Impact of ACCELERATE Paediatric Strategy Forums: a review of the value of multi-stakeholder meetings in oncology drug development

In a landscape of an increasing number of products and histology and age agnostic trials for rare patient cancer, prioritization of products is required. Paediatric Strategy Forums, organized by ACCELERATE and the European Medicines Agency with participation of the US Food and Drug Administration, are multi-stakeholder meetings that share information to best inform pediatric drug development strategies and subsequent clinical trial decisions. Academia, industry, regulators, and patient advocates are equal members, with patient advocates highlighting unmet needs of children and adolescents with cancer. The 11 Paediatric Strategy Forums since 2017 have made specific and general conclusions to accelerate drug development. Conclusions on product prioritization meetings, as well as global master protocols, have been outputs of these meetings. Forums have provided information for regulatory discussions and decisions by industry to facilitate development of high-priority products; for example, 62% of high-priority assets (agreed at a Forum) in contrast to 5% of those assets not considered high priority have been the subject of a Paediatric Investigational Plan or Written Request. Where there are multiple products of the same class, Forums have recommended a focused and sequential approach. Class prioritization resulted in an increase in waivers for non-prioritized B-cell products (44% to 75%) and a decrease in monotherapy trials, proposed in Paediatric Investigation Plans (PIP) submissions of checkpoint inhibitors from 53% to 19%. Strategy Forums could play a role in defining unmet medical needs. Multi-stakeholder forums, such as the Paediatric Strategy Forum, serve as a model to improve collaboration in the oncology drug development paradigm.

Utility of propensity score-based Bayesian borrowing of external adult data in pediatric trials: A pragmatic evaluation through a case study in acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL)

A fully powered randomized controlled cancer trial can be challenging to conduct in children because of difficulties in enrollment of pediatric patients due to low disease incidence. One way to improve the feasibility of trials in pediatric patients, when clinically appropriate, is through borrowing information from comparable external adult trials in the same disease. Bayesian analysis of a pediatric trial provides a way of seamlessly augmenting pediatric trial efficacy data with data from external adult trials. However, not all external adult trial subjects may be equally clinically relevant with respect to the baseline disease severity, prognostic factors, co-morbidities, and prior therapy observed in the pediatric trial of interest. The propensity score matching method provides a way of matching the external adult subjects to the pediatric trial subjects on a set of clinically determined baseline covariates, such as baseline disease severity, prognostic factors and prior therapy. The matching then allows Bayesian information borrowing from only the most clinically relevant external adult subjects. Through a case study in pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), we examine the utility of propensity score matched mixture and power priors in bringing appropriate external adult efficacy information into pediatric trial efficacy assessment, and present considerations for scaling fixed borrowing from external adult data.

Clinical trial considerations for pediatric cancer drug development

Oncology has been one of the most active therapeutic areas in medicinal products development. Despite this fact, few drugs have been approved for use in pediatric cancer patients when compared to the number approved for adults with cancer. This disparity could be attributed to the fact that many oncology drugs have had orphan drug designation and were exempt from Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA) requirements. On August 18, 2017, the RACE for Children Act, i.e. Research to Accelerate Cures and Equity Act, was signed into law as Title V of the 2017 FDA Reauthorization Act (FDARA) to amend the PREA. Pediatric investigation is now required if the drug or biological product is intended for the treatment of an adult cancer and directed at a molecular target that FDA determines to be "substantially relevant to the growth or progression of a pediatric cancer." This paper discusses the specific considerations in clinical trial designs and statistical methodologies to be implemented in oncology pediatric clinical programs.

Assessing Information Gaps Associated with Initial Pediatric Study Plans for New Oncology Drug and Biological Products

The Research Acceleration for Cure and Equity (RACE) for Children Act requires sponsors to submit a Pediatric Study Plan (PSP) with a proposed pediatric investigation of new molecularly targeted drugs and biologics that are intended for treatment of adult cancers, and whose target is relevant to pediatric cancer or provide a justification for a plan to request a deferral or waiver of the required investigation. A landscape analysis was performed to identify trends in information gaps associated with a sponsor's first initial PSP (iPSP) submission for oncologic new molecular entities received in 2021. Comments sent to sponsors by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) during the review process of each evaluated iPSP were categorized using nine flags relating to different portions of the PSP. For iPSPs that included a plan for a full waiver request, the most common information gap was inadequate justification based on molecular target relevance. All other sponsor proposed plans (deferral and/or partial waiver or investigation) were found to have information gaps related to clinical study features, clinical pharmacology, and/or missing clinical or nonclinical data. This landscape analysis of iPSPs shows the trends in comments that often occur during initial review and may help to provide sponsors with more direction for preparing an adequate iPSP to fulfill statutory requirements aimed at ensuring pediatric patients are considered in the development of new molecularly targeted drugs.

Clinical development of new drugs for adults and children with cancer, 2010-2020

BACKGROUND

Many new molecular entities enter clinical development to evaluate potential therapeutic benefits for oncology patients. We characterized adult and pediatric development of the set of new molecular entities that started clinical testing in 2010-2015 worldwide.

METHODS

We extracted data from AdisInsight, an extensive database of global pharmaceutical development, and the FDA.gov website. We followed the cohort of new molecular entities initiating first-in-human phase I clinical trials in 2010-2015 to the end of 2020. For each new molecular entity, we determined whether it was granted US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, studied in a trial open to pediatric enrollment, or stalled during development. We characterized the cumulative incidence of these endpoints using statistical methods for censored data.

RESULTS

The 572 new molecular entities starting first-in-human studies in 2010-2015 were studied in 6142 trials by the end of 2020. Most new molecular entities were small molecules (n = 316, 55.2%), antibodies (n = 148, 25.9%), or antibody-drug conjugates (n = 44, 7.7%). After a mean follow-up of 8.0 years, 173 new molecular entities did not advance beyond first-in-human trials, and 39 were approved by the FDA. New molecular entities had a 10.4% estimated probability (95% confidence interval = 6.6% to 14.1%) of being approved by the FDA within 10 years of first-in-human trials. After a median of 4.6 years since start of first-in-human trials, 67 (11.7%) new molecular entities were tested in trials open to pediatric patients, and 5 (0.9%) were approved for pediatric indications.

CONCLUSIONS

More efficient clinical development strategies are needed to evaluate new cancer therapies, especially for children, and incorporate approaches to ensure knowledge gain from investigational products that stall in development.

