ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Scientific and regulatory progress in advancing paediatric oncology drug development in the EU and in the US.
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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study provides an updated overview of progress in paediatric oncology, following legislative and regulatory initiatives in the European Union (EU) and in the United States (US). In particular, the US Research to Accelerate Cures and Equity (RACE) Act 2017 mandated new paediatric indications based on drug Mechanism of Action (MoA), and the EE 2015 revision of the waivers system allowed more agreed Paediatric Investigation Plans (PIPs). Materials and methods: The sample included: (a) products with paediatric oncology marketing authorisation in the US and in the EU from 2007 to 2024; (b) PIPs granted in the EU during the same period. Linear regression models were used to evaluate the time-trends in approvals, and the chi-squared test was applied to compare categorical variables in the periods ranging between 2007-2017 and 2018-2024. Results: In the 2018-2024 period, more paediatric products have been approved in both regions, with the US progressing at a rapid pace. The approved indications for solid tumours (STs) are growing, with innovations from targeted and immunotherapeutic agents prevailing over chemotherapies. The approval of PIPs reflects a similar trend to that of the products. Both paediatric products and PIPs are granted mainly to address specific childhood tumours, rather than those derived solely from adult indications. However, several unmet needs remain to be addressed. Discussion: Both regions are working to advance paediatric oncology medicines. However, a significant gap still exists between the EU and the US, with the EU lagging behind. This discrepancy should be a priority for Europe. It is unlikely that abolishing the Paediatric Regulation, proposed as part of the Pharmaceutical Legislation reform, in the absence of other initiatives and substantial investments, would be the right solution.
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.