Ann-Katrine Birkelund Mogensen1, Helle Christiansen1, Marie Louise De Bruin1,2, Christine Erikstrup Hallgreen3. 1. Copenhagen Centre for Regulatory Science, Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 2. Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 3. Copenhagen Centre for Regulatory Science, Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. christine.hallgreen@sund.ku.dk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As part of the European Paediatric Regulation, the European Medicines Agency (former European Medicines Evaluation Agency) and the Paediatric Working Party (precursor for the Paediatric Committee) revised a priority list for studies on off-patent medicinal products in 2007 where a need for studies on paediatric medicinal products was emphasised. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the status of guidance for paediatric use in the Summary of Product Characteristics for medicinal products on the priority list as well as the presence and status of Paediatric Investigation Plans for these medicinal products. METHODS: We included active pharmaceutical ingredients on the priority list authorised through the centralised procedure and/or marketed in Denmark. The status of guidance for paediatric use (indication, posology and/or contraindication) was reviewed from the most recent Summary of Product Characteristics uploaded on the European Medicines Agency or the Danish Medicines Agency website as of November 2020. Information on Paediatric Investigation Plans status (Paediatric Committee opinion, completion and waivers granted) was retrieved from the European Medicines Agency website. RESULTS: A total of 121 active pharmaceutical ingredients were included in this study. Seventy-one percent had guidance for paediatric use in the Summary of Product Characteristics for at least one paediatric subpopulation, more often concerning adolescents (70%) and children (70%) as compared with neonates (41%) and infants (49%). The guidance included a paediatric indication in 46% of the cases, but less often a contraindication (13%). Thirty-three active pharmaceutical ingredients had an agreed Paediatric Investigation Plan, six of these were completed. CONCLUSIONS: Most active pharmaceutical ingredients from the priority list had guidance for paediatric use in the Summary of Product Characteristics. However, there is still an unmet need in relation to guidance for use for the youngest paediatric subpopulation.
BACKGROUND: As part of the European Paediatric Regulation, the European Medicines Agency (former European Medicines Evaluation Agency) and the Paediatric Working Party (precursor for the Paediatric Committee) revised a priority list for studies on off-patent medicinal products in 2007 where a need for studies on paediatric medicinal products was emphasised. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the status of guidance for paediatric use in the Summary of Product Characteristics for medicinal products on the priority list as well as the presence and status of Paediatric Investigation Plans for these medicinal products. METHODS: We included active pharmaceutical ingredients on the priority list authorised through the centralised procedure and/or marketed in Denmark. The status of guidance for paediatric use (indication, posology and/or contraindication) was reviewed from the most recent Summary of Product Characteristics uploaded on the European Medicines Agency or the Danish Medicines Agency website as of November 2020. Information on Paediatric Investigation Plans status (Paediatric Committee opinion, completion and waivers granted) was retrieved from the European Medicines Agency website. RESULTS: A total of 121 active pharmaceutical ingredients were included in this study. Seventy-one percent had guidance for paediatric use in the Summary of Product Characteristics for at least one paediatric subpopulation, more often concerning adolescents (70%) and children (70%) as compared with neonates (41%) and infants (49%). The guidance included a paediatric indication in 46% of the cases, but less often a contraindication (13%). Thirty-three active pharmaceutical ingredients had an agreed Paediatric Investigation Plan, six of these were completed. CONCLUSIONS: Most active pharmaceutical ingredients from the priority list had guidance for paediatric use in the Summary of Product Characteristics. However, there is still an unmet need in relation to guidance for use for the youngest paediatric subpopulation.
Authors: Tjitske M van der Zanden; Saskia N de Wildt; Yves Liem; Martin Offringa; Matthijs de Hoog Journal: Arch Dis Child Date: 2016-10-31 Impact factor: 3.791
Authors: L Lindell-Osuagwu; M Hakkarainen; K Sepponen; K Vainio; T Naaranlahti; H Kokki Journal: J Clin Pharm Ther Date: 2013-12-16 Impact factor: 2.512