Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quantitative Extrapolation: An Approach to Validation of Adult Drug Efficacy in Pediatric Subjects

  • Special Section: Maternal and Child Health Therapeutics
  • Published:
Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Confirmation of efficacy in pediatric drug development has traditionally required large, fully powered efficacy studies that have proven to have major feasibility and ethical challenges. Extrapolation of efficacy in the framework provided by the US Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency is an appropriate solution when there is similarity of disease. When there is uncertainty regarding the degree of disease similarity, partial extrapolation may be utilized. The authors propose a more quantitative approach to partial extrapolation (ie, quantitative extrapolation), involving (1) integration of adult pharmacokinetic (PK), pharmacodynamic (PD), and clinical outcome data using pharmacometric models, (2) extrapolation using the adult pharmacometric model to predict PD and efficacy outcomes in pediatric subjects, and (3) validation of pediatric predictions with a streamlined plan of pediatric trials (ie, a quantitative extrapolation plan). A case study is presented for quantitative extrapolation using dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors. In this example, the authors demonstrate how adult PK, PD, and HbA1c data can be integrated using a pharmacometric model for DPP-4 inhibitors with pediatric dose selection and efficacy validated with relatively few pediatric subjects.

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. Copeland KC, Silverstein J, Moore KR, et al. Management of newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in children and adolescents. Pediatrics. 2013;131(2):364–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Goran MI, Ball GD, Cruz ML. Obesity and risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease in children and adolescents. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2003;88(4):1417–1427.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Krakoff J, Hanson RL, Kobes S, Knowler WC. Comparison of the effect of plasma glucose concentrations on microvascular disease between Pima Indian youths and adults. Diabetes Care. 2001;24(6):1023–1028.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Alberti G, Zimmet P, Shaw J, Bloomgarden Z, Kaufman F, Silink M. Type 2 diabetes in the young: the evolving epidemic: the International Diabetes Federation consensus workshop. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(7):1798–1811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Pinhas-Hamiel O, Zeitler P. Clinical presentation and treatment of type 2 diabetes in children. Pediatr Diabetes. 2007;8(suppl 9):16–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. World Health Organization. Diabetes Fact Sheet. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; March 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Imperatore G, Boyle JP, Thompson TJ, et al. Projections of type 1 and type 2 diabetes burden in the U.S. population aged <20 years through 2050: dynamic modeling of incidence, mortality, and population growth. Diabetes Care. 2012;35(12):2515–2520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Effects of metformin, metformin plus rosiglitazone, and metformin plus lifestyle on insulin sensitivity and beta-cell function in TODAY. Diabetes Care. 2013;36(6):1749–1757.

