how the changing landscape of oncology drug development and … · 2019-01-24 · oncology office...
TRANSCRIPT
HowtheChangingLandscapeofOncologyDrugDevelopmentandApprovalWillAffectAdvancedPractitioners
RichardPazdur,MDDirector
OncologyCenterofExcellenceUSFoodandDrugAdministration
2
LearningObjectives
1. UnderstandFDAregulatoryprincipleswithrespecttotrialdesign,endpoints,randomization,andacceleratedapprovalprograms
2. Differentiateamongvariousendpointsusedinclinicaltrialdesignandunderstandtheirstrengthsandweaknesses
3. Discussemerginginitiativesinthequesttoexpeditethedrugdevelopmentprocess
3
Disclosures
Ihavenoconflictsofinteresttodisclose.
4
FDAMission
• FDAisresponsiblefor:– Assuranceofthesafety,efficacy,andsecurity of:
• Drugandbiological products• Medicaldevices• Food supply
• Radiation products
– Accountsfor25centsofeverydollarspentbyAmericans…
• FDAdoesnottakeintoaccountcostorpaymentissues• FDAdoesnot regulate“practiceofmedicine”
5
KeyFDACenters
CenterforDrugEvaluationandResearch(CDER)•Drugsandantibodies
•Sixofficesacrosstherapeutic areas,including theOfficeofHematology andOncologyProducts
CenterforBiologicsEvaluationandResearch(CBER)•Cellular andgenetherapies, vaccines
CenterforDevicesandRadiologicHealth(CDRH)•Devices, invitrodiagnostics, diagnostic andtherapeutic
radiologics
6
OfficeofHematologyandOncologyDisease-specificstructureakintocurrentacademicmodels
OncologyOffice
Div.ofOncologyProducts1
Div.ofOncologyProducts2
Div.ofHematologyProducts
Div.ofHematologyandOncologyToxicology
• Breastcancer• Gynecologic
cancer• GUmalignancies
• Thoracic,headandneck• Gastrointestinal• Melanoma-sarcoma• Pediatric-neuroendocrine-
Raretumors
• Benignheme• Lymphomas• Leukemias• Transplant
• Toxicologistssupportingeachclinical division
7
FDAOncologyCenterofExcellenceOverallAims
• Evaluateproductsforprevention,screening,diagnosis,andtreatmentofcancer
• Supportdevelopmentofcompaniondiagnostictestsanduseofcombinationsofdrugs,biologics,anddevices
• Developandpromoteuseofmethodscreatedthroughthescienceofprecisionmedicine
• Facilitateincorporationofthepatientviewinregulatorydecisionmaking
8
HowIsOncologyDifferentFromOtherTherapeuticAreas?
• Severeandlife-threateningdiseases• Largepublicinterest,needtoexpeditedrugs• Differentrisktoleranceforsideeffects• Activeadvocacygroups• Activeareaofbiomedicalresearch• 50%ofbreakthroughtherapies• Biomarker-definedpopulations
9
Traditional(“Regular”)Approval
• Traditionalapprovalrequires– Substantialevidenceofsafetyandefficacy– Well-controlledclinicaltrials(usuallytwoormore)– Basedonprolongationoflife,abetterlife,oranestablishedsurrogateforeitheroftheabove
• Nocomparativeefficacyfortraditionalapproval– Assafeandeffectiveasexistingtherapies,allowingfornon-inferioritydesigns
10
AcceleratedApproval• Canbebasedona“surrogateendpoint…reasonablylikely…topredictclinicalbenefit”
• “Providemeaningfultherapeuticbenefit…overexistingtherapies”
• Post-marketingclinicaltrialsmayberequired– Shouldusuallybeunderwayatthetimeofacceleratedapproval
– Applicantshouldcarryoutstudieswithduediligence
11
WhatIsClinicalBenefit?
12
StrengthofEfficacyEndpointResults
• What isbeingmeasured?(EndpointSelection)
• How accuratelyisitbeingmeasured?(MeasurementCharacteristics)
• Howmucheffectontheendpointisobserved?(MagnitudeofEffect)
13
How IstheEndpointMeasured?
• Howmuchinterpretation isrequired?– Moreinterpretation=moreriskforbias/variability
• Howaccurateisthetiming oftheevent?
14
DirectMeasuresofEfficacyOverallSurvival:GoldStandard
• Strengths– Directmeasureofbenefit– Leastpronetobias,nointerpretationoftheevent(deathyesorno)– Eventtiming(dateofdeath)typicallyknowntotheday– Includesinformationregardingsafety
• Deathsduetodrugtoxicityarepartoftheendpoint
• Limitations– Lasteventinadisease’snaturalhistory=longerandlargertrial– Requiresrandomizedcontrolledtrial
• Comparisonwithhistoricalcontrollimited(differingpopulations,differingstandardsofcare,etc.)
