M E M O R A N D U M DEPARTMENT
OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
FOOD AND
DRUG ADMINISTRATION
DATE: Feb
2, 2005
FROM: Dianne
Murphy, MD
Director
Office
of Pediatric Therapeutics
Office
of the Commissioner
SUBJECT: Overview of the February 14, 2005 Meeting
of the Pediatric Advisory Committee (PAC)
TO: Members
of the Pediatric Advisory Committee
The focus of the
February 14th 2005 Pediatric Advisory Committee (PAC) meeting will
be safety. We will begin with a discussion of adverse event reports for 6 drugs
granted pediatric marketing exclusivity.
Following the adverse event reports, the committee will discuss and
provide input on options for improving pediatric post-marketing drug adverse
event monitoring as mandated by the Best Pharmaceutical Act for Children
(BPCA). The meeting will begin at 2:00
PM and end at 6:00 PM. A draft agenda for the meeting follows this memorandum.
After brief introductions, Medical
Officers within the Center of Drug Evaluation and Research’s Division of
Pediatric Drug Development will report on adverse events for the first year of
marketing following the granting of exclusivity under 505A of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act for the following 6 drugs: LOTENSIN® (benazepril),
BREVIBLOC® (esmolol), XENICAL® (orlistat), GLUCOVANCE®
(glyburide/metformin), MALARONE® (atovaquone/proguanil), and VIRACEPT®
(nelfinavir). These reports are
required under section 17 of the BPCA. This will bring to 34 the number of
products whose 1-year post-pediatric market exclusivity adverse events have
been reviewed and reported to the PAC and it predecessor.
Following
the adverse event reports, Dr. Solomon Iyasu will present a summary of the
feedback from committee members received by the Office of Pediatric
Therapeutics (OPT) regarding the format and advent event information presented
to the pediatric advisory committee.
Dr. Iyasu will also present options regarding the content and
presentation format of the BPCA-mandated safety reviews and options for
enhancing pediatric post marketing adverse event monitoring for discussion by
the committee. The committee will also
be asked to specifically address the following questions.
Question
1: OPT proposes to submit an abbreviated written summary report to the PAC for
drugs where the 1-year safety review does not raise a safety concern i.e. there
were no post-marketing reports submitted or the reported pediatric events did
not provide any concern of a possible safety risk. The entire written summary will not be presented at a public PAC
meeting. However, a slide summarizing the products reviewed and our
recommendation to the PAC will be presented. The PAC will still retain the
opportunity to comment upon our recommendation at a public hearing. Do you
concur with this approach?
Question 2: OPT proposes to provide a public
presentation of the mandated safety review at the PAC meeting for drugs where
the 1-year safety review raised a possible pediatric safety signal i.e.
increase in the frequency or severity of expected adverse events relative to
adults or background rate; occurrence of unexpected or new serous pediatric
events; reports of events that are unique to pediatric patients. When possible, in addition to the adverse
event reporting and our usual review, the presentation will include an
assessment of incidence rates, biological plausibility and review of the
literature. Do you concur with this
approach?
Question
3: The limitations of spontaneous post-marketing adverse event reporting system
are well known to you. Please discuss
and prioritize potential programs, assuming additional resources were
available, to supplement and/or overcome the limitations of spontaneous
reporting system for assessing and monitoring safety of marketed drug products
in the pediatric populations. Some
examples of potential programs include:
a. Population-based active surveillance
b. Analysis of claims databases (e.g. United Health Group, Harvard
Pilgrim, TenCare)
c. Exposure and/or outcome/disease registries and creation of
linkages with AERS
d. Long-term pediatric safety studies to assess drug adverse events
including assessment of growth and development; discuss if and how
prioritization of products for additional long-term studies might be
approached.
The background package
for the adverse event review portion of the February 14th meeting
includes the following documents under separate tabs for each drug in addition
to this cover memo:
§
Draft of the slide presentations for the 6
products.
§
1-year Post-Pediatric Exclusivity Post-marketing
Adverse Event Reviews for all 6 drugs granted exclusivity
§
1-year Post-Pediatric Exclusivity Drug Use
Reviews for all 6 drugs granted exclusivity
§
Summary
of the Clinical and Pharmacology/Toxicology reviews of trials conducted for
pediatric exclusivity for these 6 drugs
§
Product labeling for all 6 drugs to be presented
during the adverse event reporting portion of the meeting (please note that
there is an indication in the margin of each label that identifies the
pediatric sections of the product label)
The FDA relies on the
knowledge, judgment, experience and wisdom of scientists and practitioners like
you to help address safety of medications in the pediatric population. We thank you for your time and effort, and
we look forward to seeing you and hearing from you on Feb 14th.