Advertisement

Juvenile Nonclinical Safety Studies in Support of Pediatric Drug Development

  • Paul C. BarrowEmail author
  • Georg Schmitt
Protocol
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1641)

Abstract

A pediatric assessment is now a required component of every drug marketing application in North America, Europe, and Japan, unless a waiver has been granted previously. Nonclinical juvenile toxicity studies are often required as part of this assessment. The protocols for juvenile toxicity studies are best devised in consultation with the regulatory authorities. It is important to submit the pediatric investigation plan (PIP) or pediatric study plan (PSP) early, in order not to delay the marketing authorization of the drug in adults. The choice of species and the design of juvenile toxicity studies are based on a series of complex considerations, including the therapeutic use of the drug, age at which children will be treated, duration of treatment, and potential age- or species-specific differences in efficacy, pharmacokinetics, or toxicity.

Key words

Juvenile animals Toxicology Pediatric Safety testing 

References

  1. 1.
    Mulberg AE, Silber SA, Van den Anker JN (2009) Pediatric drug development: concepts and applications. Wiley, Hoboken, NJGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    ICH (2009) Guideline M3(R2) on non-clinical safety studies for the conduct of human clinical trials and marketing authorisation for pharmaceuticals. http://www.ich.org/fileadmin/Public_Web_Site/ICH_Products/Guidelines/Multidisciplinary/M3_R2/Step4/M3_R2__Guideline.pdf. Accessed 17 Feb 2016
  3. 3.
    ICH (2000) Harmonised Tripartite Guideline: Clinical investigation of medicinal products in the pediatric population E11. http://www.ich.org/fileadmin/Public_Web_Site/ICH_Products/Guidelines/Efficacy/E11/Step4/E11_Guideline.pdf. Accessed 14 Jan 2016
  4. 4.
    FDA (2006) Guidance for industry: nonclinical safety evaluation of pediatric drug products. FDA, Silver SpringGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shirkey H (1968) Editorial comment: therapeutic orphans. J Pediatr 72(1):119–120CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Choonara I (2000) Clinical trials of medicines in children: US experience shows how to ensure that treatment of children is evidence based. Br Med J 321(7269):1093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    FDA (2013) FDA Voice: FDA takes step to encourage pediatric drug studies. http://blogs.fda.gov/fdavoice/index.php/tag/best-pharmaceuticals-for-children-act-bpca/. Accessed 5 Aug 2015
  8. 8.
    Allegaert K, van den Anker JN (2015) Adverse drug reactions in neonates and infants: a population-tailored approach is needed. Br J Clin Pharmacol 80(4):788–795CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Drugs (1995) Guidelines for the ethical conduct of studies to evaluate drugs in pediatric populations. Pediatrics 95(2):286–294Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nunn A, Richey R, Shah U, Barker C, Craig J, Peak M, Ford J, Turner M (2013) Estimating the requirement for manipulation of medicines to provide accurate doses for children. Eur J Hosp Pharm Sci Pract 20(1):3–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Drugs (2014) Off-label use of drugs in children. Pediatrics 133(3):563–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    108th Congress S. (2003) 650 (108th): Pediatric research equity act. GovTrack.us. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/108/s650. Accessed 9 Sep 2015
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
    FDA (2011) Implementation of the biologics price competition and innovation act of 2009. http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/ucm215089.htm. Accessed 16 Sep 2015
  15. 15.
    European Union, Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on medicinal products for paediatric use and amending Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92, Directive2001/20/EC, Directive 2001/83/EC and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004. Off J Eur Union (2006). pp L378-1-19. 27 Dec 2006Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    European Union, Regulation (EC) No 1902/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 amending Regulation 1901/2006 on medicinal products for paediatric use. Off J Eur Union (2006). pp L378-20-21. 27 Dec 2006Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    FDA (2006) Non-clinical testing in juvenile animals on human pharmaceuticals for pediatric indications. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation/guidances/ucm079247.pdf. Accessed 14 Jan 2016
  18. 18.
    EMA (2008) Guideline on the need for non-clinical testing in juvenile animals on human pharmaceuticals for paediatric indications. Ref. EMEA/CHMP/SWP/169215/2008. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003305.pdf
  19. 19.
