In the previous blog of this series, we introduced the pilot PDP initiated by Health Canada including the types of PDP that can be submitted and the content and format of a C-PDP. This blog discusses the review of PDPs by Health Canada, amending agreed-to PDPs and annual reporting requirements.
Review of a foreign-approved PDP or a Canadian PDP by Health Canada
Verifying foreign-approved PDP:
Verification of a foreign-approved pediatric plan will consist of confirming that the iPSP or PIP is complete and is in line with C-PDP recommended content. During the verification, Health Canada may seek clarification on parts of the plans. Once Health Canada verifies that the foreign-approved plan meets the C-PDP content recommendations, then it will become identified as the PDP without changes to the plan1.
Review of a C-PDP:
C-PDPs will undergo scientific review to determine whether the proposed plan is adequate to study the efficacy, safety and quality of the drug in the specified pediatric population. Health Canada will review, consult with appropriate subject matter experts and make decisions on all C‑PDPs. Reaching an agreement on a C-PDP is a collaborative process that may require discussion between Health Canada and the sponsor. Health Canada may communicate with the sponsor if, during review, they have questions about the pediatric plan or request a meeting to discuss elements of the plan in order to reach an agreement1.
Review process:
The review period for a foreign-approved PDP or a C-PDP will begin after the screening acceptance letter (SAL) is issued for the NDS or SNDS. Health Canada will conduct the pediatric plan review at the same time as the pre-market review. The service standard for reviewing the PDP is the same as the service standard of the submission that included the pediatric plan1.
If the sponsor and Health Canada cannot agree on the content of the foreign-approved PDP or C‑PDP, the sponsor may withdraw from the pilot. This will not affect the review decision for the associated NDS or SNDS1.
Health Canada will provide the outcome of the assessment through a letter that will be sent at the time of the notice of compliance (NOC). The letter will identify the timeframe within which completed study reports should be submitted to the regulatory authority. All study reports identified in the C-PDP are expected to be submitted within 6 months after the final study has been completed, unless otherwise agreed to by the sponsor and Health Canada1.
In case1:
- The review decision on the submission is negative, no decision will be made on the foreign-approved PDP or C-PDP
- A drug authorised for sale in Canada becomes cancelled pre- or post-market, completion of the studies in the foreign-approved PDP or C-PDP for that drug will no longer be expected
Health Canada's agreement to a foreign-approved PDP or C-PDP is not indicative of a future positive decision on the pediatric studies submitted under the PDP for the purpose of obtaining approval of a pediatric indication, formulation or labelling change.
Similarly, agreement to a foreign-approved PDP or C-PDP does not constitute approval of the clinical trials described in the plan. Sponsors will be responsible for seeking approvals for conducting clinical trials as required by the jurisdictions in which the trials take place1.
Amending an agreed-to PDP
Amendment to a foreign-approved PDP:
Health Canada requests sponsors to inform them of all amendments once approved by the US FDA or EMA. If an iPSP or EU-PIP is amended with the foreign regulator, the approved amendment may be submitted to Health Canada in the same format in which it has been submitted to the US FDA or EMA1.
Amendment to a C-PDP:
Sponsors can request an amendment to a C-PDP according to conditions and requirements described in Health Canada Guidance: Canadian pediatric development plans: Guidance - Canada.ca. Amendments will be subject to a 10-calendar day processing period, a 15-calendar day screening period and a 90-calendar day review service standard. Amendments to a C-PDP will not be considered agreed-upon until Health Canada notifies the sponsor that it has accepted the amendments. All changes to a C-PDP that are outside of the scope of an amendment should be included as part of the annual report1.
Annual reports
To assist Health Canada to track the progress of pediatric plans within the pilot, sponsors are requested to submit annual reports detailing the status of the studies identified in their PDPs or C‑PDPs.
Sponsors should submit a single annual report for all open PDPs and C-PDPs on the anniversary date of the NOC for a drug with which the first pediatric plan was attached1. Annual reports should include a note to reviewer and the annual report document.
Changes to the PDP identified in an annual report will be noted by Health Canada. An approval letter will not be issued.
