How is the Pharmaceutical Industry Structured to Optimize Pediatric Drug Development? Existing Pediatric Structure Models and Proposed Recommendations for Structural Enhancement

Correction; Early Access: DOI: 10.1007/s43441-020-00152-0 Early Access: APR 2020Background Pediatric regulations enacted in both Europe and the USA have disrupted the pharmaceutical industry, challenging business and drug development processes, and organizational structures. Over the last decade, with science and innovation evolving, industry has moved from a reactive to a proactive mode, investing in building appropriate structures and capabilities as part of their business strategy to better tackle the challenges and opportunities of pediatric drug development. Methods The EFGCP Children's Medicines Working Party and the IQ Pediatric working group have joined their efforts to survey their member company representatives to understand how pharmaceutical companies are organized to fulfill their regulatory obligations and optimize their pediatric drug development programs. Results Key success factors and recommendations for a fit-for-purpose Pediatric Expert Group (PEG) were identified. Conclusion Pediatric structures and expert groups were shown to be important to support optimization of the development of pediatric medicines.Peer reviewe

Validity and responsiveness of the Daily- and Clinical visit-PROactive Physical Activity in COPD (D-PPAC and C-PPAC) instruments

BACKGROUND: The Daily-PROactive and Clinical visit-PROactive Physical Activity (D-PPAC and C-PPAC) instruments in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) combines questionnaire with activity monitor data to measure patients' experience of physical activity. Their amount, difficulty and total scores range from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) but require further psychometric evaluation. OBJECTIVE: To test reliability, validity and responsiveness, and to define minimal important difference (MID), of the D-PPAC and C-PPAC instruments, in a large population of patients with stable COPD from diverse severities, settings and countries. METHODS: We used data from seven randomised controlled trials to evaluate D-PPAC and C-PPAC internal consistency and construct validity by sex, age groups, COPD severity, country and language as well as responsiveness to interventions, ability to detect change and MID. RESULTS: We included 1324 patients (mean (SD) age 66 (8) years, forced expiratory volume in 1 s 55 (17)% predicted). Scores covered almost the full range from 0 to 100, showed strong internal consistency after stratification and correlated as a priori hypothesised with dyspnoea, health-related quality of life and exercise capacity. Difficulty scores improved after pharmacological treatment and pulmonary rehabilitation, while amount scores improved after behavioural physical activity interventions. All scores were responsive to changes in self-reported physical activity experience (both worsening and improvement) and to the occurrence of COPD exacerbations during follow-up. The MID was estimated to 6 for amount and difficulty scores and 4 for total score. CONCLUSIONS: The D-PPAC and C-PPAC instruments are reliable and valid across diverse COPD populations and responsive to pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions and changes in clinically relevant variables

Advanced Methods for Dose and Regimen Finding During Drug Development: Summary of the EMA/EFPIA Workshop on Dose Finding (London 4-5 December 2014)

Inadequate dose selection for confirmatory trials is currently still one of the most challenging issues in drug development, as illustrated by high rates of late-stage attritions in clinical development and postmarketing commitments required by regulatory institutions. In an effort to shift the current paradigm in dose and regimen selection and highlight the availability and usefulness of well-established and regulatory-acceptable methods, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in collaboration with the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries Association (EFPIA) hosted a multistakeholder workshop on dose finding (London 4-5 December 2014). Some methodologies that could constitute a toolkit for drug developers and regulators were presented. These methods are described in the present report: they include five advanced methods for data analysis (empirical regression models, pharmacometrics models, quantitative systems pharmacology models, MCP-Mod, and model averaging) and three methods for study design optimization (Fisher information matrix (FIM)-based methods, clinical trial simulations, and adaptive studies). Pairwise comparisons were also discussed during the workshop; however, mostly for historical reasons. This paper discusses the added value and limitations of these methods as well as challenges for their implementation. Some applications in different therapeutic areas are also summarized, in line with the discussions at the workshop. There was agreement at the workshop on the fact that selection of dose for phase III is an estimation problem and should not be addressed via hypothesis testing. Dose selection for phase III trials should be informed by well-designed dose-finding studies; however, the specific choice of method(s) will depend on several aspects and it is not possible to recommend a generalized decision tree. There are many valuable methods available, the methods are not mutually exclusive, and they should be used in conjunction to ensure a scientifically rigorous understanding of the dosing rationale