Paediatric Strategy Forum for medicinal product development of DNA damage response pathway inhibitors in children and adolescents with cancer: ACCELERATE in collaboration with the European Medicines Agency with participation of the Food and Drug Administration

DNA damage response inhibitors have a potentially important therapeutic role in paediatric cancers; however, their optimal use, including patient selection and combination strategy, remains unknown. Moreover, there is an imbalance between the number of drugs with diverse mechanisms of action and the limited number of paediatric patients available to be enrolled in early-phase trials, so prioritisation and a strategy are essential. While PARP inhibitors targeting homologous recombination-deficient tumours have been used primarily in the treatment of adult cancers with BRCA1/2 mutations, BRCA1/2 mutations occur infrequently in childhood tumours, and therefore, a specific response hypothesis is required. Combinations with targeted radiotherapy, ATR inhibitors, or antibody drug conjugates with DNA topoisomerase I inhibitor-related warheads warrant evaluation. Additional monotherapy trials of PARP inhibitors with the same mechanism of action are not recommended. PARP1-specific inhibitors and PARP inhibitors with very good central nervous system penetration also deserve evaluation. ATR, ATM, DNA-PK, CHK1, WEE1, DNA polymerase theta and PKMYT1 inhibitors are early in paediatric development. There should be an overall coordinated strategy for their development. Therefore, an academia/industry consensus of the relevant biomarkers will be established and a focused meeting on ATR inhibitors (as proof of principle) held. CHK1 inhibitors have demonstrated activity in desmoplastic small round cell tumours and have a potential role in the treatment of other paediatric malignancies, such as neuroblastoma and Ewing sarcoma. Access to CHK1 inhibitors for paediatric clinical trials is a high priority. The three key elements in evaluating these inhibitors in children are (1) innovative trial design (design driven by a clear hypothesis with the intent to further investigate responders and non-responders with detailed retrospective molecular analyses to generate a revised or new hypothesis); (2) biomarker selection and (3) rational combination therapy, which is limited by overlapping toxicity. To maximally benefit children with cancer, investigators should work collaboratively to learn the lessons from the past and apply them to future studies. Plans should be based on the relevant biology, with a focus on simultaneous and parallel research in preclinical and clinical settings, and an overall integrated and collaborative strategy.

Combination Early-Phase Trials of Anticancer Agents in Children and Adolescents

PURPOSE

There is an increasing need to evaluate innovative drugs for childhood cancer using combination strategies. Strong biological rationale and clinical experience suggest that multiple agents will be more efficacious than monotherapy for most diseases and may overcome resistance mechanisms and increase synergy. The process to evaluate these combination trials needs to maximize efficiency and should be agreed by all stakeholders.

METHODS

After a review of existing combination trial methodologies, regulatory requirements, and current results, a consensus among stakeholders was achieved.

RESULTS

Combinations of anticancer therapies should be developed on the basis of mechanism of action and robust preclinical evaluation, and may include data from adult clinical trials. The general principle for combination early-phase studies is that, when possible, clinical trials should be dose- and schedule-confirmatory rather than dose-exploratory, and every effort should be made to optimize doses early. Efficient early-phase combination trials should be seamless, including dose confirmation and randomized expansion. Dose evaluation designs for combinations depend on the extent of previous knowledge. If not previously evaluated, limited evaluation of monotherapy should be included in the same clinical trial as the combination. Randomized evaluation of a new agent plus standard therapy versus standard therapy is the most effective approach to isolate the effect and toxicity of the novel agent. Platform trials may be valuable in the evaluation of combination studies. Patient advocates and regulators should be engaged with investigators early in a proposed clinical development pathway and trial design must consider regulatory requirements.

CONCLUSION

An optimized, agreed approach to the design and evaluation of early-phase pediatric combination trials will accelerate drug development and benefit all stakeholders, most importantly children and adolescents with cancer.

Paediatric Strategy Forum for medicinal product development in mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway inhibitors: ACCELERATE in collaboration with the European Medicines Agency with participation of the Food and Drug Administration

As the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signalling pathway is activated in many paediatric cancers, it is an important therapeutic target. Currently, a range of targeted MAPK pathway inhibitors are being developed in adults. However, MAPK signals through many cascades and feedback loops and perturbing the MAPK pathway may have substantial influence on other pathways as well as normal development. In view of these issues, the ninth Paediatric Strategy Forum focused on MAPK inhibitors. Development of MAPK pathway inhibitors to date has been predominantly driven by adult indications such as malignant melanoma. However, these inhibitors may also target unmet needs in paediatric low-grade gliomas, high-grade gliomas, Langerhans cell histiocytosis, juvenile myelomonocytic leukaemia and several other paediatric conditions. Although MAPK inhibitors have demonstrated activity in paediatric cancer, the response rates and duration of responses needs improvement and better documentation. The rapid development and evaluation of combination approaches, based on a deep understanding of biology, is required to optimise responses and to avoid paradoxical tumour growth and other unintended consequences including severe toxicity. Better inhibitors with higher central nervous systempenetration for primary brain tumours and cancers with a propensity for central nervous system metastases need to be studied to determine if they are more effective than agents currently being used, and the optimum duration of therapy with MAPK inhibition needs to be determined. Systematic and coordinated clinical investigations to inform future treatment strategies with MAPK inhibitors, rather than use outside of clinical trials, are needed to fully assess the risks and benefits of these single agents and combination strategies in both front-line and in the refractory/relapse settings. Platform trials could address the investigation of multiple similar products and combinations. Accelerating the introduction of MAPK inhibitors into front-line paediatric studies is a priority, as is ensuring that these studies generate data appropriate for scientific and regulatory purposes. Early discussions with regulators are crucial, particularly if external controls are considered as randomised control trials in small patient populations can be challenging. Functional end-points specific to the populations in which they are studied, such as visual acuity, motor and neuro psychological function are important, as these outcomes are often more reflective of benefit for lower grade tumours (such as paediatric low-grade glioma and plexiform neurofibroma) and should be included in initial study designs for paediatric low-grade glioma. Early prospective discussions and agreements with regulators are necessary. Long-term follow-up of patients receiving MAPK inhibitors is crucial in view of their prolonged administration and the important involvement of this pathway in normal development. Further rational development, with a detailed understanding of biology of this class of products, is crucial to ensure they provide optimal benefit while minimising toxicity to children and adolescents with cancer.

The Critical Role of Academic Clinical Trials in Pediatric Cancer Drug Approvals: Design, Conduct, and Fit for Purpose Data for Positive Regulatory Decisions

PURPOSE

For decades, academic clinical trials consortia have collaborated to optimize outcomes for childhood cancers through evaluating incremental improvements in conventional mutimodality treatment regimes. There are now increasing opportunities to partner with industry to test new medicines in academic-sponsored trials, but these collaborative studies rarely contribute to marketing authorizations. We addressed why this is the case and sought solutions to enable academic-sponsored trials to directly contribute to the licensing of new medicines.

METHODS

Under the auspices of the multistakeholder platform ACCELERATE, we convened a working group of representatives from clinical academia, pharmaceutical industry, European Medicines Agency, US Food and Drug Administration, and patient advocacy to define the challenges and propose recommendations to facilitate academic-sponsored trial design and conduct to be aligned to both the needs of the pharmaceutical company who own the asset and the expectations of the regulatory (licensing) authorities.

RESULTS

We identified that although academic consortia have long-standing expertise to conduct robust clinical trials, there were critical gaps in knowledge, standard procedures, and resources that hindered the trial data directly contributing to marketing authorization applications. We propose a suite of recommendations focused on (1) essential documents, (2) essential data, (3) data management, and (4) trial resources, specifically aimed at enabling academic-industry partnerships to deliver an academic-sponsored trial that meets the requirements for a marketing authorization submission. These recommendations pivot around transparency in academic-industry partnerships and early engagement with regulators.

