Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39995690›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025

From guideline to practice: three years of ICH S11 insights and recommendations.

Diana Tavares, Hsiao-Tzu Chien, Maria Elzbieta Sheean, Peter Theunissen, Peter van Meer, Karen Van Malderen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Diana Tavares *Paediatric Medicines Office, European Medicines Agency, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Hsiao-Tzu Chien *Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Maria Elzbieta SheeanPaediatric Medicines Office, European Medicines Agency, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Peter TheunissenMedicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Peter van MeerMedicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Karen Van MalderenFederal Agency for Medicines and Health Products, Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Juvenile Animal Studies (JAS) may be warranted to ensure the safe clinical use of medicines for children. The ICH S11 guideline was developed to guide the need for and design of JAS, and proposes a weight-of-evidence (WoE) approach. We evaluated how the introduction of the guideline shaped the non-clinical strategy for paediatric medicines in the European Union. Our review included Paediatric Investigation Plans (PIPs) for 127 products approved between 2020 and 2023, along with the associated regulatory assessment and final non-clinical plans. Although in 12 of selected PIPs a JAS was already ongoing or completed at the time of submission, in all other cases (115/127), the PIP was submitted before the initiation of JAS. In 75% (86/115) of these procedures the discussions based on the ICH S11 WoE approach led to an agreement on the proposed non-clinical strategy. In approximately a quarter of PIPs, there was disagreement on the outcome of the WoE analysis leading to the addition (3%), modification (10%), or removal (11%) of JAS. Our review indicates that the implementation of ICH S11 facilitates science-driven discussions about the necessity and design of JAS within the broader non-clinical strategy. A thorough consideration of developmental aspects of the product's pharmacological target, the clinical relevance of notable toxicity findings, and the clinical context of the medicine's use fosters effective dialogue and improves regulatory alignment. The WoE approach in ICH S11 ensures that relevant safety information is generated to support paediatric drug development while balancing the principles of non-clinical replacement, reduction and refinement (the 3Rs).

Indexed as

3RsEMAICH S11juvenile animal studyPaediatric Investigation Planweight-of-evidence approach

Identifiers

PMID39995690
PMCPMC11847842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.