Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ethics of Drug Research in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Drugs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Critical illness and treatment modalities change pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of medications used in critically ill children, in addition to age-related changes in drug disposition and effect. Hence, to ensure effective and safe drug therapy, research in this population is urgently needed. However, conducting research in the vulnerable population of the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) presents with ethical challenges. This article addresses the main ethical issues specific to drug research in these critically ill children and proposes several solutions. The extraordinary environment of the PICU raises specific challenges to the design and conduct of research. The need for proxy consent of parents (or legal guardians) and the stress-inducing physical environment may threaten informed consent. The informed consent process is challenging because emergency research reduces or even eliminates the time to seek consent. Moreover, parental anxiety may impede adequate understanding and generate misconceptions. Alternative forms of consent have been developed taking into account the unpredictable reality of the acute critical care environment. As with any research in children, the burden and risk should be minimized. Recent developments in sample collection and analysis as well as pharmacokinetic analysis should be considered in the design of studies. Despite the difficulties inherent to drug research in critically ill children, methods are available to conduct ethically sound research resulting in relevant and generalizable data. This should motivate the PICU community to commit to drug research to ultimately provide the right drug at the right dose for every individual child.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS). International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects. Geneva 2002.

  2. Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10. Washington: US Government Printing Office; 1949. p. 181–2.

  3. The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Washington: US Government Printing Office; 1978.

  4. Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects (8th revision; original: 1964), 2013.

  5. Bos W, Tromp K, Tibboel D, Pinxten W. Ethical aspects of clinical research with minors. Eur J Pediatr. 2013;172(7):859–66. doi:10.1007/s00431-012-1856-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Shirkey H. Therapeutic orphans. J Pediatr. 1968;72(1):119–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kearns GL, Abdel-Rahman SM, Alander SW, Blowey DL, Leeder JS, Kauffman RE. Developmental pharmacology—drug disposition, action, and therapy in infants and children. N Eng J Med. 2003;349(12):1157–67. doi:10.1056/NEJMra035092.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Shann F, Chiletti R. Neonatal herpes virus infection: duration of extracorporeal support and the dose of acyclovir. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2011;12(5):605–6. doi:10.1097/PCC.0b013e3182191780 (author reply).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Prodhan P, Okhuysen-Cawley R, Imamura M. Central extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory pediatric septic shock. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2011;12(5):606–7. doi:10.1097/PCC.0b013e31821917cc (author reply).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Conroy S. Association between licence status and medication errors. Arch Dis Child. 2011;96(3):305–6. doi:10.1136/adc.2010.191940.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Turner S, Gill A, Nunn T, Hewitt B, Choonara I. Use of “off-label” and unlicensed drugs in paediatric intensive care unit. Lancet. 1996;347(9000):549–50. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(96)91182-4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sutherland JM. Fatal cardiovascular collapse of infants receiving large amounts of chloramphenicol. AMA J Dis Child. 1959;97(6):761–7. doi:10.1001/archpedi.1959.02070010763001.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Johnson TN. The development of drug metabolising enzymes and their influence on the susceptibility to adverse drug reactions in children. Toxicology. 2003;192(1):37–48. doi:10.1016/S0300-483X(03)00249-X.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Vet NJ, de Hoog M, Tibboel D, de Wildt SN. The effect of inflammation on drug metabolism: a focus on pediatrics. Drug Discov Today. 2011;16(9–10):435–42. doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2011.02.014.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Daschner M. Drug dosage in children with reduced renal function. Pediatr Nephrol. 2005;20(12):1675–86. doi:10.1007/s00467-005-1922-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Verbeeck RK. Pharmacokinetics and dosage adjustment in patients with hepatic dysfunction. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2008;64(12):1147–61. doi:10.1007/s00228-008-0553-z.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Verbeeck RK, Musuamba FT. Pharmacokinetics and dosage adjustment in patients with renal dysfunction. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2009;65(8):757–73. doi:10.1007/s00228-009-0678-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wildschut ED, Ahsman MJ, Houmes RJ, Pokorna P, de Wildt SN, Mathot RA, et al. Pharmacotherapy in neonatal and pediatric extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Curr Drug Metab. 2012;13(6):767–77. doi:10.2174/138920012800840383.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. van den Broek MP, Groenendaal F, Egberts AC, Rademaker CM. Effects of hypothermia on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics: a systematic review of preclinical and clinical studies. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2010;49(5):277–94. doi:10.2165/11319360-000000000-00000.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Schetz M. Drug dosing in continuous renal replacement therapy: general rules. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2007;13(6):645–51. doi:10.1097/MCC.0b013e3282f0a3d3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act, US Public Law 107–109, 2002.