CONCLUSION

Academic sponsors and industry partners need to prospectively recognize when the planned collaborative trial could contribute to an application to marketing authorization and plan accordingly. Transparent collaboration and knowledge sharing between the partners opens an important pathway for accelerating new treatments into clinical practice for children with cancer.

FDA approval summary: Crizotinib for pediatric and young adult patients with relapsed or refractory systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma

In January 2021, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved crizotinib for pediatric patients 1 year and older and young adults with relapsed or refractory systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma (sALCL). This is the first approval for pediatric sALCL. Approval was based on a single-arm trial of crizotinib monotherapy that included 26 patients, aged 1-20 years, with previously treated sALCL. Efficacy was based on centrally assessed objective response rate (88%) and duration of response. Herein, we highlight unique aspects of the regulatory review, including extension of the indication to young adults, postmarketing safety, and dose optimization strategies.

A mouse pancreatic organoid model to compare PD-L1 blocking antibodies

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have changed the therapeutic landscape for cancer patients, but diabetes, a rare, severe immune-related endocrinopathy, is linked to ICI therapy. It is unclear whether glycosylation of ICIs may play a role in the development of this adverse event and how the physiological effects of different ICIs on pancreatic cells should be evaluated. We used a mouse pancreatic organoid model to compare three PD-L1 blocking antibodies in the presence or absence of IFNγ using a metabolic bioanalyzer. Modulation of ICI glycosylation altered its metabolic effects on mouse pancreatic organoids, suggesting that this model could be used to monitor and compare ICIs and to study the mechanisms underlying the development of IC-mediated diabetes.

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.

Paediatric Strategy Forum for medicinal product development of chimeric antigen receptor T-cells in children and adolescents with cancer: ACCELERATE in collaboration with the European Medicines Agency with participation of the Food and Drug Administration

The seventh multi-stakeholder Paediatric Strategy Forum focused on chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cells for children and adolescents with cancer. The development of CAR T-cells for patients with haematological malignancies, especially B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (BCP-ALL), has been spectacular. However, currently, there are scientific, clinical and logistical challenges for use of CAR T-cells in BCP-ALL and other paediatric malignancies, particularly in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), lymphomas and solid tumours. The aims of the Forum were to summarise the current landscape of CAR T-cell therapy development in paediatrics, too identify current challenges and future directions, with consideration of other immune effector modalities and ascertain the best strategies to accelerate their development and availability to children. Although the effect is of limited duration in about half of the patients, anti-CD19 CAR T-cells produce high response rates in relapsed/refractory BCP-ALL and this has highlighted previously unknown mechanisms of relapse. CAR T-cell treatment as first- or second-line therapy could also potentially benefit patients whose disease has high-risk features associated with relapse and failure of conventional therapies. Identifying patients with very early and early relapse in whom CAR T-cell therapy may replace haematopoietic stem cell transplantation and be definitive therapy versus those in whom it provides a more effective bridge to haematopoietic stem cell transplantation is a very high priority. Development of approaches to improve persistence, either by improving T cell fitness or using more humanised/fully humanised products and co-targeting of multiple antigens to prevent antigen escape, could potentially further optimise therapy. Many differences exist between paediatric B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (B-NHL) and BCP-ALL. In view of the very small patient numbers with relapsed lymphoma, careful prioritisation is needed to evaluate CAR T-cells in children with Burkitt lymphoma, primary mediastinal B cell lymphoma and other NHL subtypes. Combination trials of alternative targets to CD19 (CD20 or CD22) should also be explored as a priority to improve efficacy in this population. Development of CD30 CAR T-cell immunotherapy strategies in patients with relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma will likely be most efficiently accomplished by joint paediatric and adult trials. CAR T-cell approaches are early in development for AML and T-ALL, given the unique challenges of successful immunotherapy actualisation in these diseases. At this time, CD33 and CD123 appear to be the most universal targets in AML and CD7 in T-ALL. The results of ongoing or planned first-in-human studies are required to facilitate further understanding. There are promising early results in solid tumours, particularly with GD2 targeting cell therapies in neuroblastoma and central nervous system gliomas that represent significant unmet clinical needs. Further understanding of biology is critical to success. The comparative benefits of autologous versus allogeneic CAR T-cells, T-cells engineered with T cell receptors T-cells engineered with T cell receptor fusion constructs, CAR Natural Killer (NK)-cell products, bispecific T-cell engager antibodies and antibody-drug conjugates require evaluation in paediatric malignancies. Early and proactive academia and multi-company engagement are mandatory to advance cellular immunotherapies in paediatric oncology. Regulatory advice should be sought very early in the design and preparation of clinical trials of innovative medicines, for which regulatory approval may ultimately be sought. Aligning strategic, scientific, regulatory, health technology and funding requirements from the inception of a clinical trial is especially important as these are very expensive therapies. The model for drug development for cell therapy in paediatric oncology could also involve a 'later stage handoff' to industry after early development in academic hands. Finally, and very importantly, strategies must evolve to ensure appropriate ease of access for children who need and could potentially benefit from these therapies.

Recommendations for Dose Selection for Adolescent Patients in Relevant Adult Oncology Clinical Trials

Our research supported the dose selection recommendations for adolescents in the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Guidance on Inclusion of Adolescent Patients in Adult Oncology Clinical Trials. The FDA Guidance states that for drugs administered as a flat dose in adults and data showing no clinically meaningful effect of body size on drug exposure and toxicity in adults, a minimum body weight threshold may need to be defined to prevent adolescents who have a lower body weight from exceeding adult exposures. Our review of adult population pharmacokinetic analyses of new molecular entities approved for oncology between January 2015 and March 2021 suggested that 40 kg (the approximate median body weight of a 12-year-old) is generally the lower end of the body weight range that has no clinically relevant effect on drug pharmacokinetics or safety. The minimum body weight threshold and selection of an appropriate dose for adolescents in relevant adult oncology clinical trials should ultimately be determined based on available data on pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics of the investigational drug with consideration of body size effect on drug exposure, toxicity, and efficacy data (if available), the therapeutic index of the drug, and dose- and exposure-response relationships in adults.

