The status of paediatric medicines initiatives around the world-what has happened and what has not?

Purpose: This review was conducted to examine the current status of paediatric medicines initiatives across the globe. Methods: The authors made a non-systematic descriptive review of current world situation. Results: Two regions, the United States (US) and the European Union (EU), and the World Health Organization (WHO) have introduced strong paediatric initiatives to improve children's health through improving access to better paediatric medicines. The experience from the US initiative indicates that it is possible to stimulate development and study of paediatric medicines and provide important new information for improvement of paediatric therapy. The early results from the EU initiative are similarly encouraging. In Canada, Japan, Australia and other developed countries, specific paediatric medicines initiatives have been less extensive and weaker, with modest results. Disappointingly, current evidence suggests that results from clinical trials outside the US often do not benefit children in the country in which the trials were largely conducted. Pharmaceutical companies that have derived a financial benefit commensurate with the cost of doing the paediatric trials in one country do not seem to be making the results of these trials available to all countries if there is no financial incentive to the company. The WHO campaign 'make medicines child size' has produced substantive accomplishments in building improved foundations to improve mechanisms that will enhance children's access to critical medicines in resource-limited settings. However, practically all of this work has been performed using an amalgamation of short-term funding from a variety of sources as opposed to a sustained, programmatic commitment. Conclusions: Although much still needs to be done, it's clear that with concerted efforts and appropriate resources, change is possible but slow. Retaining and fostering public and political interest in paediatric medicines is challenging, but pivotal for success.Fil: Hoppu, Kalle. Helsinki University Central Hospital; FinlandiaFil: Anabwani, Gabriel. Botswana-Baylor Children’s Clinical Centre of Excellence; BotsuanaFil: Garcia Bournissen, Facundo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños "Ricardo Gutiérrez"; ArgentinaFil: Gazarian, Madlen. University of New South Wales; Australia. Sydney Children’s Hospital; AustraliaFil: Kearns, Gregory L.. The Children’s Mercy Hospital; Estados Unidos. University of Missouri; Estados UnidosFil: Nakamura, Hidefumi. National Center for Child Health and Development; JapónFil: Peterson, Robert G.. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Sri Ranganathan, Shalini. University Of Colombo. Faculty Of Medicine; Sri LankaFil: De Wildt, Saskia N.. Sophia Children’s Hospital; Países Bajo

Pediatric drug safety signal detection: a new drug-event reference set for performance testing of data-mining methods and systems

BACKGROUND: Better evidence regarding drug safety in the pediatric population might be generated from existing data sources such as spontaneous reporting systems and electronic healthcare records. The Global Research in Paediatrics (GRiP)-Network of Excellence aims to develop pediatric-specific methods that can be applied to these data sources. A reference set of positive and negative drug-event associations is required. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a pediatric-specific reference set of positive and negative drug-event associations. METHODS: Considering user patterns and expert opinion, 16 drugs that are used in individuals aged 0-18 years were selected and evaluated against 16 events, regarded as important safety outcomes. A cross-table of unique drug-event pairs was created. Each pair was classified as potential positive or negative control based on information from the drug's Summary of Product Characteristics and Micromedex. If both information sources consistently listed the event as an adverse event, the combination was reviewed as potential positive control. If both did not, the combination was evaluated as potential negative control. Further evaluation was based on published literature. RESULTS: Selected drugs include ibuprofen, flucloxacillin, domperidone, methylphenidate, montelukast, quinine, and cyproterone/ethinylestradiol. Selected events include bullous eruption, aplastic anemia, ventricular arrhythmia, sudden death, acute kidney injury, psychosis, and seizure. Altogether, 256 unique combinations were reviewed, yielding 37 positive (17 with evidence from the pediatric population and 20 with evidence from adults only) and 90 negative control pairs, with the remainder being unclassifiable. CONCLUSION: We propose a drug-event reference set that can be used to compare different signal detection methods in the pediatric population

Once-daily gentamicin in infants and children : a prospective cohort study evaluating safety and the role of therapeutic drug monitoring in minimizing toxicity

BACKGROUND: The clinical evidence base for ototoxicity and nephrotoxicity outcomes with once-daily dosing (ODD) of gentamicin in children is suboptimal. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in once-daily gentamicin regimens is variable and its role in predicting or preventing clinical toxicity is unclear. We aimed to assess the safety of ODD of gentamicin and the usefulness of TDM in a pediatric cohort. METHODS: Children with suspected sepsis were prospectively enrolled to receive ODD of gentamicin at 7 mg/kg/day. Hearing and renal function were objectively as sessed at baseline, during therapy, and after therapy. TDM was performed using an interval-adjusted graphical method (Hartford nomogram). RESULTS: A total of 79 children (median age: 5.6 years; range: 1 month-16 years) received 106 episodes of therapy. In all, 61% of these episodes were for febrile neutropenia. Evaluation was complete in 88% for ototoxicity and 92% for nephrotoxicity. Two patients (1.88%, 95% confidence interval: 0.10%-7.13%) experienced permanent hearing loss. One patient (0.94%, 95% confidence interval: <0.10%-5.73%) experienced transient nephrotoxicity. No abnormal serum gentamicin values were detected, even in those experiencing toxicity. Children experiencing toxicity were undergoing treatment for malignancies and had received nephrotoxic or ototoxic medicines before gentamicin. CONCLUSIONS: In this pediatric cohort receiving ODD of gentamicin, nephrotoxicity was uncommon and reversible, but irreversible ototoxicity occurred more frequently. TDM using a nomogram neither predicted nor prevented toxicity, which was only observed in those with risk factors.6 page(s

Patient based methods for assessing adverse events in clinical trials in rheumatology. Progress report for the OMERACT drug toxicity working party

There has been increasing recognition in recent years that the measurement of drug related toxicities in rheumatology clinical trials has been sub-optimal. The OMERACT Drug Toxicity Working Party was established to address this issue. The first task of the working party was to identify a minimum set of attributes of drug related toxicity that would be important to patients, clinicians, investigators, and policymakers. The working party then developed consensus on a standard set of properties for instruments to measure these attributes. Existing instruments in the field of rheumatology were ascertained by literature review and by contact with experts in the field. Four instruments were ascertained and evaluated using the guidelines developed by the working party. This report outlines the progress and preliminary results of these activities

Off-label use of medicines: consensus recommendations for evaluating appropriateness

• Off-label prescribing is the prescription of a registered medicine for a use that is not included in the product information. The practice is common, with rates up to 40% in adults and up to 90% in paediatric patients. • Off-label prescribing is not illegal and may sometimes be clinically appropriate, but is associated with a number of clinical, safety and ethical issues. To date, no explicit guidance has been available to help clinicians assess appropriateness in off-label prescribing. • We describe the development of a guide for clinicians, policymakers and funders of health care in evaluating the appropriateness of medicines proposed for off-label use. • Three broad categories of appropriate off-label use are identified: ▶ off-label use justified by high-quality evidence; ▶ use within the context of a formal research proposal; and ▶ exceptional use, justified by individual clinical circumstances. • An appropriate process for informed consent is proposed for each category. • If there is no high-quality evidence supporting off-label use, and the medicine is not suitable for exceptional or research indications, its use is generally not recommended. This will reduce inappropriate use, enhance patient safety by reducing exposure to unnecessary risk, and may stimulate more clinically relevant medicines research

バイオモニタリングを用いた水環境の汚染評価に関する研究

博士（学術）神戸大