  22. European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Regulation (EC) No. 1901/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on medicinal products for paediatric use and amending Regulation (EEC) No. 1768/92, Directive 2001/20/EC, Directive 2001/83/EC and Regulation (EC) No. 726/2004. Off J Eur Union. 2006;49(L 378):1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Benjamin DK Jr, Smith PB, Murphy MD, Roberts R, Mathis L, Avant D, et al. Peer-reviewed publication of clinical trials completed for pediatric exclusivity. JAMA. 2006;296(10):1266–73. doi:10.1001/jama.296.10.1266.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wimmer S, Rascher W, McCarthy S, Neubert A. The eu paediatric regulation: still a large discrepancy between therapeutic needs and approved paediatric investigation plans. Paediatr Drugs. 2014. doi:10.1007/s40272-014-0082-4.

  25. Davies EH, Ollivier CM, Saint Raymond A. Paediatric investigation plans for pain: painfully slow! Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2010;66(11):1091–7. doi:10.1007/s00228-010-0886-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kimland E, Odlind V. Off-label drug use in pediatric patients. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2012;91(5):796–801. doi:10.1038/clpt.2012.26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Yang CP, Veltri MA, Anton B, Yaster M, Berkowitz ID. Food and Drug Administration approval for medications used in the pediatric intensive care unit: a continuing conundrum. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2011;12(5):e195–9. doi:10.1097/PCC.0b013e3181fe25b9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Doherty DR, Pascuet E, Ni A, Stewart P, Splinter W, Vaillancourt R. Off-label drug use in pediatric anesthesia and intensive care according to official and pediatric reference formularies. Can J Anaesth. 2010;57(12):1078–88. doi:10.1007/s12630-010-9395-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ceelie I, van der Starre C, Tibboel D, Stol K, Koren G, de Wildt SN. Evaluation of drug formularies for pediatric intensive care. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2011;12(1):e14–9. doi:10.1097/PCC.0b013e3181d90228.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Morris AD, Zaritsky AL, LeFever G. Evaluation of ethical conflicts associated with randomized, controlled trials in critically ill children. Crit Care Med. 2000;28(4):1152–6. doi:10.1097/00003246-199801001-00173.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Duffett M, Choong K, Hartling L, Menon K, Thabane L, Cook DJ. Randomized controlled trials in pediatric critical care: a scoping review. Crit Care. 2013;17(5):R256. doi:10.1186/cc13083.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Sharkey K, Savulescu J, Aranda S, Schofield P. Clinician gate-keeping in clinical research is not ethically defensible: an analysis. J Med Ethics. 2010;36(6):363–6. doi:10.1136/jme.2009.031716.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Menon K, Ward R, Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. A study of consent for participation in a non-therapeutic study in the pediatric intensive care population. J Med Ethics. 2014;40(2):123–6. doi:10.1136/medethics-2012-101075.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Harron K, Lee T, Ball T, Mok Q, Gamble C, Macrae D, et al. Making co-enrolment feasible for randomised controlled trials in paediatric intensive care. PloS One. 2012;7(8):e41791. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0041791.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Duffett M, Choong K, Foster J, Cheng J, Meade MO, Menon K, et al. Clonidine in the sedation of mechanically ventilated children: a pilot randomized trial. J Crit Care. 2014;29(5):758–63. doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2014.05.029.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Rabe H. The need for noninvasive biomarkers for drug safety in neonatal circulation. Biomarkers Med. 2010;4(5):771–6. doi:10.2217/bmm.10.88.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Vet NJ, Ista E, de Wildt SN, van Dijk M, Tibboel D, de Hoog M. Optimal sedation in pediatric intensive care patients: a systematic review. Intensive Care Med. 2013;39(9):1524–34. doi:10.1007/s00134-013-2971-3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. de Graaf J, van Lingen RA, Valkenburg AJ, Weisglas-Kuperus N, Groot Jebbink L, Wijnberg-Williams B, et al. Does neonatal morphine use affect neuropsychological outcomes at 8 to 9 years of age? Pain. 2013;154(3):449–58. doi:10.1016/j.pain.2012.12.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Holubkov R, Dean JM, Berger J, Anand KJ, Carcillo J, Meert K, et al. Is “rescue” therapy ethical in randomized controlled trials? Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2009;10(4):431–8. doi:10.1097/PCC.0b013e318198bd13.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. European Parliament and the Council of the Europan Union. Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use, and repealing Directive 2001/20/EC. Off J Eur Union. 2014;57(L 158):1–76.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Protections for children involved as subjects in research (45 CFR Part 46, Subpart D), 2009.