Second Paediatric Strategy Forum for anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibition in paediatric malignancies: ACCELERATE in collaboration with the European Medicines Agency with the participation of the Food and Drug Administration

The first (2017) and sixth (2021) multistakeholder Paediatric Strategy Forums focused on anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibition in paediatric malignancies. ALK is an important oncogene and target in several paediatric tumours (anaplastic large cell lymphoma [ALCL], inflammatory myofibroblastic tumour [IMT], neuroblastoma and hemispheric gliomas in infants and young children) with unmet therapeutic needs. ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors have been demonstrated to be active both in ALK fusion-kinase positive ALCL and IMT. ALK alterations differ, with fusions occurring in ALCL, IMT and gliomas, and activating mutations and amplification in neuroblastoma. While there are many ALK inhibitors in development, the number of children diagnosed with ALK driven malignancies is very small. The objectives of this ALK Forum were to (i) Describe current knowledge of ALK biology in childhood cancers; (ii) Provide an overview of the development of ALK inhibitors for children; (iii) Identify the unmet needs taking into account planned or current ongoing trials; (iv) Conclude how second/third-generation inhibitors could be evaluated and prioritised; (v) Identify lessons learnt from the experience with ALK inhibitors to accelerate the paediatric development of other anti-cancer targeted agents in the new regulatory environments. There has been progress over the last four years, with more trials of ALK inhibitors opened in paediatrics and more regulatory submissions. In January 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration approved crizotinib for the treatment of paediatric and young adult patients with relapsed or refractory ALCL and there are paediatric investigation plans (PIPs) for brigatinib and for crizotinib in ALCL and IMT. In ALCL, the current goal is to investigate the inclusion of ALK inhibitors in front-line therapy with the aim of decreasing toxicity with higher/similar efficacy compared to present first-line therapies. For IMT, the focus is to develop a joint prospective trial with one product in children, adolescents and adults, taking advantage of the common biology across the age spectrum. As approximately 50% of IMTs are ALK-positive, molecular analysis is required to identify patients to be treated with an ALK inhibitor. For neuroblastoma, crizotinib has not shown robust anti-tumour activity. A focused and sequential development of ALK inhibitors with very good central nervous system (CNS) penetration in CNS tumours with ALK fusions should be undertaken. The Forum reinforced the strong need for global academic collaboration, very early involvement of regulators with studies seeking possible registration and early academia-multicompany engagement. Innovations in study design and conduct and the use of 'real-world data' supporting development in these rare sub-groups of patients for whom randomised clinical trials are not feasible are important initiatives. A focused and sequenced development strategy, where one product is evaluated first with other products being assessed sequentially, is applicable for ALK inhibitors and other medicinal products in children.

Common Commentary on Paediatric Oncology Drug Development Published: Another Step in Optimising Global Regulatory Coordination of Paediatric Development Plans

The European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration recently published a common commentary document on paediatric oncology drug development, building on the call for simultaneous submissions of paediatric investigation plans and initial pediatric study plans. The objective of this document is to guide deliberations and permit focused discussions at the monthly paediatric cluster calls, allowing early regulatory coordination of global development plans. The differences in regulations related to timeline are not considered posing a barrier in that regard.

Cancer Informatics for Cancer Centers: Scientific Drivers for Informatics, Data Science, and Care in Pediatric, Adolescent, and Young Adult Cancer

Cancer Informatics for Cancer Centers (CI4CC) is a grassroots, nonprofit 501c3 organization intended to provide a focused national forum for engagement of senior cancer informatics leaders, primarily aimed at academic cancer centers anywhere in the world but with a special emphasis on the 70 National Cancer Institute-funded cancer centers. This consortium has regularly held topic-focused biannual face-to-face symposiums. These meetings are a place to review cancer informatics and data science priorities and initiatives, providing a forum for discussion of the strategic and pragmatic issues that we faced at our respective institutions and cancer centers. Here, we provide meeting highlights from the latest CI4CC Symposium, which was delayed from its original April 2020 schedule because of the COVID-19 pandemic and held virtually over three days (September 24, October 1, and October 8) in the fall of 2020. In addition to the content presented, we found that holding this event virtually once a week for 6 hours was a great way to keep the kind of deep engagement that a face-to-face meeting engenders. This is the second such publication of CI4CC Symposium highlights, the first covering the meeting that took place in Napa, California, from October 14-16, 2019. We conclude with some thoughts about using data science to learn from every child with cancer, focusing on emerging activities of the National Cancer Institute's Childhood Cancer Data Initiative.

A global approach to long-term follow-up of targeted and immune-based therapy in childhood and adolescence

While considerable efforts and progress in our understanding of the long-term toxicities of surgery, radiation and chemotherapy in children with cancer have been made over the last 5 decades, there continues to be a wide gap in our knowledge of the long-term health impact of most novel targeted and immunotherapy agents. To address this gap, ACCELERATE, a multi-stakeholder collaboration of clinical and translational academics, regulators from the EMA and FDA, patient/family advocates and members spanning small biotechnology through to large pharmaceutical companies have initiated the development of an international long-term follow-up data registry to collect this important information prospectively. Providing critical safety data on the long-term use of these approved and investigational therapies in children will support the regulatory requirements and labeling information. It will also provide the necessary insight to help guide physicians and families on the appropriateness of a targeted or immune therapy for their child and inform survivorship planning.

Retrospective evaluation of single patient investigational new drug (IND) requests in pediatric oncology

Background

Single patient Investigational New Drug (IND) applications are one mechanism through which experimental therapies are accessed for children with cancer. The landscape of use, outcomes, and toxicity from single patient INDs remains unknown in pediatric oncology.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of all single patient INDs requested and prescribed at a single institution between 1/1/2007 and 5/1/2019. We report aggregate data from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on single patient IND applications over the final two years of the study (2017–2019). We report an overview of all IND applications, as well as clinical descriptions of patients, treatments, outcomes, and toxicity.

Results

Over the 2‐year period, the FDA approved all 171 submitted single patient IND requests for pediatric oncology. We identified 56 requests from our center during the 12‐year study period, and all were approved (median time from FDA submission to approval: 1 day (range 0–12)). 71% of requests were based on disease histology. Lack of pediatric clinical trial (65%) was the most common reason for use. 48 approved requests were ultimately administered. The median duration of treatment was 84 days (range: 4–1590), with 3 patients remaining on treatment at time of analysis. Only 7% discontinued treatment due to toxicity. Three‐year overall survival was 50% (95% CI, 35–64).

Conclusions

Single patient INDs in pediatric oncology were universally approved in our national and single‐center analysis. In our cohort, single patient INDs were primarily utilized based on disease histology, rather than genomics, for agents that lacked a clinical trial.

FDA approval summary: Dalteparin for the treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolism in pediatric patients

On May 16, 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved dalteparin sodium for the treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) to reduce the risk of recurrence in pediatric patients 1 month of age and older. Approval was primarily based on FDA review of a single-arm trial evaluating dalteparin administered subcutaneous twice daily in 38 pediatric patients with symptomatic VTE. Efficacy was based on the achievement of therapeutic plasma anti-Xa levels. The FDA concluded that dalteparin has efficacy and acceptable safety for pediatric patients.