  9. Kahn SE, Haffner SM, Heise MA, et al. Glycemic durability of rosiglitazone, metformin, or glyburide monotherapy. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(23):2427–2443.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Zeitler P, Hirst K, Pyle L, et al. A clinical trial to maintain glycemic control in youth with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(24):2247–2256.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Zee P, Portman R. Paediatric type 2 diabetes mellitus meeting trial recruitment issues—a company perspective. In: EMA Workshop on Paediatric Investigation Plans in Type-2 Diabetes Mellitus. London, UK: European Medicines Agency; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  12. US Food and Drug Administration. Specific Requirements on Content and Format of Labeling for Human Prescription Drugs: Revision of “Pediatric Use” Subsection in the Labeling: Final Rule, Federal Register. Silver Spring, MD: US Food and Drug Administration; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  13. European Medicines Agency. Concept Paper on Extrapolation of Efficacy and Safety in Medicine Development. London, UK: European Medicines Agency; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Dunne J, Rodriguez WJ, Murphy MD, et al. Extrapolation of adult data and other data in pediatric drug-development programs. Pediatrics. 2011;128(5):e1242–e1249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Tamborlane W. T2D in children and adolescents. In: EMA Workshop on Paediatric Investigation Plans in Type-2 Diabetes Mellitus. London, UK: European Medicines Agency; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Tamborlane WV, Klingensmith G. Crisis in care: limited treatment options for type 2 diabetes in adolescents and youth. Diabetes Care. 2013;36(6):1777–1778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Vaidyanathan J, Choe S, Sahajwalla CG. Type 2 diabetes in pediatrics and adults: thoughts from a clinical pharmacology perspective. J Pharm Sci. 2012;101(5):1659–1671.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Bellanti F, Della Pasqua O. Modelling and simulation as research tools in paediatric drug development. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2011;67(suppl 1):75–86.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Jadhav PR, Kern SE. The need for modeling and simulation to design clinical investigations in children. J Clin Pharmacol. 2010;50(suppl 9):121S–129S.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Jadhav PR, Zhang J, Gobburu JV. Leveraging prior quantitative knowledge in guiding pediatric drug development: a case study. Pharm Stat. 2009;8(3):216–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Leong R, Vieira ML, Zhao P, et al. Regulatory experience with physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling for pediatric drug trials. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2012;91(5):926–931.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Manolis E, Osman TE, Herold R, et al. Role of modeling and simulation in pediatric investigation plans. Paediatr Anaesth. 2011;21(3):214–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Salazar DE, Song SH, Shi J, et al. The use of modeling and simulation to guide clinical development of olmesartan medoxomil in pediatric subjects. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2012;91(2):250–256.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Hazan L, Hernandez Rodriguez OA, Bhorat AE, Miyazaki K, Tao B, Heyrman R. A double-blind, dose-response study of the efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil in children and adolescents with hypertension. Hypertension. 2010;55(6):1323–1330.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Nisal K, Kela R, Khunti K, Davies MJ. Comparison of efficacy between incretin-based therapies for type 2 diabetes mellitus. BMC Med. 2012;10:152.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Gibbs JP, Fredrickson J, Barbee T, et al. Quantitative model of the relationship between dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibition and response: meta-analysis of alogliptin, saxagliptin, sitagliptin, and vildagliptin efficacy results. J Clin Pharmacol. 2012;52(10):1494–1505.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Johnson TN, Rostami-Hodjegan A. Resurgence in the use of physiologically based pharmacokinetic models in pediatric clinical pharmacology: parallel shift in incorporating the knowledge of biological elements and increased applicability to drug development and clinical practice. Paediatr Anaesth. 2011;21(3):291–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. van den Anker JN, Schwab M, Kearns GL. Developmental pharmacokinetics. Handb Exp Pharmacol. 2011;205:51–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Fraser IP, Neufeld N, Fox LA, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of sitagliptin in adolescents with type 2 diabetes. Paper presented at: American Diabetes Association, 73rd Scientific Sessions; 2013; Chicago, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Schoenfeld DA, Hui Z, Finkelstein DM. Bayesian design using adult data to augment pediatric trials. Clin Trials. 2009;6(4):297–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lai TL, Lavori PW, Shih MC. Adaptive trial designs. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2012;52:101–110.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Slikker W Jr., Young JF, Corley RA, et al. Improving predictive modeling in pediatric drug development: pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and mechanistic modeling. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2005;1053:505–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Johnson TN, Rostami-Hodjegan A, Tucker GT. Prediction of the clearance of eleven drugs and associated variability in neonates, infants and children. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2006;45(9):931–956.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pediatric Center of Excellence, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Route 206 & Province Line Road, Lawrenceville, NJ, 08648, USA

    Tarek A. Leil, Pamela Zee, Satyendra Suryawanshi & Ronald Portman MD

  2. Department of Paediatrics, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

    Christoph Male

Authors
  1. Tarek A. Leil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pamela Zee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Satyendra Suryawanshi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christoph Male
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ronald Portman MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ronald Portman MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Leil, T.A., Zee, P., Suryawanshi, S. et al. Quantitative Extrapolation: An Approach to Validation of Adult Drug Efficacy in Pediatric Subjects. Ther Innov Regul Sci 47, 557–565 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1177/2168479013500286

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2168479013500286

Keywords

Search

Navigation