-critical, value-added CDER program. The success of this effort will depend on the willingness of pharmaceutical and diagnostic companies, consortia, the FDA and other regulatory agencies to continue to work together, motivated by the benefits that can accrue to public health through the increasing availability of qualified biomarkers for use in drug development.

Summary proceedings from the neonatal pain-control group.

Recent advances in neurobiology and clinical medicine have established that the fetus and newborn may experience acute, established, and chronic pain. They respond to such noxious stimuli by a series of complex biochemical, physiologic, and behavioral alterations. Studies have concluded that controlling pain experience is beneficial with respect to short-term and perhaps long-term outcomes. Yet, pain-control measures are adopted infrequently because of unresolved scientific issues and lack of appreciation for the need for control of pain and its long-term sequelae during the critical phases of neurologic maturation in the preterm and term newborn. The neonatal pain-control group, as part of the Newborn Drug Development Initiative (NDDI) Workshop I, addressed these concerns. The specific issues addressed were (1) management of pain associated with invasive procedures, (2) provision of sedation and analgesia during mechanical ventilation, and (3) mitigation of pain and stress responses during and after surgery in the newborn infant. The cross-cutting themes addressed within each category included (1) clinical-trial designs, (2) drug prioritization, (3) ethical constraints, (4) gaps in our knowledge, and (5) future research needs. This article provides a summary of the discussions and deliberations. Full-length articles on procedural pain, sedation and analgesia for ventilated infants, perioperative pain, and study designs for neonatal pain research were published in Clinical Therapeutics (June 2005).

Clinical trials in children--How are they implemented?

Drug metabolism in children may differ from adults and adverse events may occur that are not predictable from the adult experience. Clinical trials of safety and efficacy are needed both for new treatments and those that may already be in use but have not been tested in infants and children. The role and responsibilities of different participants in a trial are discussed, including the steering committee, the clinical and statistical co-ordinating centers, and the data and safety monitoring board. Advantages of external vs internal pilot studies are reviewed. Information that is available on the websites of the Food and Drug Administration and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke may be helpful to those planning clinical trials of interventions in children.

Analgesia and anesthesia for neonates: study design and ethical issues.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to summarize the clinical, methodologic, and ethical considerations for researchers interested in designing future trials in neonatal analgesia and anesthesia, hopefully stimulating additional research in this field. METHODS: The MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane register databases were searched using subject headings related to infant, newborn, neonate, analgesia, anesthesia, ethics, and study design. Cross-references and personal files were searched manually. Studies reporting original data or review articles related to these topics were assessed and critically evaluated by experts for each topical area. Data on population demographics, study characteristics, and cognitive and behavioral outcomes were abstracted and synthesized in a systematic manner and refined by group members. Data synthesis and results were reviewed by a panel of independent experts and presented to a wider audience including clinicians, scientists, regulatory personnel, and industry representatives at the Newborn Drug Development Initiative workshop. Recommendations were revised after extensive discussions at the workshop and between committee members. RESULTS: Designing clinical trials to investigate novel or currently available approaches for analgesia and anesthesia in neonates requires consideration of salient study designs and ethical issues. Conditions requiring treatment include pain/stress resulting from invasive procedures, surgical operations, inflammatory conditions, and routine neonatal intensive care. Study design considerations must define the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a rationale for stratification, the confounding effects of comorbid conditions, and other clinical factors. Significant ethical issues include the constraints of studying neonates, obtaining informed consent, making risk-benefit assessments, defining compensation or rewards for participation, safety considerations, the use of placebo controls, and the variability among institutional review boards in interpreting federal guidelines on human research. For optimal study design, investigators must formulate well-defined study questions, choose appropriate trial designs, estimate drug efficacy, calculate sample size, determine the duration of the studies, identify pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters, and avoid drug-drug interactions. Specific outcome measures may include scoring on pain assessment scales, various biomarkers and their patterns of response, process outcomes (eg, length of stay, time to extubation), intermediate or long-term outcomes, and safety parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Much more research is needed in this field to formulate a scientifically sound, evidence-based, and clinically useful framework for management of anesthesia and analgesia in neonates. Newer study designs and additional ethical dilemmas may be defined with accumulating data in this field.