Paediatric Strategy Forum for medicinal product development of epigenetic modifiers for children: ACCELERATE in collaboration with the European Medicines Agency with participation of the Food and Drug Administration

The fifth multistakeholder Paediatric Strategy Forum focussed on epigenetic modifier therapies for children and adolescents with cancer. As most mutations in paediatric malignancies influence chromatin-associated proteins or transcription and paediatric cancers are driven by developmental gene expression programs, targeting epigenetic mechanisms is predicted to be a very important therapeutic approach in paediatric cancer. The Research to Accelerate Cures and Equity (RACE) for Children Act FDARA amendments to section 505B of the FD&C Act was implemented in August 2020, and as there are many epigenetic targets on the FDA Paediatric Molecular Targets List, clinical evaluation of epigenetic modifiers in paediatric cancers should be considered early in drug development. Companies are also required to submit to the EMA paediatric investigation plans aiming to ensure that the necessary data to support the authorisation of a medicine for children in EU are of high quality and ethically researched. The specific aims of the forum were i) to identify epigenetic targets or mechanisms of action associated with epigenetic modification relevant to paediatric cancers and ii) to define the landscape for paediatric drug development of epigenetic modifier therapies. DNA methyltransferase inhibitors/hypomethylating agents and histone deacetylase inhibitors were largely excluded from discussion as the aim was to discuss those targets for which therapeutic agents are currently in early paediatric and adult development. Epigenetics is an evolving field and could be highly relevant to many paediatric cancers; the biology is multifaceted and new targets are frequently emerging. Targeting epigenetic mechanisms in paediatric malignancy has in most circumstances yet to reach or extend beyond clinical proof of concept, as many targets do not yet have available investigational drugs developed. Eight classes of medicinal products were discussed and prioritised based on the existing level of science to support early evaluation in children: inhibitors of menin, DOT1L, EZH2, EED, BET, PRMT5 and LSD1 and a retinoic acid receptor alpha agonist. Menin inhibitors should be moved rapidly into paediatric development, in view of their biological rationale, strong preclinical activity and ability to fulfil an unmet clinical need. A combination approach is critical for successful utilisation of any epigenetic modifiers (e.g. EZH2 and EED) and exploration of the optimum combination(s) should be supported by preclinical research and, where possible, molecular biomarker validation in advance of clinical translation. A follow-up multistakeholder meeting focussing on BET inhibitors will be held to define how to prioritise the multiple compounds in clinical development that could be evaluated in children with cancer. As epigenetic modifiers are relatively early in development in paediatrics, there is a clear opportunity to shape the landscape of therapies targeting the epigenome in order that efficient and optimum plans for their evaluation in children and adolescents are developed in a timely manner.

Paediatric Strategy Forum for medicinal product development for acute myeloid leukaemia in children and adolescents: ACCELERATE in collaboration with the European Medicines Agency with participation of the Food and Drug Administration

Purpose:

The current standard-of-care for front-line therapy for acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) results in short-term and long-term toxicity, but still approximately 40% of children relapse. Therefore, there is a major need to accelerate the evaluation of innovative medicines, yet drug development continues to be adult-focused. Furthermore, the large number of competing agents in rare patient populations requires coordinated prioritisation, within the global regulatory framework and cooperative group initiatives.

Methods:

The fourth multi-stakeholder Paediatric Strategy Forum focused on AML in children and adolescents.

Results:

CD123 is a high priority target and the paediatric development should be accelerated as a proof-of-concept. Efforts must be coordinated, however, as there are a limited number of studies that can be delivered. Studies of FLT3 inhibitors in agreed paediatric investigation plans present challenges to be completed because they require enrolment of a larger number of patients than actually exist. A consensus was developed by industry and academia of optimised clinical trials. For AML with rare mutations that are more frequent in adolescents than in children, adult trials should enrol adolescents and when scientifically justified, efficacy data could be extrapolated. Methodologies and definitions of minimal residual disease need to be standardised internationally and validated as a new response criterion. Industry supported, academic sponsored platform trials could identify products to be further developed. The Leukaemia and Lymphoma Society PedAL/EUpAL initiative has the potential to be a major advance in the field.

Conclusion:

These initiatives continue to accelerate drug development for children with AML and ultimately improve clinical outcomes.

A Bayesian approach in design and analysis of pediatric cancer clinical trials

It is well recognized that cancer drug development for children and adolescents has many challenges, from biological and societal to economic. Pediatric cancer consists of a diverse group of rare diseases, and the relatively small population of children with multiple, disparate tumor types across various age groups presents a significant challenge for drug development programs as compared to oncology drug development programs for adults. Due to the different types of cancers, limited opportunities exist for extrapolation of efficacy from adult cancer indications to children. Thus, innovative study designs including Bayesian statistical approaches should be considered. A Bayesian approach can be a flexible tool to formally leverage prior knowledge of adult or external controls in pediatric cancer trials. In this article, we provide in a case example of how Bayesian approaches can be used to design, monitor, and analyze pediatric trials. Particularly, Bayesian sequential monitoring can be useful to monitor pediatric trial results as data accumulate. In addition, designing a pediatric trial with both skeptical and enthusiastic priors with Bayesian sequential monitoring can be an efficient mechanism for early trial cessation for both efficacy and futility. The interpretation of efficacy using a Bayesian approach is based on posterior probability and is intuitive and interpretable for patients, parents and prescribers given limited data.

Crossing Oceans: Preclinical Collaboration to Improve Pediatric Drug Development

Changes in the regulatory environment affecting pediatric cancer drug development in the United States and the European Union provide unprecedented opportunity to advance the concept of precision medicine to children with cancer. Increasing evidence suggests that new drugs and biologic products directed at molecular targets presumed to be etiologically associated with many adult cancers may well provide therapeutic options for selected subsets of children with cancer despite their histologic and biologic differences. Regulatory requirements for early evaluation of appropriate new drugs for children based on their molecular mechanism of action, rather than the specific clinical indications for which they are developed and/or approved, will shorten the unacceptable time lag between first-in-human and first-in-children studies. The relative scarcity of pediatric patients eligible for biomarker-directed studies and the ever-expanding compendium of new targeted agents mandate rational, science-based decision-making in selecting and prioritizing appropriate drugs to study early in development. A critical component of the evidence base in such decision-making includes preclinical testing of relevant drugs in pediatric tumor-specific in vitro and in vivo models. Established preclinical testing programs with academic investigator-industry collaborations are actively engaged in such activities. International collaboration is required to address the resource constraints and increasing number of potential products to be tested in a timely, efficient, nonduplicative, and cost-effective manner.

ACCELERATE and European Medicines Agency Paediatric Strategy Forum for medicinal product development of checkpoint inhibitors for use in combination therapy in paediatric patients