  42. Kent G. Shared understandings for informed consent: the relevance of psychological research on the provision of information. Soc Sci Med. 1996;43(10):1517–23. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(96)00173-6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Cuttini M. Proxy informed consent in pediatric research: a review. Early Hum Dev. 2000;60(2):89–100. doi:10.1016/S0378-3782(00)00106-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Balluffi A, Kassam-Adams N, Kazak A, Tucker M, Dominguez T, Helfaer M. Traumatic stress in parents of children admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2004;5(6):547–53. doi:10.1097/01.PCC.0000137354.19807.44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Rees G, Gledhill J, Garralda ME, Nadel S. Psychiatric outcome following paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) admission: a cohort study. Intensive Care Med. 2004;30(8):1607–14. doi:10.1007/s00134-004-2310-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Woolfall K, Frith L, Gamble C, Young B. How experience makes a difference: practitioners’ views on the use of deferred consent in paediatric and neonatal emergency care trials. BMC Med Ethics. 2013;14:45. doi:10.1186/1472-6939-14-45.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Menon K, Ward RE, Gaboury I, Thomas M, Joffe A, Burns K, et al. Factors affecting consent in pediatric critical care research. Intensive Care Med. 2012;38(1):153–9. doi:10.1007/s00134-011-2412-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Thomas M, Menon K. Consenting to pediatric critical care research: understanding the perspective of parents. Dynamics. 2013;24(3):18–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Hulst JM, Peters JW, van den Bos A, Joosten KF, van Goudoever JB, Zimmermann LJ, et al. Illness severity and parental permission for clinical research in a pediatric ICU population. Intensive Care Med. 2005;31(6):880–4. doi:10.1007/s00134-005-2647-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Flanagan BM, Philpott S, Strosberg MA. Protecting participants of clinical trials conducted in the intensive care unit. J Intensive Care Med. 2011;26(4):237–49. doi:10.1177/0885066610390867.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Needle JS, O’Riordan M, Smith PG. Parental anxiety and medical comprehension within 24 hrs of a child’s admission to the pediatric intensive care unit*. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2009;10(6):668–74. doi:10.1097/PCC.0b013e3181a706c9 (quiz 74).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Ballard HO, Shook LA, Desai NS, Anand KJ. Neonatal research and the validity of informed consent obtained in the perinatal period. J Perinatol. 2004;24(7):409–15. doi:10.1038/sj.jp.7211142.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Mason SA, Allmark PJ. Obtaining informed consent to neonatal randomised controlled trials: interviews with parents and clinicians in the Euricon study. Lancet. 2000;356(9247):2045–51. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(00)03401-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Chappuy H, Baruchel A, Leverger G, Oudot C, Brethon B, Haouy S, et al. Parental comprehension and satisfaction in informed consent in paediatric clinical trials: a prospective study on childhood leukaemia. Arch Dis Child. 2010;95(10):800–4. doi:10.1136/adc.2009.180695.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Tait AR, Voepel-Lewis T, Malviya S. Do they understand? (part I): parental consent for children participating in clinical anesthesia and surgery research. Anesthesiology. 2003;98(3):603–8. doi:10.1097/00000542-200303000-00005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Raymond TT, Carroll TG, Sales G, Morris MC. Effectiveness of the informed consent process for a pediatric resuscitation trial. Pediatrics. 2010;125(4):e866–75. doi:10.1542/peds.2009-2427.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. US Department of Health and Human Services. Guidance for Institutional Review Boards, Clinical Investigators, and Sponsors: Exception from Informed Consent Requirements for Emergency Research (updated 2013). March 2011.