– Maybeconfoundedbycrossover(dependingonmagnitudeofeffect)andsubsequenttherapiesifgivenunequallybetweenarms
*MeaningfulclinicalbenefitofasurvivaladvantageisstillbasedontoxicityofdrugandmagnitudeofOSresult
15
SurrogateEndpointsRadiographicEvidenceofAnti-TumorEffect
• Response rate(RR)– Shrinkingatumor– Criticallyimportant:tumorlocation,numberofCRs,durationofresponse
• Timetoprogression (TTP),progression-free survival (PFS)– Timefromrandomizationtogrowthoftumorpastpredefinedthreshold– PFScountsdeathasaprogressioneventandispreferred
• Radiographic endpoints: Strengths– Earliereventsthansurvival=smaller,shortertrial– Radiographscanbecapturedandstoredtoverifytheevent– Notconfoundedbycrossoverorsubsequenttherapies(eventoccurspriortocrossover)
• Radiographic endpoints: Limitations– Uncertaintyregardingclinicalbenefit:Willagivenchangeinanasymptomaticradiographic
findingpredicttrueclinicalbenefit?– Missing,incomplete,infrequent,orunevenassessments– Difficulttomeasuredisease(ill-definedlesions),bonemetastases,peritoneal
carcinomatosis
16
FDAHistoricalPerspectiveOncologyEfficacyEndpoints
• 1970s:Asettingoflimitedavailable therapies– Tumorshrinkage (response rate)wasaccepted asaprimaryefficacy
endpoint forregularapproval• 1980s:Achangeinthisinterpretation occurred:
– 10%to20%ofpatientswithasymptomaticradiographictumorshrinkagemaynottranslate intoanimprovement inoveralloutcome(particularlygiventhetoxicityoftheagentsbeingevaluated)
• Ideally,measurement shouldreflectdirectclinicalbenefit• Howone“feels,functions, orsurvives”• AmoveawayfromORRfortraditional approval andafocusonoverallsurvival
FDAGuidance forIndustry:Clinical TrialEndpointsfortheApprovalofCancerDrugsandBiologics.
17
Andthenthisstartedtohappen…
Completehematologic response in53of54patientswithIFN-refractorychronicphaseCML…
“Ourresults…demonstrate thepotentialforthedevelopment ofanticancerdrugsbasedonthespecificmolecularabnormalitypresentinhumancancer.”
DrukerBJ,etal.NEnglJMed 2001;344(14):1031-7.
18
UnprecedentedResponseRates• Enrichedpopulations• Strongbasicscience
Afatinib:LUX-LUNG-2YangJC,etal.LancetOncol2012;13:539-48.
EGFR-Mut+NSCLC:ORR61%ALK+NSCLC:ORR61%
Crizotinib:Phase1CamidgeDR,etal.LancetOncol2012;13:1011-9.
CD30+Hodgkin:ORR75%
BrentuximabVedotin:Phase2YounesA.etal.JClinOncol201;30:2183-9.
19
LookingCloseratORR
Therearemultiplevariablesin“responserate”– Locationoftumor– Numberofcompleteresponses– Durationofresponses– Whatwasinitialtumorburden?– Howmanypatients’tumorsreduced,but<30%?
– NotcurrentlycapturedinRECISTORR– Thesepatientsmayderivebenefit ifactivity/stability oflongdurationdependingontoxicityofthetreatment
– Valueofthewaterfall plot
20
Where AretheTumorsThatAreResponding?When“response rate”maybeconsidered directclinical benefit…
VismodegibResponse
VonHoffDD,etal.NEnglJMed2009;361:1164-72.
DepsipeptideResponse
PiekarzRL,etal. JClinOncol2009;27:5410-17.
•Nearcompleteresponsesofdisfiguringorfungatingskinlesionsareadifferentcontext•Traditional approval grantedbasedonclinical responserate(andduration),thecosmeticimprovement,andthehighlikelihoodoftumor-relatedsymptomaticrelief
21
ClinicalEquipoiseWhenthereisgeneraluncertaintyintheexpertmedical
communityonwhetheratreatmentiseffective
• Importantforethical conductofrandomizedtrialsANDcanaffectfeasibility• WhatisORRimprovement overexisting therapieswhereequipoise islost?
FDAReview:OxaliplatininColorectalCancer• 9%ORR,allpartialresponseswithadded
toxicityoverthechemobackbone…
FDAReview:CrizotinibforNon–SmallCellLungCancer• 50%–61%ORR,mediandurationofover10monthswithdeep
responsesandfavorabletoxicitywhencomparedwithchemotherapydoublet…
22
BarrierstoRandomizedControlledTrials
• Feasibilityinlowfrequencypopulations• CrossoverimpactsOSdifferenceassessment• Ethicalissueswheninterventionishighlyactiveorcomparatoristoxic/hasminimalefficacy– Equipoiselost?