    MHLW Japan (2012) Guideline on the nonclinical safety study in juvenile animals for pediatric drugs and questions and answers regarding guideline on the non-clinical safety study in juvenile animals for pediatric drugsGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Barrow P (1990) Oral dosing of neonatal rats. In: Barrow P (ed) Technical procedures in reproduction toxicology, vol 11. Laboratory Animal Handbooks Royal Society of Medicine, London, p 49Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    ICH (2014) Final concept paper. S11: nonclinical safety testing in support of development of pediatric medicines. http://www.ich.org/fileadmin/Public_Web_Site/ICH_Products/Guidelines/Safety/S11/S11_Final_Concept_Paper_10_November_2014.pdf. Accessed 05 Aug 2015
  22. 22.
  23. 23.
    Shaddy RE, Denne SC (2010) The Committee on Drugs, Committee on Pediatric Research, Guidelines for the ethical conduct of studies to evaluate drugs in pediatric populations. Pediatrics 125(4):850–860CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cappon GD (2011) Nonclinical support of pediatric drug development in a global context: an industry perspective. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 92(4):269–272PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sakiyama M (2013) Current research situation and challenges of pediatric clinical studies in Japan (Presentation). http://www.pmda.go.jp/files/000153085.pdf. Accessed 18 Sep 2015
  26. 26.
    Ishikawa I (2013) PMDA’s experiences and challenges in pediatric drug development (Presentation). http://www.pmda.go.jp/files/000205934.pdf. Accessed 18 Sep 2015
  27. 27.
    EMA (2015) Opinions and decisions on paediatric investigation plans. http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/medicines/landing/pip_search.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac058001d129. Accessed 16 Sep 2015
  28. 28.
    Field M, Boat T (2012) Safe and effective medicines for children: pediatric studies conducted under the best pharmaceuticals for children act and the pediatric research equity act. The National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hurtt ME, Engel S (2015) An update of juvenile animal studies in the European Union: What do the numbers say? Reprod Toxicol 56:105–108CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Baldrick P (2013) The evolution of juvenile animal testing for small and large molecules. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 67(2):125–135CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hines RN, Sargent D, Autrup H, Birnbaum LS, Brent RL, Doerrer NG, Cohen Hubal EA, Juberg DR, Laurent C, Luebke R, Olejniczak K, Portier CJ, Slikker W (2010) Approaches for assessing risks to sensitive populations: lessons learned from evaluating risks in the pediatric population. Toxicol Sci 113(1):4–26CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Krasinski K, Perkin R, Rutledge J (1982) Gray baby syndrome revisited. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 21(9):571–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gershanik J, Boecler B, Ensley H, McCloskey S, George W (1982) The gasping syndrome and benzyl alcohol poisoning. N Engl J Med 307(22):1384–1388CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Allegaert K, van den Anker J (2015) Neonatal drug therapy: The first frontier of therapeutics for children. Clin Pharmacol Ther 98(3):288–297CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Offringa M, Davis JM, Turner MA, Ward R, Bax R, Maldonado S, Sinha V, McCune SK, Zajicek A, Benjamin DK (2015) Applying regulatory science to develop safe and effective medicines for neonates report of the US Food and drug administration first annual neonatal scientific workshop, October 28–29, 2014. Therap Innov Regul Sci 49(5):623–631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Eiby YA, Wright LL, Kalanjati VP, Miller SM, Bjorkman ST, Keates HL, Lumbers ER, Colditz PB, Lingwood BE (2013) A pig model of the preterm neonate: anthropometric and physiological characteristics. PLoS One 8(7):e68763CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bailey GP, Marien D (2011) The value of juvenile animal studies “What have we learned from preclinical juvenile toxicity studies? II”. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 92(4):273–291CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Walzer M, Bekersky I, Wanaski S, Collins S, Jortner B, Patterson R, Garman R, Sagar S, Tolbert D (2011) Oral toxicity of vigabatrin in immature rats: Characterization of intramyelinic edema. Neurotoxicology 32(6):963–974CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zoetis T, Hurtt ME (2003) Species comparison of anatomical and functional renal development. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 68(2):111–120CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Walthall K, Cappon GD, Hurtt ME, Zoetis T (2005) Postnatal development of the gastrointestinal system: a species comparison. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 74(2):132–156CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hines RN (2008) The ontogeny of drug metabolism enzymes and implications for adverse drug events. Pharmacol Ther 118(2):250–267CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    de Wildt SN, Kearns GL, Leeder JS, van den Anker JN (1999) Cytochrome P450 3A. Clin Pharmacokinet 37(6):485–505CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Morgan E, MacGeoch C, Gustafsson J (1985) Hormonal and developmental regulation of expression of the hepatic microsomal steroid 16 alpha-hydroxylase cytochrome P-450 apoprotein in the rat. J Biol Chem 260(22):11895–11898PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Johnson TN, Rostami-Hodjegan A (2011) 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. Pediatr Anesth 21(3):291–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Yang X, Morris SM, Gearhart JM, Ruark CD, Paule MG, Slikker W, Jr., Mattison DR, Vitiello B, Twaddle NC, Doerge DR, Young JF, Fisher JW (2014) Development of a physiologically based model to describe the pharmacokinetics of methylphenidate in juvenile and adult humans and nonhuman primates. PLoS One 9 (9):e106101.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Parrott N, Davies B, Hoffmann G, Koerner A, Lave T, Prinssen E, Theogaraj E, Singer T (2011) Development of a physiologically based model for oseltamivir and simulation of pharmacokinetics in neonates and infants. Clin Pharmacokinet 50(9):613–623CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    ICH (2015) Harmonised tripartite guideline: detection of toxicity to reproduction for medicinal products & toxicity to male fertility S5(R2). http://www.ich.org/fileadmin/Public_Web_Site/ICH_Products/Guidelines/Safety/S5/Step4/S5_R2__Guideline.pdf. Accessed 1 April 2016
  48. 48.
    Silva-Lima B, Due Theilade-Thomsen M, Carleer J, Vidal JM, Tomasi P, Saint-Raymond A (2010) Juvenile animal studies for the development of paediatric medicines: a description and conclusions from a European Medicines Agency workshop on juvenile animal testing for nonclinical assessors. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 89(6):467–473CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Carleer J, Karres J (2011) Juvenile animal studies and pediatric drug development: a European regulatory perspective. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 92(4):254–260PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Leconte I, Bailey G, Davis-Bruno K, Hew KW, Kim J, Silva Lima B, Liminga U, Moffit J, De Schaepdrijver L, Schmitt G, Tassinari M, Thompson K, Hurtt M (2011) Value of juvenile animal studies. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 92(4):292–303CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    ICH (2010) Guidance for industry: S9 nonclinical evaluation for anticancer pharmaceuticals. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/.../Guidances/ucm085389.pdf. Accessed 17 Feb 2016
  52. 52.
    Duarte DM (2015) Use of juvenile animal studies to support oncology medicine development in children. Reprod Toxicol 56:97–104CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    EMA (2013) European Medicines Agency decision (lisdexamfetamine). P/0321/2013. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/PIP_decision/WC500160560.pdf. Accessed 30 Nov 2015
  54. 54.
    Cross DM, Chmielewski G, Lewis EM, Liu L, Modesitt MS, Ripp SL, Sawaryn CM, Bowman CJ (2012) Non-clinical safety assessment and toxicokinetics of voriconazole and anidulafungin in the juvenile rat: a combination study design in support of a Paediatric Investigation Plan. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 63(1):29–39CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Schmitt G (2015) Safety of excipients in pediatric formulations—a call for toxicity studies in juvenile animals? Children 2(2):191–197CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    EMA (2013) Guideline on pharmaceutical development of medicines for paediatric use. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2013/07/WC500147002.pdf. Accessed 13 Aug 2015
  57. 57.
    EMA (2006) Reflection paper: formulations of choice for the paediatric population. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003782.pdf. Accessed 30 Nov 2015
  58. 58.
    EuPFi (2015) STEP database. http://pharmacyapp-a.ucl.ac.uk:8080/eupfi. Accessed 13 Aug 2015
  59. 59.