  58. Koogler T. Legal and ethical policies regarding research involving critically ill children. Virtual Mentor. 2012;14(10):797–800. doi:10.1001/virtualmentor.2012.14.10.pfor1-1210.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Gamble C, Nadel S, Snape D, McKay A, Hickey H, Williamson P, et al. What parents of children who have received emergency care think about deferring consent in randomised trials of emergency treatments: postal survey. PloS One. 2012;7(5):e35982. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0035982.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Woolfall K, Young B, Frith L, Appleton R, Iyer A, Messahel S, et al. Doing challenging research studies in a patient-centred way: a qualitative study to inform a randomised controlled trial in the paediatric emergency care setting. BMJ Open. 2014;4(5):e005045. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005045.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Eltorki M, Uleryk E, Freedman SB. Waiver of informed consent in pediatric resuscitation research: a systematic review. Acad Emerg Med. 2013;20(8):822–34. doi:10.1111/acem.12180.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Duffett M, Burns KE, Kho ME, Lauzier F, Meade MO, Arnold DM, et al. Consent in critical care trials: a survey of Canadian research ethics boards and critical care researchers. J Crit Care. 2011;26(5):533 e11–22. doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2010.12.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Jansen TC, Bakker J, Kompanje EJ. Inability to obtain deferred consent due to early death in emergency research: effect on validity of clinical trial results. Intensive Care Med. 2010;36(11):1962–5. doi:10.1007/s00134-010-1988-0.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Jansen TC, Kompanje EJ, Druml C, Menon DK, Wiedermann CJ, Bakker J. Deferred consent in emergency intensive care research: what if the patient dies early? Use the data or not? Intensive Care Med. 2007;33(5):894–900. doi:10.1007/s00134-007-0580-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Maitland K, Molyneux S, Boga M, Kiguli S, Lang T. Use of deferred consent for severely ill children in a multi-centre phase III trial. Trials. 2011;12:90. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-12-90.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Simons SH, van Dijk M, van Lingen RA, Roofthooft D, Duivenvoorden HJ, Jongeneel N, et al. Routine morphine infusion in preterm newborns who received ventilatory support: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2003;290(18):2419–27. doi:10.1001/jama.290.18.2419.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. van Dijk M, Bouwmeester NJ, Duivenvoorden HJ, Koot HM, Tibboel D, Passchier J, et al. Efficacy of continuous versus intermittent morphine administration after major surgery in 0–3-year-old infants; a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Pain. 2002;98(3):305–13. doi:10.1016/S0304-3959(02)00031-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Knibbe CA, Krekels EH, van den Anker JN, DeJongh J, Santen GW, van Dijk M, et al. Morphine glucuronidation in preterm neonates, infants and children younger than 3 years. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2009;48(6):371–85. doi:10.2165/00003088-200948060-00003.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Krekels EH, Tibboel D, de Wildt SN, Ceelie I, Dahan A, van Dijk M, et al. Evidence-based morphine dosing for postoperative neonates and infants. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2014. doi:10.1007/s40262-014-0135-4.

  70. Ahsman MJ, Tibboel D, Mathot RA, de Wildt SN. Sample collection, biobanking, and analysis. Handb Exp Pharmacol. 2011;205:203–17. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-20195-0_10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Autmizguine J, Benjamin DK, Smith PB, Sampson M, Ovetchkine P, Cohen-Wolkowiez M, et al. Pharmacokinetic studies in infants using minimal-risk study designs. Curr Clin Pharmacol. 2014.

