recommendations by the Conect4Children expert advice group

Funding Information: Competing interests: A.V.R. has received Speaker fees/Consultant for Abbvie, Novartis, UCB, SOBI, Eli Lilly and Roche. N.M. reports grants outside the submitted work in the last five years from the Medical Research Council, National Institute of Health Research, March of Dimes, British Heart Foundation, HCA international, Health Data Research UK, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Chiesi Pharmaceuticals, Prolacta Life Sciences, and Westminster Children’s Research Fund; N.M. is a member of the Nestle Scientific Advisory Board and accepts no personal remuneration for this role. N.M. reports travel and accommodation reimbursements from Chiesi, Nestle and Shire. N.M. is a member of C4C, International Neonatal Collaboration (INC), UK National Research Ethics Advisory Service and MHRA advisory groups and/or working parties. S.W. has received compensation as a member of the scientific advisory board of AM Pharma, Novartis and Khondrion and receives research funding from IMI2 for the Conect4children project. B.A. has worked for GlaxoSmithKline between October 2006 and September 2009 and holds company shares. Between October 2009 and May 2015, she has worked for Novartis. M.S. has recieved research grant and honoraria for meetings and Advisory Boards from Alexion, Sanofi/Genzyme, Takeda, CHIESI, Ultragenix, Orchard, Orphazyme. P.I. is a permanent employee of Bayer AG, Germany. M.V. has received compensation for Advisory boards or Steering committes from Roche, Novartis, Achillion, Apellis, Retrophin/Travere, Alexion pharmaceuticals. C.M. has been a consultant to or has received honoraria from Janssen, Angelini, Servier, Nuvelution, Otsuka, Lundbeck, Pfizer, Neuraxpharm and Esteve outside the submitted work. She declares conflicts of interest unrelated to the present work. M.C. had advisory roles for AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Lilly, and Roche in the last 2 years (outside the topic of the submitted work, for oncology drugs). M.J. has received research grants from Shire and has been engaged as a speaker or consultant by Shire, Ginsana, PCM Scientific Evolan, and New Nordic, all unrelated to the present work. P.S. has received speaker fees and participated at advisory boards for Biomarin, Zogenyx, GW Pharmaceuticals, and has received research funding by ENECTA BV, GW Pharmaceuticals, Kolfarma srl., Eisai. E.R. has received speaker fees and participated at advisory boards for Eisai and has received research funding by GW Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Italian Ministry of Health (MoH) and the Italian Medicine Agency (AIFA). This work was developed within the framework of the DINOGMI Department of Excellence of MIUR 2018-2022 (legge 232 del 2016). M.A.R. is a member of the c4c Ethics Expert Group and received compensation for ethical consulting activities from Bayer AG Wallace Crandall is employee of Eli Lilly and Co. P.C. is an employee of UCB, and owns stock in the company. She was previously an employee of GSK and owns stock in the company. N.R. has received honoraria for consultancies or speaker bureaus from the following pharmaceutical companies in the past 3 years: Ablynx, Amgen, Astrazeneca-Medimmune, Aurinia, Bayer, Bristol Myers and Squibb, Cambridge Healthcare Research (CHR), Celgene, Domain therapeutic, Eli-Lilly, EMD Serono, Glaxo Smith and Kline, Idorsia, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sobi, UCB. The IRCCS Istituto Giannina Gaslini (IGG), where NR works as full-time public employee has received contributions from the following industries in the last 3 years: Bristol Myers and Squibb, Eli-Lilly, F Hoffmann-La Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, Sobi. This funding has been reinvested for the research activities of the hospital in a fully independent manner, without any commitment with third parties. M.L. receives/has received consultation fees from CSL Behring, Novartis, Roche and Octopharma, travel grants from Merck Serono, and been awarded educational grants to organise meetings by Novartis, Biogen Idec, Merck Serono and Bayer. All other authors have no disclosures. Funding Information: Conect4children has received funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking under grant agreement No 777389. The Joint Undertaking receives support from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and EFPIA. The views expressed in this article are the personal views of the author(s) and should not be interpreted as made on behalf of, or reflecting the position of, the regulatory agency/agencies or organisations with which the author(s) is/are employed/affiliated . Publisher Copyright: © 2021, The Author(s).Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating impact on multiple aspects of healthcare, but has also triggered new ways of working, stimulated novel approaches in clinical research and reinforced the value of previous innovations. Conect4children (c4c, www.conect4children.org) is a large collaborative European network to facilitate the development of new medicines for paediatric populations, and is made up of 35 academic and 10 industry partners from 20 European countries, more than 50 third parties, and around 500 affiliated partners. Methods: We summarise aspects of clinical research in paediatrics stimulated and reinforced by COVID-19 that the Conect4children group recommends regulators, sponsors, and investigators retain for the future, to enhance the efficiency, reduce the cost and burden of medicines and non-interventional studies, and deliver research-equity. Findings: We summarise aspects of clinical research in paediatrics stimulated and reinforced by COVID-19 that the Conect4children group recommends regulators, sponsors, and investigators retain for the future, to enhance the efficiency, reduce the cost and burden of medicines and non-interventional studies, and deliver research-equityWe provide examples of research innovation, and follow this with recommendations to improve the efficiency of future trials, drawing on industry perspectives, regulatory considerations, infrastructure requirements and parent–patient–public involvement. We end with a comment on progress made towards greater international harmonisation of paediatric research and how lessons learned from COVID-19 studies might assist in further improvements in this important area.publishersversionepub_ahead_of_prin

The K+ Channel Opener 1-EBIO Potentiates Residual Function of Mutant CFTR in Rectal Biopsies from Cystic Fibrosis Patients

BACKGROUND: The identification of strategies to improve mutant CFTR function remains a key priority in the development of new treatments for cystic fibrosis (CF). Previous studies demonstrated that the K⁺ channel opener 1-ethyl-2-benzimidazolone (1-EBIO) potentiates CFTR-mediated Cl⁻ secretion in cultured cells and mouse colon. However, the effects of 1-EBIO on wild-type and mutant CFTR function in native human colonic tissues remain unknown. METHODS: We studied the effects of 1-EBIO on CFTR-mediated Cl⁻ secretion in rectal biopsies from 47 CF patients carrying a wide spectrum of CFTR mutations and 57 age-matched controls. Rectal tissues were mounted in perfused micro-Ussing chambers and the effects of 1-EBIO were compared in control tissues, CF tissues expressing residual CFTR function and CF tissues with no detectable Cl⁻ secretion. RESULTS: Studies in control tissues demonstrate that 1-EBIO activated CFTR-mediated Cl⁻ secretion in the absence of cAMP-mediated stimulation and potentiated cAMP-induced Cl⁻ secretion by 39.2±6.7% (P<0.001) via activation of basolateral Ca²⁺-activated and clotrimazole-sensitive KCNN4 K⁺ channels. In CF specimens, 1-EBIO potentiated cAMP-induced Cl⁻ secretion in tissues with residual CFTR function by 44.4±11.5% (P<0.001), but had no effect on tissues lacking CFTR-mediated Cl⁻ conductance. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that 1-EBIO potentiates Cl⁻secretion in native CF tissues expressing CFTR mutants with residual Cl⁻ channel function by activation of basolateral KCNN4 K⁺ channels that increase the driving force for luminal Cl⁻ exit. This mechanism may augment effects of CFTR correctors and potentiators that increase the number and/or activity of mutant CFTR channels at the cell surface and suggests KCNN4 as a therapeutic target for CF

Industry and Patient Perspectives on Child Participation in Clinical Trials: The Pediatric Assent Initiative Survey Report

Background:Obtaining assent from children participating in clinical trials acknowledges autonomy and developmental ability tocontribute to the consent process. This critical step in pediatric drug development remains poorly understood, with significantroom for improving the clarity, efficiency, and implementation of the assent process. Beyond ethical necessity of informingchildren about their treatment, the assent process provides the advantages of including children in discussions about theirdiagnosis and treatment—allowing greater understanding of interventions included in the study. A formalized assent processacknowledges the child as a volunteer and provides a forum for questions and feedback. Legal, cultural, and social differences havehistorically prevented the development of clear, concise, and accessible materials to ensure children understand the clinical trialdesign. Published guidelines on obtaining pediatric assent are vague, with many decisions left to local institutional review boardsand ethics committees, underscoring the need for collaboratively designed standards. To address this need, 2 surveys wereconducted to quantify perspectives on assent in pediatric clinical trials.Methods:Two digital surveys were circulated in the UnitedStates and internationally (October 2014 to January 2015). The first survey targeted children, parents, and/or caregivers. Thesecond polled clinical trial professionals on their organizations’ experience and policies regarding pediatric assent.Results:Forty-five respondents completed the child and parent/caregiver survey; 57 respondents completed the industry survey. Respondentsfrom both surveys detailed experiences with clinical trials and the impediments to securing assent, offering potential solutions toattaining assent in pediatric patients.Conclusions:An important opportunity exists for standardized practices and tools to ensurepediatric patients make well-informed decisions regarding their participation in clinical trials, using materials appropriate to theirlevel of understanding. These tools would establish a baseline standard for the assent process and be made available toresearchers, improving their ability to secure assent from young patients