Validity and responsiveness of the Daily- and Clinical visit-PROactive Physical Activity in COPD (D-PPAC and C-PPAC) instruments

Background: The Daily-PROactive and Clinical visit-PROactive Physical Activity (D-PPAC and C-PPAC) instruments in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) combines questionnaire with activity monitor data to measure patients' experience of physical activity. Their amount, difficulty and total scores range from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) but require further psychometric evaluation. Objective: To test reliability, validity and responsiveness, and to define minimal important difference (MID), of the D-PPAC and C-PPAC instruments, in a large population of patients with stable COPD from diverse severities, settings and countries. Methods: We used data from seven randomised controlled trials to evaluate D-PPAC and C-PPAC internal consistency and construct validity by sex, age groups, COPD severity, country and language as well as responsiveness to interventions, ability to detect change and MID. Results: We included 1324 patients (mean (SD) age 66 (8) years, forced expiratory volume in 1 s 55 (17)% predicted). Scores covered almost the full range from 0 to 100, showed strong internal consistency after stratification and correlated as a priori hypothesised with dyspnoea, health-related quality of life and exercise capacity. Difficulty scores improved after pharmacological treatment and pulmonary rehabilitation, while amount scores improved after behavioural physical activity interventions. All scores were responsive to changes in self-reported physical activity experience (both worsening and improvement) and to the occurrence of COPD exacerbations during follow-up. The MID was estimated to 6 for amount and difficulty scores and 4 for total score. Conclusions: The D-PPAC and C-PPAC instruments are reliable and valid across diverse COPD populations and responsive to pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions and changes in clinically relevant variables

Mobilizing patient and public involvement in the development of real-world digital technology solutions: tutorial

Although the value of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) activities in the development of new interventions and tools is well known, little guidance exists on how to perform these activities in a meaningful way. This is particularly true within large research consortia that target multiple objectives, include multiple patient groups, and work across many countries. Without clear guidance, there is a risk that PPIE may not capture patient opinions and needs correctly, thereby reducing the usefulness and effectiveness of new tools. Mobilise-D is an example of a large research consortium that aims to develop new digital outcome measures for real-world walking in 4 patient cohorts. Mobility is an important indicator of physical health. As such, there is potential clinical value in being able to accurately measure a person’s mobility in their daily life environment to help researchers and clinicians better track changes and patterns in a person’s daily life and activities. To achieve this, there is a need to create new ways of measuring walking. Recent advancements in digital technology help researchers meet this need. However, before any new measure can be used, researchers, health care professionals, and regulators need to know that the digital method is accurate and both accepted by and produces meaningful outcomes for patients and clinicians. Therefore, this paper outlines how PPIE structures were developed in the Mobilise-D consortium, providing details about the steps taken to implement PPIE, the experiences PPIE contributors had within this process, the lessons learned from the experiences, and recommendations for others who may want to do similar work in the future. The work outlined in this paper provided the Mobilise-D consortium with a foundation from which future PPIE tasks can be created and managed with clearly defined collaboration between researchers and patient representatives across Europe. This paper provides guidance on the work required to set up PPIE structures within a large consortium to promote and support the creation of meaningful and efficient PPIE related to the development of digital mobility outcomes. J Med Internet Res 2023;25:e44206 doi:10.2196/4420

Objectively Measured Physical Activity in Patients with COPD: Recommendations from an International Task Force on Physical Activity

Physical activity (PA) is of key importance for health among healthy persons and individuals with COPD. PA has multiple dimensions that can be assessed and quantified objectively using activity monitors. Moreover, as shown in the published literature, variable methodologies have been used to date to quantify PA among individuals with COPD, precluding clear comparisons of outcomes across studies. The present paper aims to provide a summary of the available literature for the rationale behind using objectively measured PA and proposes a standardized methodology for assessment, including standard operating procedures for future research. The present paper therefore describes the concept of PA, reports on the importance of PA, summarizes the dimensions of PA, provides a standard operating procedure how to monitor PA using objective assessments and describes the psychometric properties of objectively measured PA. The present international task force recommends implementation of the standard operating procedure for PA data collection and reporting in the future. This should allow to further clarify the relationship between PA and clinical outcomes, to test the impact of treatment interventions on PA in individuals with COPD and to successfully propose a PA endpoint for regulatory qualification in the future

Medicines adaptive pathways to patients: Why, when, and how to engage?