Transparency
PDPs submitted during the pilot will be subject to Health Canada’s transparency initiatives. Health Canada’s Notice of Compliance (NOC) website and Drug Product Database website will report the outcome of Health Canada’s regulatory review, but will not contain a direct reference to PDPs. The Drug Health and Product Portal (regulatory decision summaries and summary basis of decision) may refer to the PDPs submitted during the pilot. The summaries may include statements about a submission having a PDP and whether it was based on a foreign PDP or was a C-PDP or the submission contained rationales for not conducting studies in all or part of the pediatric population.
Conclusion
Health Canada's pilot program for PDPs represents a significant step forward in ensuring the safety and efficacy of medications for pediatric populations. By encouraging the submission of comprehensive PDPs alongside NDS and certain SNDSs, Health Canada aims to align with international standards and increase the availability of critical data. For this, Health Canada has issued the Submitting pediatric development plans and studies: Guidance - Canada.ca which outlines the agency’s policy on submitting a pediatric study. The guidance is intended to assist sponsors to align their submissions with the policy by including pediatric studies and a PDP when filing an NDS or an SNDS that meets certain criteria. Submission of these data will increase the availability of safety, efficacy and quality data that will help health care providers make important decisions when treating pediatric populations. As the pilot progresses, the feedback and expertise gained will be instrumental in shaping future policies and enhancing Health Canada's approach to pediatric drug development. Ultimately, this program underscores the commitment to improving pediatric healthcare and ensuring that children receive the best possible treatments based on robust scientific evidence.
To read part 1 of this blog series, click here.

Author
Pratibha Duggal
Regulatory Affairs Manager,
Regulatory Consulting Solutions Canada.
References:
1Health Canada. Guidance on submitting pediatric development plans and pediatric studies: Modified on May 01, 2024. Accessed February 24, 2025 at: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/drug-products/pediatrics/guidance-submitting-development-plans-studies.html
2Health Canada. Pilot on pediatric development plans and studies. Modified on April 19, 2024. Accessed February 24, 2025 at: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/drug-products/pediatrics/pilot-development-plans-studies.html
In this section
-
Digital Disruption
-
Clinical strategies to optimise SaMD for treating mental health
-
Digital Disruption: Surveying the industry's evolving landscape
- AI and clinical trials
-
Clinical trial data anonymisation and data sharing
-
Clinical Trial Tokenisation
-
Closing the evidence gap: The value of digital health technologies in supporting drug reimbursement decisions
-
Digital disruption in biopharma
-
Disruptive Innovation
- Remote Patient Monitoring
-
Personalising Digital Health
- Real World Data
-
The triad of trust: Navigating real-world healthcare data integration
-
Clinical strategies to optimise SaMD for treating mental health
-
Patient Centricity
-
Agile Clinical Monitoring
-
Capturing the voice of the patient in clinical trials
-
Charting the Managed Access Program Landscape
-
Developing Nurse-Centric Medical Communications
- Diversity and inclusion in clinical trials
-
Exploring the patient perspective from different angles
-
Patient safety and pharmacovigilance
-
A guide to safety data migrations
-
Taking safety reporting to the next level with automation
-
Outsourced Pharmacovigilance Affiliate Solution
-
The evolution of the Pharmacovigilance System Master File: Benefits, challenges, and opportunities
-
Sponsor and CRO pharmacovigilance and safety alliances
-
Understanding the Periodic Benefit-Risk Evaluation Report
-
A guide to safety data migrations
-
Patient voice survey
-
Patient Voice Survey - Decentralised and Hybrid Trials
-
Reimagining Patient-Centricity with the Internet of Medical Things (IoMT)
-
Using longitudinal qualitative research to capture the patient voice
-
Agile Clinical Monitoring
-
Regulatory Intelligence
-
An innovative approach to rare disease clinical development
- EU Clinical Trials Regulation
-
Using innovative tools and lean writing processes to accelerate regulatory document writing
-
Current overview of data sharing within clinical trial transparency
-