The third multistakeholder Paediatric Strategy Forum organised by ACCELERATE and the European Medicines Agency focused on immune checkpoint inhibitors for use in combination therapy in children and adolescents. As immune checkpoint inhibitors, both as monotherapy and in combinations have shown impressive success in some adult malignancies and early phase trials in children of single agent checkpoint inhibitors have now been completed, it seemed an appropriate time to consider opportunities for paediatric studies of checkpoint inhibitors used in combination. Among paediatric patients, early clinical studies of checkpoint inhibitors used as monotherapy have demonstrated a high rate of activity, including complete responses, in Hodgkin lymphoma and hypermutant paediatric tumours. Activity has been very limited, however, in more common malignancies of childhood and adolescence. Furthermore, apart from tumour mutational burden, no other predictive biomarker for monotherapy activity in paediatric tumours has been identified. Based on these observations, there is collective agreement that there is no scientific rationale for children to be enrolled in new monotherapy trials of additional checkpoint inhibitors with the same mechanism of action of agents already studied (e.g. anti-PD1, anti-PDL1 anti-CTLA-4) unless additional scientific knowledge supporting a different approach becomes available. This shared perspective, based on scientific evidence and supported by paediatric oncology cooperative groups, should inform companies on whether a paediatric development plan is justified. This could then be proposed to regulators through the available regulatory tools. Generally, an academic-industry consensus on the scientific merits of a proposal before submission of a paediatric investigational plan would be of great benefit to determine which studies have the highest probability of generating new insights. There is already a rationale for the evaluation of combinations of checkpoint inhibitors with other agents in paediatric Hodgkin lymphoma and hypermutated tumours in view of the activity shown as single agents. In paediatric tumours where no single agent activity has been observed in multiple clinical trials of anti-PD1, anti-PDL1 and anti-CTLA-4 agents as monotherapy, combinations of checkpoint inhibitors with other treatment modalities should be explored when a scientific rationale indicates that they could be efficacious in paediatric cancers and not because these combinations are being evaluated in adults. Immunotherapy in the form of engineered proteins (e.g. monoclonal antibodies and T cell engaging agents) and cellular products (e.g. CAR T cells) has great therapeutic potential for benefit in paediatric cancer. The major challenge for developing checkpoint inhibitors for paediatric cancers is the lack of neoantigens (based on mutations) and corresponding antigen-specific T cells. Progress critically depends on understanding the immune macroenvironment and microenvironment and the ability of the adaptive immune system to recognise paediatric cancers in the absence of high neoantigen burden. Future clinical studies of checkpoint inhibitors in children need to build upon strong biological hypotheses that take into account the distinctive immunobiology of childhood cancers in comparison to that of checkpoint inhibitor responsive adult cancers.

Treatment of Nonmetastatic Unilateral Retinoblastoma in Children

Importance

Multi-institutional collaborative studies that include large patient populations for the management of retinoblastoma with histopathological risk factors could provide important information for patient management.

Objective

To evaluate the implementation of a strategy for the management of nonmetastatic unilateral retinoblastoma in children based on standardized diagnostic and treatment criteria.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This single-arm prospective study applied a strategy based on a single-center experience. The setting was a multicenter study in Latin America (Grupo de America Latina de Oncologia Pediatrica [GALOP]). Participants were children with nonmetastatic unilateral retinoblastoma (staged with the International Retinoblastoma Staging System). The study opened on July 1, 2008, and closed on December 31, 2014. Follow-up was updated until June 30, 2017.

Interventions

Stage 0 patients (without enucleation) were given conservative therapy without a protocol. Stage I patients (with enucleation and no residual tumor) were divided into a high-risk group (retrolaminar invasion and/or scleral invasion) and a low-risk group (all remaining patients). High-risk children received adjuvant chemotherapy with 4 alternating cycles of regimen 1 (cyclophosphamide [65 mg/kg/d] [plus sodium-2-mercaptoethane sulfonate], idarubicin hydrochloride [10 mg/m2/d], and vincristine sulfate [0.05 mg/kg/d]) and 4 cycles of regimen 2 (carboplatin [500 mg/m2/d, days 1 and 2] and etoposide [100 mg/m2/d, days 1-3]). Low-risk children did not receive adjuvant therapy. Children with buphthalmia received neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for a total of 8 cycles.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Probability of event-free survival (extraocular relapse and death from any cause were considered events).

Results

Among 187 children registered in the study, 175 were evaluable (92 [52.5%] female; median age, 22 months; age range, 3-100 months). Forty-two were stage 0 children, 84 were stage I low-risk children, and 42 were stage I high-risk children; there were 7 children in the buphthalmia group. With a median follow-up of 46 months, the 3-year probability of event-free survival was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.94-0.99), and the probability of overall survival was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.94-1.00). Stage 0 patients had no events, stage I low-risk patients had 1 event (orbital relapse treated with second-line therapy), stage I high-risk patients had 2 events (1 central nervous system relapse and 1 death from sepsis), and the buphthalmia group had 1 event (orbital relapse, followed by central nervous relapse and death).

Conclusions and Relevance

Adjuvant therapy may be effective for high-risk unilateral retinoblastoma but is toxic, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for buphthalmus appears feasible.

Interventions for cisplatin-induced hearing loss in children and adolescents with cancer

The identification of preventive interventions that are safe and effective for cisplatin-induced ototoxicity is important, especially in children because hearing loss can impair speech-language acquisition development. Previous randomised trials assessed systemic drugs such as amifostine, sodium diethyldithiocarbamate or disulfiram, and sodium thiosulfate. Amifostine, sodium diethyldithiocarbamate, and disulfiram did not show hearing preservation. Paediatric trials assessing sodium thiosulfate showed efficacy in terms of hearing protection. The SIOPEL 6 trial consisted solely of patients with localised hepatoblastoma and no effects on survival were shown. In the ACCL0431 trial, which included heterogeneous patients, a post-hoc analysis showed significantly worse overall survival among patients who had disseminated disease receiving sodium thiosulfate than among controls, but not among those with localised disease. Intratympanically administered drugs have mainly been assessed in adults and include N-acetylcysteine and dexamethasone. Inconsistent effects of these drugs were identified but these studies were limited by design, small sample size, and statistical approach. Future studies of systemic drugs will need to consider the measurement of disease outcomes through study design and sample size, and ototoxicity endpoints should be harmonised to enhance comparability between trials.

Cancer drugs approved for use in children: Impact of legislative initiatives and future opportunities

It is well appreciated that the number of anticancer drugs approved for use in children is a fraction of the number approved for use in cancers that occur in adults. We address this fact by summarizing the relevant U.S. legislation that provides the framework for the evaluation and approval of drugs used to treat children with cancer. In total, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved 38 new drug applications for pediatric oncology indications, 12 of which were new molecular entities. FDA continues to collaborate with multistakeholders regarding the development of products intended for pediatric cancer and encourages the submission of marketing applications.

ACCELERATE and European Medicine Agency Paediatric Strategy Forum for medicinal product development for mature B-cell malignancies in children

Paediatric Strategy Forums have been created by the multistakeholder organisation, ACCELERATE, and the European Medicines Agency to facilitate dialogue between all relevant stakeholders and suggest strategies in critical areas of paediatric oncology drug development. As there are many medicines being developed for B-cell malignancies in adults but comparatively few in children with these malignancies, a Paediatric Strategy Forum was held to discuss the best approach to develop these products for children. It was concluded that as current frontline therapy is highly successful, despite associated acute toxicity, de-escalation of this or substitution of presently used drugs with new medicines can only be undertaken when there is an effective salvage regimen, which is currently not available. Therefore priority should be given to developing treatment for patients with relapsed and refractory mature B-cell lymphomas. The consensus of the clinicians attending the meeting was that CAR T-cells, T-cell engagers and antibody drug conjugates (excluding those with a vinca alkaloid-like drug) presently have the greatest probability of providing benefit in relapse in view of their mechanism of action. However, as producing autologous CAR T-cells currently takes at least 4 weeks, they are not products which could be quickly employed initially at relapse in rapidly progressing mature B-cell malignancies but only for the consolidation phase of the treatment. Global, industry-supported, academic-sponsored studies testing compounds from different pharmaceutical companies simultaneously should be considered in rare populations, and it was proposed that an international working group be formed to develop an overarching clinical trials strategy for these disease groups. Future Forums are planned for other relevant paediatric oncologic diseases with a high unmet medical need and relevant molecular targets.