Medicines Adaptive Pathways to Patients (MAPPs) seeks to foster access to novel beneficial treatments for the right patient groups at the earliest appropriate time in the product life‐span, in a sustainable fashion. We summarize the MAPPs engagement process and critical questions to be asked at each milestone of the product life‐span. These considerations are of relevance for regulatory and access pathways that strive to address the “evidence vs. access” conundrum

Medicines adaptive pathways to patients: Why, when, and how to engage?

Medicines Adaptive Pathways to Patients (MAPPs) seeks to foster access to novel beneficial treatments for the right patient groups at the earliest appropriate time in the product life‐span, in a sustainable fashion. We summarize the MAPPs engagement process and critical questions to be asked at each milestone of the product life‐span. These considerations are of relevance for regulatory and access pathways that strive to address the “evidence vs. access” conundrum

Validity and responsiveness of the Daily-and Clinical visit-PROactive Physical Activity in COPD (D-PPAC and C-PPAC) instruments

Background The Daily-PROactive and Clinical visit-PROactive Physical Activity (D-PPAC and C-PPAC) instruments in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) combines questionnaire with activity monitor data to measure patients' experience of physical activity. Their amount, difficulty and total scores range from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) but require further psychometric evaluation. Objective To test reliability, validity and responsiveness, and to define minimal important difference (MID), of the D-PPAC and C-PPAC instruments, in a large population of patients with stable COPD from diverse severities, settings and countries. Methods We used data from seven randomised controlled trials to evaluate D-PPAC and C-PPAC internal consistency and construct validity by sex, age groups, COPD severity, country and language as well as responsiveness to interventions, ability to detect change and MID. Results We included 1324 patients (mean (SD) age 66 (8) years, forced expiratory volume in 1 s 55 (17)% predicted). Scores covered almost the full range from 0 to 100, showed strong internal consistency after stratification and correlated as a priori hypothesised with dyspnoea, health-related quality of life and exercise capacity. Difficulty scores improved after pharmacological treatment and pulmonary rehabilitation, while amount scores improved after behavioural physical activity interventions. All scores were responsive to changes in self-reported physical activity experience (both worsening and improvement) and to the occurrence of COPD exacerbations during follow-up. The MID was estimated to 6 for amount and difficulty scores and 4 for total score. Conclusions The D-PPAC and C-PPAC instruments are reliable and valid across diverse COPD populations and responsive to pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions and changes in clinically relevant variables. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021

Objectively Measured Physical Activity as a COPD Clinical Trial Outcome

BACKGROUND: Reduced physical activity is common in COPD and is associated with poor outcomes. Physical activity is therefore a worthy target for intervention in clinical trials; however, trials evaluating physical activity have used heterogeneous methods. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the available evidence on the efficacy and/or effectiveness of various interventions to enhance objectively measured physical activity in patients with COPD, taking into account the minimal preferred methodologic quality of physical activity assessment? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In this narrative review, the COPD Biomarker Qualification Consortium (CBQC) task force searched three scientific databases for articles that reported the effect of an intervention on objectively measured physical activity in COPD. Based on scientific literature and expert consensus, only studies with >_ 7 measurement days and >_ 4 valid days of >_ 8 h of monitoring were included in the primary analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-seven of 110 (34%) identified studies fulfilled the criteria, investigating the efficacy and/or effectiveness of physical activity behavior change programs (n = 7), mobile or electronic-health interventions (n = 9), rehabilitative exercise (n = 9), bronchodilation (n = 6), lung volume reduction procedures (n = 3), and other interventions (n = 3). Results are generally variable, reflecting the large differences in study characteristics and outcomes. Few studies show an increase beyond the proposed minimal important change of 600 to 1100 daily steps, indicating that enhancing physical activity levels is a challenge. INTERPRETATION: Only one-third of clinical trials measuring objective physical activity in people with COPD fulfilled the preset criteria regarding physical activity assessment. Studies showed variable effects on physical activity even when investigating similar interventions