Global Agency Meetings: A collaborative approach to drug development
-
Keeping the end in mind: key considerations for creating plain language summaries
-
Navigating orphan drug development from early phase to marketing authorisation
-
Procedural and regulatory know-how for China biotechs in the EU
-
RACE for Children Act
-
Early engagement and regulatory considerations for biotech
-
Regulatory Intelligence Newsletter
-
Requirements & strategy considerations within clinical trial transparency
-
Spotlight on regulatory reforms in China
-
Demystifying EU CTR, MDR and IVDR
-
Transfer of marketing authorisation
-
Exploring FDA guidance for modern Data Monitoring Committees
-
Streamlining dossier preparation
-
An innovative approach to rare disease clinical development
-
Therapeutics insights
- Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders
- Cardiovascular
- Cell and Gene Therapies
-
Central Nervous System
-
A mind for digital therapeutics
-
Challenges and opportunities in traumatic brain injury clinical trials
-
Challenges and opportunities in Parkinson’s Disease clinical trials
-
Early, precise and efficient; the methods and technologies advancing Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s R&D
-
Key Considerations in Chronic Pain Clinical Trials
-
ICON survey report: CNS therapeutic development
-
A mind for digital therapeutics
-
Glycomics
- Infectious Diseases
- NASH
- Oncology
- Paediatrics
-
Respiratory
-
Rare and orphan diseases
-
Advanced therapies for rare diseases
-
Cross-border enrollment of rare disease patients
-
Crossing the finish line: Why effective participation support strategy is critical to trial efficiency and success in rare diseases
-
Diversity, equity and inclusion in rare disease clinical trials
-
Identify and mitigate risks to rare disease clinical programmes
-
Leveraging historical data for use in rare disease trials
-
Natural history studies to improve drug development in rare diseases
-
Patient Centricity in Orphan Drug Development
-
The key to remarkable rare disease registries
-
Therapeutic spotlight: Precision medicine considerations in rare diseases
-
Advanced therapies for rare diseases
-
Transforming Trials
-
Accelerating biotech innovation from discovery to commercialisation
-
Ensuring the validity of clinical outcomes assessment (COA) data: The value of rater training
-
Linguistic validation of Clinical Outcomes Assessments
-
Optimising biotech funding
- Adaptive clinical trials
-
Best practices to increase engagement with medical and scientific poster content
-
Decentralised clinical trials
-
Biopharma perspective: the promise of decentralised models and diversity in clinical trials
-
Decentralised and Hybrid clinical trials
-
Practical considerations in transitioning to hybrid or decentralised clinical trials
-
Navigating the regulatory labyrinth of technology in decentralised clinical trials
-
Biopharma perspective: the promise of decentralised models and diversity in clinical trials
-
eCOA implementation
- Blended solutions insights
-
Implications of COVID-19 on statistical design and analyses of clinical studies
-
Improving pharma R&D efficiency
-
Increasing Complexity and Declining ROI in Drug Development
-
Innovation in Clinical Trial Methodologies
- Partnership insights
-
Risk Based Quality Management
-
Transforming the R&D Model to Sustain Growth
-
Accelerating biotech innovation from discovery to commercialisation
-
Value Based Healthcare
-
Strategies for commercialising oncology treatments for young adults
-
US payers and PROs
-
Accelerated early clinical manufacturing
-
Cardiovascular Medical Devices
-
CMS Part D Price Negotiations: Is your drug on the list?
-
COVID-19 navigating global market access
-
Ensuring scientific rigor in external control arms
-
Evidence Synthesis: A solution to sparse evidence, heterogeneous studies, and disconnected networks
-
Global Outcomes Benchmarking
-
Health technology assessment
-
Perspectives from US payers
-
ICER’s impact on payer decision making
-
Making Sense of the Biosimilars Market
-
Medical communications in early phase product development
-
Navigating the Challenges and Opportunities of Value Based Healthcare
-
Payer Reliance on ICER and Perceptions on Value Based Pricing
-
Payers Perspectives on Digital Therapeutics
-
Precision Medicine
-
RWE Generation Cross Sectional Studies and Medical Chart Review
-
Survey results: How to engage healthcare decision-makers
-
The affordability hurdle for gene therapies
-
The Role of ICER as an HTA Organisation
-
Strategies for commercialising oncology treatments for young adults
-
Blog
-
Videos
-
Webinar Channel