Prevention of cisplatin-induced hearing loss in children: Informing the design of future clinical trials

Cisplatin is an essential chemotherapeutic agent in the treatment of many pediatric cancers. Unfortunately, cisplatin-induced hearing loss (CIHL) is a common, clinically significant side effect with life-long ramifications, particularly for young children. ACCL05C1 and ACCL0431 are two recently completed Children's Oncology Group studies focused on the measurement and prevention of CIHL. The purpose of this paper was to gain insights from ACCL05C1 and ACCL0431, the first published cooperative group studies dedicated solely to CIHL, to inform the design of future pediatric otoprotection trials. Use of otoprotective agents is an attractive strategy for preventing CIHL, but their successful development must overcome a unique constellation of methodological challenges related to translating preclinical research into clinical trials that are feasible, evaluate practical interventions, and limit risk. Issues particularly important for children include use of appropriate methods for hearing assessment and CIHL severity grading, and use of trial designs that are well-informed by preclinical models and suitable for relatively small sample sizes. Increasing interest has made available new funding opportunities for expanding this urgently needed research.

Accelerating Pediatric Cancer Drug Development: Challenges and Opportunities for Pediatric Master Protocols

Although outcomes for children with cancer have significantly improved over the past 40 years, there has been little progress in the treatment of some pediatric cancers, particularly when advanced. Additionally, clinical trial options and availability are often insufficient. Improved genomic and immunologic understanding of pediatric cancers, combined with innovative clinical trial designs, may provide an enhanced opportunity to study childhood cancers. Master protocols, which incorporate the use of precision medicine approaches, coupled with the ability to quickly assess the safety and effectiveness of new therapies, have the potential to accelerate early-phase clinical testing of novel therapeutics and which may result in more rapid approval of new drugs for children with cancer. Designing and conducting master protocols for children requires addressing similar principles and requirements as traditional adult oncology trials, but there are also unique considerations for master protocols conducted in children with cancer. The purpose of this paper is to define the key challenges and opportunities associated with this approach in order to ensure that master protocols can be adapted to benefit children and adolescents and ensure that adequate data are captured to advance, in parallel, the clinical development of investigational agents for children with cancer.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval summary: Eltrombopag for the treatment of pediatric patients with chronic immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenia

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved eltrombopag for pediatric patients with chronic immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenia (ITP) ages ≥6 on June 11, 2015, and ages ≥1 on August 24, 2015. Approval was based on the FDA review of two randomized trials that included 159 pediatric patients with chronic ITP who had an insufficient response to corticosteroids, immunoglobulins, or splenectomy. This manuscript describes the basis for approval of these applications. The FDA concluded that eltrombopag has shown efficacy and a favorable benefit to risk profile for pediatric patients with chronic ITP.

Modernizing Clinical Trial Eligibility: Recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology-Friends of Cancer Research Minimum Age Working Group

Purpose Children have historically been excluded from first-in-human studies of promising new cancer drugs and later phase adult clinical trials. Delays in evaluation may result in off-label use without dosing information as the only access to new drugs. A multistakeholder workshop was convened in May 2016 by ASCO and Friends of Cancer Research to identify opportunities for when it would be scientifically appropriate to expand trial eligibility to include children younger than age 18 years in first-in-human and other adult cancer clinical trials. Methods This group convened experts from academia, government, and industry to review barriers to enrolling children and adolescents in oncology clinical trials. We evaluated the historical context, published literature, regulatory considerations, and myriad risks and benefits associated with lowering the age of enrollment on oncology clinical trials. Results We conclude that many of the historical concerns about including children early in oncology clinical trials do not apply in the current scientific and clinical environment of pediatric oncology and drug development; we provide specific recommendations for how the inclusion of children in early-phase investigational cancer drug trials might be accomplished. Automatic inclusion of pediatric patients is appropriate in early-phase trials that assess dose, safety, and pharmacokinetics in a variety of tumor types and later phase trials that assess efficacy in a specific disease that spans adult and pediatric populations. Conclusion Including children in appropriately designed adult clinical oncology trials is feasible and can be done in a way that enhances their access to these agents without compromising safety or development strategies.

Bridging Adult Experience to Pediatrics in Oncology Drug Development

Pediatric drug development in the United States has grown under the current regulations made permanent by the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act of 2012. Over 1200 pediatric studies have now been submitted to the US FDA, but there is still a high rate of failure to obtain pediatric labeling for the indication pursued. Pediatric oncology represents special problems in that the disease is most often dissimilar to any cancer found in the adult population. Therefore, the development of drug dosing in pediatric oncology patients represents a special challenge. Potential approaches to pediatric dosing in oncology patients include extrapolation of efficacy from adult studies in those few cases where the disease is similar, inclusion of adolescent patients in adult trials when possible, and bridging the adult dose to the pediatric dose. An analysis of the recommended phase 2 dose for 40 molecularly targeted agents in pediatric patients provides some insight into current practices. Increased knowledge of tumor biology and efforts to identify and validate molecular targets and genetic abnormalities that drive childhood cancers can lead to increased opportunities for precision medicine in the treatment of pediatric cancers.

Advancing a comprehensive cancer care agenda for children and their families: Institute of Medicine Workshop highlights and next steps

This article highlights key findings from the "Comprehensive Cancer Care for Children and Their Families" March 2015 joint workshop by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and the American Cancer Society. This initiative convened more than 100 family members, clinician investigators, advocates, and members of the public to discuss emerging evidence and care models and to determine the next steps for optimizing quality-of-life outcomes and well-being for children and families during pediatric cancer treatment, after treatment completion, and across the life spectrum. Participants affirmed the triple aim of pediatric oncology that strives for every child with cancer to be cured; provides high-quality palliative and psychosocial supportive, restorative, and rehabilitative care to children and families throughout the illness course and survivorship; and assures receipt of high-quality end-of-life care for patients with advancing disease. Workshop outcomes emphasized the need for new pediatric cancer drug development and identified critical opportunities to prioritize palliative care and psychosocial support as an integral part of pediatric cancer research and treatment, including the necessity for adequately resourcing these supportive services to minimize suffering and distress, effectively address quality-of-life needs for children and families at all stages of illness, and mitigate the long-term health risks associated with childhood cancer and its treatment. Next steps include dismantling existing silos and enhancing collaboration between clinical investigators, disease-directed specialists, and supportive care services; expanding the use of patient-reported and parent-reported outcomes; effectively integrating palliative and psychosocial care; and clinical communication skills development. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;66:398-407. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

International patterns of childhood chronic myeloid leukemia: comparisons between the United States and resource-restricted nations

BACKGROUND

Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) is a rare disease in children and represents approximately 2% of all childhood leukemia. This results in difficulty creating large cohorts of patients for pediatric CML research. The Glivec International Patient Assistance Program (GIPAP) is a patient-access program sponsored by Novartis Oncology and administered by The Max Foundation (MAX) that provides imatinib free of charge to patients in resource-restricted countries who are not able to afford this treatment.

PROCEDURES

GIPAP highlights a cohort of children (n = 3,188) with CML that provides novel insight into international trends in diagnosis, treatment, and survival. These trends can be compared to outcomes in developed nations to crudely assess the impact of an extended access program for CML treatment such as GIPAP.

RESULTS

Overall survival values for children treated for CML within the GIPAP (89%) suggest that imatinib is very effective in middle and low-income countries.

CONCLUSIONS

This may allow for increased international awareness within the scientific community to consider possible reasons for the differences in overall survival in pediatric CML within the United States versus other nations with fewer resources.

Patient-perceived facilitators in the transition of care for young adult survivors of childhood cancer

BACKGROUND

A new challenge has emerged in optimizing the transition of pediatric survivorship care to similarly focused programs that are age-appropriate for young adults. The purpose of this study is to identify components of a clinical survivorship program that facilitate the transition of care for young adult survivors of childhood cancer from a pediatric to adult care-setting.

PROCEDURE

Prior to transition, a descriptive study of childhood cancer survivors was conducted using a cross-sectional study design. A questionnaire was used to identify which clinical components of a survivorship program would most influence their decision to transition care to an adult medical center.

RESULTS

Of 129 invited survivors, 103 participated (80%). Most survivors were age 16-19 years (40/103, 39%) or 20-24 years (37/103, 36%). When asked if the participant was willing to transition their survivorship care to an adult facility, 97 (95%) responded affirmatively. The clinical components most frequently rated "Very Important" in the decision to transition were the acceptance of insurance (80/103, 78%) followed by the presence of a provider knowledgeable in childhood cancer (68/103, 66%). The clinical components most frequently rated "Very Important" or "Important" were the availability of flexible scheduling (102/103, 99%) followed by the comprehensive nature of the care provided (101/103, 98%).

CONCLUSIONS

The decision to transition survivorship care to age-appropriate care-settings is complex and not well understood. Issues related to insurance, clinical team composition and scheduling appear to be most important for young adult survivors making this decision. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2013;601365-1368. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The impact of the written request process on drug development in childhood cancer

PURPOSE

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Modernization Act, enacted in 1997, created a pediatric exclusivity incentive allowing sponsors to qualify for an additional 6 months of marketing exclusivity after satisfying the requirements outlined in the Written Request (WR). This review evaluates the impact of the WR mechanism on the development of oncology drugs in children.

METHODS

A search of the FDA document archiving, reporting, and regulatory tracking system was performed for January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2010. Drugs were identified and pediatric-specific labeling information was obtained from Drugs@fda.gov and FDA Pediatric Labeling Changes Table.

RESULTS

Fifty WRs have been issued for oncology drugs. Pediatric studies have been submitted for 14 drugs. Thirteen received pediatric exclusivity. As of December 31, 2010, labeling changes have been made for 11 drugs. Three drugs were approved for pediatric use.

CONCLUSION

WRs have provided a mechanism to promote the study of drugs in pediatric malignancies. Information from studies resulting from the WRs regarding safety, pharmacokinetics, and tolerability of oncology drugs has been incorporated into pediatric labeling for 11/14 of the drugs. Earlier communication and collaboration between the FDA, National Cancer Institute, clinical investigators, and commercial sponsors are envisioned to facilitate the identification and prioritization of emerging new drugs of interest for WR consideration. Since this is the only regulatory mechanism, resulting from specific legislative initiatives relevant to cancer drug development for children, efforts to enhance its impact on increasing drug approval for pediatric cancer indications are warranted.

Recommendations for the return of research results to study participants and guardians: a report from the Children's Oncology Group

PURPOSE

The Children's Oncology Group (COG) strongly supports the widely recognized principle that research participants should be offered a summary of study results. The mechanism by which to do so in a cooperative research group setting has not been previously described.

METHODS

On the basis of a review of the available empirical and theoretic literature and on iterative, multidisciplinary discussion, a COG Return of Results Task Force (RRTF) offered detailed recommendations for the return of results to research study participants.

RESULTS

The RRTF established guidelines for the notification of research participants and/or their parents/guardians about the availability of research results, a mechanism for and timing of sharing results via registration on the COG public Web site, the scope of the research to be shared, the target audience, and a process for creating and vetting lay summaries of study results. The RRTF recognized the challenges in adequately conveying complex scientific results to audiences with varying levels of health literacy and recommended that particularly sensitive or complex results be returned using direct personal contact. The RRTF also recommended evaluation of the cost, effectiveness, and impact of sharing results.

CONCLUSION

These recommendations provide a framework for the offering and returning of results to participants. They can be used by individual investigators, multi-investigator research collaboratives, and large cooperative groups.

Implementation of multi-site neurocognitive assessments within a pediatric cooperative group: can it be done?

BACKGROUND

Neurocognitive functioning is an important construct in childhood cancer survivorship, given the potential neurotoxicity of central nervous system (CNS) diseases and treatments and the relevance for important functional outcomes in adulthood. However, within pediatric oncology cooperative groups there have been significant barriers to neurocognitive data collection that have historically resulted in incomplete data (<30% compliance), thereby limiting progress in understanding the neurocognitive functioning of survivors. This paper describes the development, feasibility, and potential efficacy of a brief neurocognitive battery to maximize collection of psychometrically robust neurocognitive data within a pediatric cooperative group. We hypothesized that a novel set of procedures could result in collection of data from over 80% of eligible children.

PROCEDURE

A novel assessment battery (ALTE07C1) that evaluates a child's cognitive, social, emotional, and behavioral functioning was developed. It included measures that were psychometrically sound, normed, widely available, and could be administered by any licensed psychologist. The battery required approximately 1 hour of administration time. A data monitoring team was developed to ensure prompt data collection.

RESULTS

Approximately 75% (105 of 140) of institutions with eligible patients opened ALTE07C1; 159 participants have been enrolled. The overall compliance rate for submission of neurocognitive data exceeded 90%.

DISCUSSION

Our study supports the feasibility and potential efficacy of a brief neurocognitive battery and a data monitoring team to evaluate children participating in multi-site pediatric oncology trials. Future work will utilize ALTE07C1 as a primary or secondary endpoint for pediatric trials when there is risk for neurocognitive impairment.

Genetic alterations activating kinase and cytokine receptor signaling in high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia

Genomic profiling has identified a subtype of high-risk B-progenitor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) with alteration of IKZF1, a gene expression profile similar to BCR-ABL1-positive ALL and poor outcome (Ph-like ALL). The genetic alterations that activate kinase signaling in Ph-like ALL are poorly understood. We performed transcriptome and whole genome sequencing on 15 cases of Ph-like ALL and identified rearrangements involving ABL1, JAK2, PDGFRB, CRLF2, and EPOR, activating mutations of IL7R and FLT3, and deletion of SH2B3, which encodes the JAK2-negative regulator LNK. Importantly, several of these alterations induce transformation that is attenuated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, suggesting the treatment outcome of these patients may be improved with targeted therapy.