23
FDAExpeditedPrograms
Non-Clinical
EarlyClinical
RegistrationTrial(s)
NDA/BLASubmission
APPROVAL
INDSubmission Dose
Exploration/PrelimActivity
SPAEfficacyandSafetyData
FDAReview
PriorityReview
BreakthroughTherapy
FastTrack
Ifconsidering accelerated approval,post-marketing clinicaltrialsshouldbeunderwayatthetimeofapproval.
AcceleratedApproval
24
BreakthroughTherapyDesignation
USFoodandDrugAdministration.www.fda.gov.
• Signedintolawin2012• Forseriouslife-threateningdisease,adrug,basedonpreliminaryclinicalevidence,hassubstantialimprovementoveravailabletherapy• About50%ofbreakthroughtherapyrequestsacrossdrugcenterhavebeeninoncology‒ Aboutone-thirdhavebeengranted
25
BreakthroughTherapyDesignation
26
MoonshotInitiatives
• Seamlessdesign—expansioncohort• Largesimpletrials• Reevaluatingeligibility criteria• Patient-reportedadverseevents• Real-worlddata• Site-agnosticindications
27
• Oncology drugdevelopmenthistorically involvedthreediscretephases:– Phase1:MTD,DLTs,preliminaryefficacy– Phase2:Efficacyassessment for“go/no-go” – Phase3:RCTsdesigned toprovideadequateefficacy/safety datato
supportdrugapproval
• Thesedistinctphaseshavebecomemoreseamless:– Earlybiomarker discovery/companion diagnosticdevelopmentà earlier
identificationofefficacyandlarger treatmenteffect sizes– Desire forgreaterefficiencyindrugdevelopment– Demandforaccess topromisinginvestigationalagents
DiscretePhasestoSeamlessTransition
MTD=maximumtolerateddose;DLT=dose-limiting toxicity;RCT=randomizedcontrolledtrial.
28
• Almost40commercialINDsforlargeFIHtrials(100to>1,200patients)– Upto14expansioncohortswith10–180patients/cohorts– Morethanone-thirdareanti-PD-1/PD-L1agents
• Natureofexpansioncohortsinthesetrials– Dose/schedule refinement– Varietyoftumortypes– Varietyofmolecularlydefinedsubsets– Varietyofdrugcombinations
• Stated objectives,endpoints,eligibilitycriteria,andinformedconsentlanguagearemoreconsistentwithusualphase1
• However,samplesize,natureofdatacollected,andactualgoalsmoreconsistentwithusualphase3
OHOPExperience
ProwellTM,etal.NEnglJMed2016;374:2001-3.
OHOP=OfficeofHematologyandOncologyProducts;IND=investigationalnewdrug;FIH=firstinhuman.
29
LargeSimpleTrials
Randomizedtrialsconductedincontextofroutinecancercareinpost-marketingsetting(phase4)– Ask/answerlimitednumberofclinicallyrelevantquestions
– Utilizefocused datacollectionfromEHRs– Are(ideally)notburdensometobusycliniciansorpatients
– Benefitfromalargesamplesize(i.e.,highlevelofpower)toreliablyestimatetherisk-benefitofadrug
– Assessclinicalbenefitendpoints,notsurrogates
30
WhyModernizeEligibilityCriteria?
• Manypotentialparticipantsexcluded:– CNSinvolvement– Marginalperformancestatus– Organdysfunctionorlimitedmarrowreserve– HIVpositivity– Extremesofage– Priormalignancy
• Resultisslowaccrualtotrialsinpatientswhomaynotcharacterizethosewhowillreceivethedruginpost-marketingsetting
31
ProsandConsofBroadeningEligibilityCriteria
• Argumentsinfavor– Makesresultsmoregeneralizable– Expeditesaccrual– Potentialfor“niche”indication/labelingclaim(e.g.,
“onlyTKIshowntoimproveOSinpatientswithxtumor&brainmets”)
• Argumentsagainst– Potentialtoconfoundinterpretationofefficacy/safety
andintroduceriskintodevelopment(minimizedifeligibilitycriteriaarethoughtfullyselectedandeffectsizeismorethanmodest)
USFoodandDrugAdministration.www.fda.govTKI=tyrosinekinaseinhibitor.
32
ChallengesforPROUniquetoOncology
• Asymptomatic/minimallysymptomaticpopulations• Open-labeltrials• Single-armtrials• Missingdata
• MostpivotaltrialshaveincludedlargeHrQOLinstruments– FACT,QLQ-C30,EQ-5D– Staticquestions, cannotadapttodiffering trialcontexts– Infrequently assessed leadingtomissingdata
33
StrikingaBalance
DATACERTAINTY
Regulatory BURDEN
“Toxicdeaths!
Delayedsafetyfindings!
FDAasleep atthewheel”
“Toocautious!
Stifling innovation!
Reduceregulatoryburden!”
Less
More
Flexible, Efficient, Interactive
Consistent, Thorough,Independent
34
HowWillDynamicsAffectAdvancedPractitioners?
35
Thanks
Thanks toDr.PaulKluetzandDr.TatianaProwellforslidesandKirstenGoldbergfor
technicalassistance.