  72. Howie SR. Blood sample volumes in child health research: review of safe limits. Bull World Health Organ. 2011;89(1):46–53. doi:10.2471/BLT.10.080010.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Vogeser M, Seger C. A decade of HPLC-MS/MS in the routine clinical laboratory—goals for further developments. Clin Biochem. 2008;41(9):649–62. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2008.02.017.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Jebrail MJ, Bartsch MS, Patel KD. Digital microfluidics: a versatile tool for applications in chemistry, biology and medicine. Lab Chip. 2012;12(14):2452–63. doi:10.1039/c2lc40318h.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Wootton RC, Demello AJ. Microfluidics: analog-to-digital drug screening. Nature. 2012;483(7387):43–4. doi:10.1038/483043a.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Lafreniere NM, Shih SC, Abu-Rabie P, Jebrail MJ, Spooner N, Wheeler AR. Multiplexed extraction and quantitative analysis of pharmaceuticals from DBS samples using digital microfluidics. Bioanalysis. 2014;6(3):307–18. doi:10.4155/bio.13.311.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Li CG, Lee CY, Lee K, Jung H. An optimized hollow microneedle for minimally invasive blood extraction. Biomed Microdevices. 2013;15(1):17–25. doi:10.1007/s10544-012-9683-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Lehmann S, Delaby C, Vialaret J, Ducos J, Hirtz C. Current and future use of “dried blood spot” analyses in clinical chemistry. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2013;51(10):1897–909. doi:10.1515/cclm-2013-0228.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Cohen-Wolkowiez M, Watt KM, Zhou C, Bloom BT, Poindexter B, Castro L, et al. Developmental pharmacokinetics of piperacillin and tazobactam using plasma and dried blood spots from infants. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58(5):2856–65. doi:10.1128/AAC.02139-13.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Spooner N, Lad R, Barfield M. Dried blood spots as a sample collection technique for the determination of pharmacokinetics in clinical studies: considerations for the validation of a quantitative bioanalytical method. Anal Chem. 2009;81(4):1557–63. doi:10.1021/ac8022839.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. de Boer T, Wieling J, Meulman E, Reuvers M, Renkema G, den Daas I, et al. Application of dried blood spot sampling combined with LC–MS/MS for genotyping and phenotyping of CYP450 enzymes in healthy volunteers. Biomed Chromatogr BMC. 2011;25(10):1112–23. doi:10.1002/bmc.1580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Hollegaard MV, Grauholm J, Nielsen R, Grove J, Mandrup S, Hougaard DM. Archived neonatal dried blood spot samples can be used for accurate whole genome and exome-targeted next-generation sequencing. Mol Genet Metab. 2013;110(1–2):65–72. doi:10.1016/j.ymgme.2013.06.004.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Hollegaard MV, Grauholm J, Norgaard-Pedersen B, Hougaard DM. DNA methylome profiling using neonatal dried blood spot samples: a proof-of-principle study. Mol Genet Metab. 2013;108(4):225–31. doi:10.1016/j.ymgme.2013.01.016.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Admiraal R, van Kesteren C, Boelens JJ, Bredius RG, Tibboel D, Knibbe CA. Towards evidence-based dosing regimens in children on the basis of population pharmacokinetic pharmacodynamic modelling. Arch Dis Child. 2014;99(3):267–72. doi:10.1136/archdischild-2013-303721.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Marsot A, Boulamery A, Bruguerolle B, Simon N. Population pharmacokinetic analysis during the first 2 years of life: an overview. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2012;51(12):787–98. doi:10.1007/s40262-012-0015-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. De Cock RF, Piana C, Krekels EH, Danhof M, Allegaert K, Knibbe CA. The role of population PK–PD modelling in paediatric clinical research. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2011;67(Suppl. 1):5–16. doi:10.1007/s00228-009-0782-9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Ahsman MJ, Wildschut ED, Tibboel D, Mathot RA. Pharmacokinetics of cefotaxime and desacetylcefotaxime in infants during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010;54(5):1734–41. doi:10.1128/AAC.01696-09.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Vuong LT, Blood AB, Vogel JS, Anderson ME, Goldstein B. Applications of accelerator MS in pediatric drug evaluation. Bioanalysis. 2012;4(15):1871–82. doi:10.4155/bio.12.173.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. European Medicines Agency. ICH guideline M3(R2) on non-clinical safety studies for the conduct of human clinical trials and marketing authorisation for pharmaceuticals. 2009.

  90. US Department of Health and Human Services. Guidance for industry, investigators and reviewers: exploratory IND studies. 2006.

  91. Salehpour M, Possnert G, Bryhni H. Subattomole sensitivity in biological accelerator mass spectrometry. Anal Chem. 2008;80(10):3515–21. doi:10.1021/ac800174j.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Vet NJ, de Wildt SN, Verlaat CW, Knibbe CA, Mooij MG, Hop WC, et al. Daily interruption of sedation in critically ill children: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2014;15:55. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-55.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Carroll TG, Dimas VV, Raymond TT. Vasopressin rescue for in-pediatric intensive care unit cardiopulmonary arrest refractory to initial epinephrine dosing: a prospective feasibility pilot trial. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2012;13(3):265–72. doi:10.1097/PCC.0b013e31822f1569.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Mooij MG, van Duijn E, Knibbe CA, Windhorst AD, Hendrikse NH, Vaes WH, et al. Pediatric microdose study of [C]Paracetamol to study drug metabolism using accelerated mass spectrometry: proof of concept. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2014. doi:10.1007/s40262-014-0176-8.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research is supported by grants from The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (113203203, 113202007 and 90700304); however, no financial support was received specifically for the writing of the manuscript.

N. Kleiber, K. Tromp, M. G. Mooij, S. van de Vathorst, D. Tibboel and S. N. de Wildt declare no relevant conflicts of interest.

Ko Hagoort is thanked for editing the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Intensive Care and Department of Pediatric Surgery, Erasmus MC–Sophia Children’s Hospital, P.O. Box 2060, 3000 CB, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Niina Kleiber, Miriam G. Mooij, Dick Tibboel & Saskia N. de Wildt

  2. Department of Medical Ethics and Philosophy of Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Krista Tromp & Suzanne van de Vathorst

Authors
  1. Niina Kleiber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Krista Tromp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Miriam G. Mooij
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Suzanne van de Vathorst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Dick Tibboel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Saskia N. de Wildt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saskia N. de Wildt.

Additional information

N. Kleiber and K. Tromp contributed equally to this paper.

This article is part of the topical collection on Ethics of Pediatric Drug Research.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kleiber, N., Tromp, K., Mooij, M.G. et al. Ethics of Drug Research in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit. Pediatr Drugs 17, 43–53 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40272-014-0101-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40272-014-0101-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation