Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Regulatory approvals of pediatric oncology drugs: Previous experience and new initiatives

  • Steven Hirschfeld*
  • , Peter T.C. Ho
  • , Malcolm Smith
  • , Richard Pazdur
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

40 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose: To review the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) experience with approvals of new drugs for pediatric oncology and to discuss new regulatory initiatives directed at pediatric oncology. Methods: A retrospective review of FDA archival documents and the published literature. Results: More than 100 drugs have been approved by the Division of Oncology Drug Products of the FDA for the treatment of malignancies. Only 15 have pediatric use information in their labeling, which is less than 50% of the drugs commonly used in the treatment of pediatric malignancies. In the past 20 years, there have been six submissions to the FDA for pediatric oncology indications. To illustrate principles of the approval process, each submission is discussed. Conclusion: Potential reasons for a lack of New Drug Application submissions for pediatric oncology include the small pediatric oncology market compared with the adult oncology market and perceived barriers to performing studies in children. Reasons for failure to approve pediatric indications include small numbers of patients, lack of appropriate controls, and failure to demonstrate patient benefit. Approval criteria include the use of controlled trials, prospective data collection, and disease-appropriate end points. Regulatory initiatives to promote pediatric therapeutic development and product labeling are discussed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1066-1073
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Clinical Oncology
Volume21
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 15 Mar 2003

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Regulatory approvals of pediatric oncology drugs: Previous experience and new initiatives'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this