The conect4children (c4c) initiative was established to facilitate the development of new drugs and other therapies for paediatric patients. It is widely recognised that there are not enough medicines tested for all relevant ages of the paediatric population. To overcome this, it is imperative that clinical data from different sources are interoperable and can be pooled for larger post hoc studies. c4c has collaborated with the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC) to develop cross-cutting data resources that build on existing CDISC standards in an effort to standardise paediatric data. The natural next step was an extension to disease-specific data items. c4c brought together several existing initiatives and resources relevant to disease-specific data and analysed their use for standardising disease-specific data in clinical trials. Several case studies that combined disease-specific data from multiple trials have demonstrated the need for disease-specific data standardisation. We identified three relevant initiatives. These include European Reference Networks, European Joint Programme on Rare Diseases, and Pistoia Alliance. Other resources reviewed were National Cancer Institute Enterprise Vocabulary Services, CDISC standards, pharmaceutical company-specific data dictionaries, Human Phenotype Ontology, Phenopackets, Unified Registry for Inherited Metabolic Disorders, Orphacodes, Rare Disease Cures Accelerator-Data and Analytics Platform (RDCA-DAP), and Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership. The collaborative partners associated with these resources were also reviewed briefly. A plan of action focussed on collaboration was generated for standardising disease-specific paediatric clinical trial data. A paediatric data standards multistakeholder and multi-project user group was established to guide the remaining actions—FAIRification of metadata, a Phenopackets pilot with RDCA-DAP, applying Orphacodes to case report forms of clinical trials, introducing CDISC standards into European Reference Networks, testing of the CDISC Pediatric User Guide using data from the mentioned resources and organisation of further workshops and educational materials.

Introduction: The high failure rate of industry-driven pediatric clinical trials leads to insufficient timely labeling of drugs in children and a lack of scientific evidence, resulting in the persistently high off-label drug use. National clinical trial networks can facilitate collaboration between sites, investigators, and experts, increasing the likelihood of successful trials. Within the conect4children (c4c) network, an Innovative Medicines Initiative 2-funded project, National Hubs hosted by National Clinical Trials Networks were set up across 21 European countries to facilitate the setup and execution of pediatric clinical trials. In this paper, we aim to present the performance metrics of the trial feasibility process as well as learnings and challenges encountered by the Belgian and Dutch Networks in working within the European c4c project.Method: The c4c National Hubs streamline pediatric clinical trials by initiating early country outreach, identifying overlapping studies, recommending quality trial sites, and supporting trial budgeting for both industry and academic settings. To show the impact of Pedmed-NL and Belgian Pediatric Clinical Research Network (BPCRN), internal metrics were collected from 2019 to 2022 on four industry-sponsored and three academic trials performed within the c4c network. Timelines and outcomes of the site identification were collected and analyzed for industry trials. A qualitative analysis was conducted through c4c platforms, sponsor interactions, and stakeholder engagement to evaluate the added value of a research network.Results: In industry-sponsored trials, full feasibility questionnaires were completed within 2 weeks (n = 48), and inclusion rates were up to 80% of clinical sites. Before committing to c4c, 14% of sites were contacted by industry, leading to communication burdens. Utilizing national infrastructure knowledge and therapeutic environment insights helped optimize trial timelines and address feasibility challenges. In addition, national adaptations, such as bilingual staff and site development, played a role in streamlining trial operations in both academic and industry settings. Performance and experiences were similar for both networks.Conclusion: The early-facilitation examples from the c4c trials demonstrated promising metrics for two National Hubs, including optimized start-up timelines and aiding site selection quality. The learnings and challenges of the Belgian and Dutch Networks provided insights for the development of clinical research networks.

Background/aims: Due to a lack of standard pediatric prescribing information, medicines are often used in a dosage form or for an indication that has not been investigated in children. Pediatric clinical trial research networks aim to facilitate the timely availability of innovative drugs for children by developing standardized trial facilitation and conduct processes. This paper aims to assess the (pre)feasibility duration and characteristics of a US-sponsored clinical trial, in collaboration with I-ACT for Children, for distribution across European sites via European clinical research facilitation networks.Method: A transatlantic partnership between the Belgian Pediatric Clinical Research Network (BPCRN,) and I-ACT for Children conducted feasibilities in Europe for industry-sponsored early-stage pharmacological clinical trials between 2019 and 2022. The collaboration recorded time to event for key elements of feasibility, influences on successful feasibility, and benefits of collaboration.Results: Trials were conducted across 17 European countries with 202 participating hospital sites. The initial phase, the pre-feasibility questionnaire had a 70% response rate from 142 sites, and sites took a median 38 days (IQR 20 days) to complete the questionnaire for five trials. All responses underwent a quality control, addressing inaccuracies in site capabilities and recruitment. The first trial's CDA and feasibility questionnaire were completed in roughly 2 months for 7 countries. Time to completion was affected by precontracted sites, limited scope of studies, changes in timelines, COVID-related disruptions, and a learning curve for collaboration.Conclusion: Collaboration between European collaborative national networks and US-network I-ACT for Children has supported site identification of global pediatric clinical trials. This illustrates one method for the importance of early engagement with sponsors and implementation of effective communication systems.