ArticlePediatrics2008
Safety monitoring of drugs receiving pediatric marketing exclusivity.
Article in Pediatrics, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- The relationship between simulated milrinone exposure and hypotension in children.Cardiology in the young · 2022Article
- Guidance for pediatric use in prescription information for novel medicinal products in the EU and the US.PloS one · 2022Article
- Labeling Changes and Costs for Clinical Trials Performed Under the US Food and Drug Administration Pediatric Exclusivity Extension, 2007 to 2012.JAMA internal medicine · 2018Article
- Article
- Harnessing the placebo effect in pediatric migraine clinic.The Journal of pediatrics · 2014Article
- Using registries to identify adverse events in rheumatic diseases.Pediatrics · 2013Review
- Medical records-based postmarketing safety evaluation of rare events with uncertain status.Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics · 2013Article
- Pediatric clinical trials.Perspectives in clinical research · 2013Article
- Medical records-based postmarketing safety evaluation of rare events with uncertain status.Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics · 2013Article
- Innovative clinical trial design for pediatric therapeutics.Expert review of clinical pharmacology · 2011Review
- An empirical review of major legislation affecting drug development: past experiences, effects, and unintended consequences.The Milbank quarterly · 2011Review
- Challenges in conducting clinical trials in children: approaches for improving performance.Expert review of clinical pharmacology · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act provided for an additional 6-month period of marketing exclusivity to companies that perform pediatric drug trials in response to a Food and Drug Administration-issued written request. Because many safety concerns cannot be detected until after the introduction of a product to a larger and more diverse market, the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act required the Food and Drug Administration to report to the Pediatric Advisory Committee on adverse events occurring during the 1-year period after granting pediatric exclusivity. We sought to describe the Pediatric Advisory Committee's recommendations made in response to safety reviews informed by data from the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System in 67 drugs granted exclusivity. PATIENTS AND
methodsPediatric Advisory Committee meetings and data presented by the Food and Drug Administration for all drugs were reviewed from June 2003 through April 2007. We divided the drugs into 2 groups: those that were returned to routine adverse event monitoring and those that had specific Pediatric Advisory Committee recommendations.
resultsForty-four (65.7%) drugs were returned to routine monitoring for adverse events. The Pediatric Advisory Committee, sometimes working with other advisory committees, recommended label changes for 12 (17.9%) drugs, continued monitoring for 10 (14.9%), production of MedGuides for 9 (13.4%), and an update on label changes resulting from discussions with the sponsor for 1 (1.5%) drug. Some drugs had >1 action. Several of the adverse events revealed during this process were rare and life-threatening.
conclusionsSafety monitoring during the early postmarketing period is crucial to detect rare, serious, or pediatric-specific adverse events. Fortunately, the majority of drugs given exclusivity had no adverse events of a frequency or severity that prevented a return to routine adverse event monitoring.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.