Conclusions Paolo Tomasi MD PhD Head of Paediatric Medicines, EMA - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

conclusions
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Conclusions Paolo Tomasi MD PhD Head of Paediatric Medicines, EMA - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Workshop on Paediatric Investigation Plans in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Conclusions Paolo Tomasi MD PhD Head of Paediatric Medicines, EMA 1 NIHR Medicines for Children Research Network (MCRN) 30/33 21/23 (to-date) 45/55 12/19 31/45 1/8


slide-1
SLIDE 1

1

Workshop on Paediatric Investigation Plans in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Conclusions

Paolo Tomasi MD PhD Head of Paediatric Medicines, EMA

slide-2
SLIDE 2

NIHR Medicines for Children Research Network (MCRN)

industry@mcrn.org.uk - www.mcrn.org.uk

0/3 1/8 12/19 31/45 30/33 45/55 21/23 (to-date)

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Com pletion of studies under BPCA w ritten request (optional, but 80% suggested by applicant)

Source: IOM report on “Safe and Effective Medicines for Children: Pediatric Studies Conducted Under BPCA and PREA”

Will all Paediatric Investigation Plans be completed?

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

Main concerns for pharm a com panies ( feasibility) :

  • Few available patients in total for all the

studies.

  • Widespread insulin (and metformin) use

needs to be addressed – weaning not always feasible.

  • 30% patients to be recruited in EU-like

countries: difficult to achieve due to rarity in EU

  • Many patients do not meet HbA1c inclusion

criteria

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

Potential solutions

  • Broadened role for extrapolation (for efficacy) / sample size reduction

 Use of Bayesian methods with adult priors  Acceptance of lower significance levels (p= 0.07, p= 0.10)  Safety study only (pre or post authorization in children?)

  • Studies in related diseases (prediabetes? T1DM?)
  • Staggered development of products (in same class) / deferrals
  • Broadened inclusion criteria:

 For insulin treatment  For age (up to 22? 25?)  For HbA1c range  For geographical origin (non-EU)  What else?

  • Multi-com pany study (paediatric incentive and obligations are

irrespective of outcome of studies)

  • Single company with multiple agents
  • Simplification of PK studies (peak and trough levels, dried blood

spots)

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Conclusions

  • Number of patients required is high (and it’s a minimum

number).

  • A change in paradigm for diabetes PIPs seems necessary, to

maximize feasibility and obtain significant data.

  • Staggered development, followed potentially by greater

extrapolation and/ or reduced requirements could be a solution.

  • Several of the proposed solutions may be applicable in

practice.

  • SAWP/ CHMP needs to be included in the equation;

Extrapolation working group will act as the glue (chairs of SAWP and CHMP are members).

  • Companies may re-consider their options (multi-company

studies, modification of previously agreed PIPs… )