    Morford LL, Bowman CJ, Blanset DL, Bøgh IB, Chellman GJ, Halpern WG, Weinbauer GF, Coogan TP (2011) Preclinical safety evaluations supporting pediatric drug development with biopharmaceuticals: strategy, challenges, current practices. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 92(4):359–380PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Weinbauer GF, Luft J, Fuchs A (2013) The enhanced pre- and postnatal development study for monoclonal antibodies. Methods Mol Biol 947:185–200. mCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Sakurai T, Takai R, Buergin H, Shioda A, Sakamoto Y, Amano J, Grimm HP, Richter WF, Higuchi Y, Chiba S (2013) The effects of interleukin-6 signal blockade on immune system, reproductive and skeletal development in juvenile mice. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 98(2):170–182CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    ICH (2011) Harmonised tripartite guideline: preclinical safety evaluation of biotechnology-derived pharmaceuticals. S6(R1). http://www.ich.org/fileadmin/Public_Web_Site/ICH_Products/Guidelines/Safety/S6_R1/Step4/S6_R1_Guideline.pdf. Accessed 17 Feb 2016
  63. 63.
    Guay-Woodford LM, Bryda EC, Lindsay JR, Avner ED, Flaherty L (1996) The mouse bpk mutation, a model of autosomal recessive polycystic kidney disease (ARPKD) and jcpk: a phenotypically distinct PKD mutation, are allelic. Pediatr Res 39:361–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Hurtt ME, Sandler JD (2003) Comparative organ system development: introduction. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 68(2):85–85CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Beckman DA, Feuston M (2003) Landmarks in the development of the female reproductive system. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 68(2):137–143CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Hew KW, Keller KA (2003) Postnatal anatomical and functional development of the heart: a species comparison. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 68(4):309–320CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Holsapple MP, West LJ, Landreth KS (2003) Species comparison of anatomical and functional immune system development. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 68(4):321–334CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Marty MS, Chapin RE, Parks LG, Thorsrud BA (2003) Development and maturation of the male reproductive system. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 68(2):125–136CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Watson RE, DeSesso JM, Hurtt ME, Cappon GD (2006) Postnatal growth and morphological development of the brain: a species comparison. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 77(5):471–484CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Wood SL, Beyer BK, Cappon GD (2003) Species comparison of postnatal CNS development: functional measures. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 68(5):391–407CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Zoetis T, Tassinari MS, Bagi C, Walthall K, Hurtt ME (2003) Species comparison of postnatal bone growth and development. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 68(2):86–110CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Zoetis T, Hurtt ME (2003) Species comparison of lung development. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 68(2):121–124CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Landrigan PJ, Kimmel CA, Correa A, Eskenazi B (2004) Children’s health and the environment: public health issues and challenges for risk assessment. Environ Health Perspect 112(2):257CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Schlumpf M, Bütikofer E, Schreiber A, Parmar R, Ramseier H, Lichtensteiger W (1994) Delayed developmental immunotoxicity of prenatal benzodiazepines. Toxicol In Vitro 8(5):1061–1065CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Barrow P (2012) Use of the swine pediatric model. In: Hoberman A, Lewis E (eds) Pediatric nonclinical drug testing. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, pp 213–229. doi: 10.1002/9781118168226.ch11 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Robinson K, Smith SY, Viau A (2012) Dog juvenile toxicity. In: Hoberman A, Lewis E (eds) Pediatric nonclinical drug testing: principles, requirements, and practices. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, pp 183–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Weinbauer GF, Chellman GJ, Rasmussen AD, Vogelwedde E (2012) Use of primate pediatric model. In: Hoberman A, Lewis E (eds) Pediatric nonclinical drug testing: principles, requirements, and practices. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, pp 255–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Himmel HM (2008) Safety pharmacology assessment of central nervous system function in juvenile and adult rats: Effects of pharmacological reference compounds. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods 58(2):129–146CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Lewin G, Hoymann HG, Fuhst R, Berger-Preiss E, Pohlmann G, Buschmann J (2010) Assessment of pulmonary function and serum substance levels in newborn and juvenile rats. Reprod Toxicol 30(3):422–428CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Beck MJ, Padgett EL, Bowman CJ, Wilson DT, Kaufman LE, Varsho BJ, Stump DG, Nemec MD, Holson JF (2006) Nonclinical juvenile toxicity testing. In: Hood RD (ed) Developmental and reproductive toxicology: a practical approach, 2nd edn. CRC, Boca Raton, pp 263–328Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Parker RM (2014) Juvenile Toxicology. In: Derelanko MJ, Auletta CS (eds) Handbook of toxicology, 3rd edn. CRC, Boca Raton, pp 400–452Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Barrow P, Allais L (2013) Developmental toxicity testing of vaccines. Methods Mol Biol 947:81–89CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Bessa J, Boeckle S, Beck H, Buckel T, Schlicht S, Ebeling M, Kiialainen A, Koulov A, Boll B, Weiser T (2015) The immunogenicity of antibody aggregates in a novel transgenic mouse model. Pharm Res:1–16Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Laffan S, Posobiec L (2012) Approaches to rat juvenile toxicity studies and case studies: a pharmaceutical perspective. In: Hoberman AM (ed) Pediatric non-clinical drug testing Principles, requirements and practices. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, pp 281–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Gad SC (1998) Statistics and experimental design for toxicologists, 3rd edn. CRC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Zoetis T, Walls I (2003) A report of the ILSI risk science institute expert working group on direct dosing of pre-weaning mammals in toxicity testing. International Life Sciences Institute, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Hoberman AM, Barnett JF (2012) Juvenile toxicity study design for the rodent and rabbit. In: Hoberman A, Lewis E (eds) Pediatric nonclinical drug testing: principles, requirements, and practices. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, pp 141–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Barrow P (2000) Reproductive and developmental toxicology safety studies. In: Krinke GJ (ed) The laboratory rat. Academic, London, pp 199–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Jonsson O, Villar RP, Nilsson LB, Norsten-Höög C, Brogren J, Eriksson M, Königsson K, Samuelsson A (2012) Capillary microsampling of 25 μl blood for the determination of toxicokinetic parameters in regulatory studies in animals. Bioanalysis 4(6):661–674CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Nilsson LB, Ahnoff M, Jonsson O (2013) Capillary microsampling in the regulatory environment: Validation and use of bioanalytical capillary microsampling methods. Bioanalysis 5(6):731–738CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    NC3Rs Blood Sampling/Pig/Ear vein. http://www.nc3rs.org.uk/pig-ear-vein-non-surgical. Accessed 25 Aug 2015
  92. 92.
    Sewald K, Mueller M, Buschmann J, Hansen T, Lewin G (2015) Development of hematological and immunological characteristics in neonatal rats. Reprod Toxicol 56:109–117CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Meyer J (1998) Behavioral assessment in developmental neurotoxicology: approaches involving unconditioned behaviors and pharmacologic challenges in rodents. In: Slikker W, Chang LW (eds) Handbook of developmental neurotoxicology. Academic, New York, pp 403–426Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Haagensen AM, Grand N, Klastrup S, Skytte C, Sørensen DB (2013) Spatial discrimination and visual discrimination: two methods evaluating learning and memory in juvenile göttingen minipigs. Behav Pharmacol 24(3):172–179CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Bolon B, Garman RH, Pardo ID, Jensen K, Sills RC, Roulois A, Radovsky A, Bradley A, Andrews-Jones L, Butt M (2013) STP position paper recommended practices for sampling and processing the nervous system (brain, spinal cord, nerve, and eye) during nonclinical general toxicity studies. Toxicol Pathol 41(7):1028–1048CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Allais L, Condevaux F, Fant P, Barrow P (2009) Juvenile toxicity of cyclosporin in the rat. Reprod Toxicol 28(2):230–238CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Barrow P, Ravel G (2005) Immune assessments in developmental and juvenile toxicology: practical considerations for the regulatory safety testing of pharmaceuticals. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 43(1):35–44CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Barrow P (2007) Toxicology testing for products intended for pediatric populations. Nonclinical drug safety assessment: practical considerations for successful registration. FDA News, Washington, DC, pp 411–440Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Roche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical SciencesRoche Innovation Center Basel, F. Hoffmann-La Roche LtdBaselSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations