Optimus-Era Dose Finding for Rare Cancers.

SUMMARY: Advances in cancer biology and diagnostics have led to the recognition of a multitude of rare cancer subtypes, emphasizing the pressing need for strategies to accelerate drug development for patients with these cancers. This paper addresses the unique challenges of dose finding in trials that accrue small numbers of patients with rare cancers; strategies for dose optimization are proposed, in line with evolving approaches to dose determination in the age of the US Food and Drug Administration's Project Optimus.

Sustaining competition for biosimilars on the pharmacy benefit: Use it or lose it.

Congress passed the Biologic Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, specifically to offer market competition as a counterweight to the rising costs of biologic medicines. As of April 15, 2024, 49 biosimilars have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 15 biologic categories. Biosimilar competition has been undeniably successful: Through 2022, biosimilars have saved the US health system $23.6 billion, without significant care disruption or reduced quality. Through 2023, adalimumab biosimilar competition has added an additional $6.5 billion to this total, primarily through greater rebates from the reference manufacturer. Despite launching at discounts as great as 85%, adalimumab biosimilars have not been given preferred formulary positioning in the vast majority of cases and have thus gained only 3% of market share through 2023, largely because of payers' and pharmacy benefit managers' preference for rebates over discounts. This situation may negatively influence future biosimilar development, posing a threat to a biosimilar pipeline that represents hundreds of billions in savings over the next 10 years.

Trust but Verify: Lessons Learned for the Application of AI to Case-Based Clinical Decision-Making From Postmarketing Drug Safety Assessment at the US Food and Drug Administration.

Adverse drug reactions are a common cause of morbidity in health care. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) evaluates individual case safety reports of adverse events (AEs) after submission to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System as part of its surveillance activities. Over the past decade, the FDA has explored the application of artificial intelligence (AI) to evaluate these reports to improve the efficiency and scientific rigor of the process. However, a gap remains between AI algorithm development and deployment. This viewpoint aims to describe the lessons learned from our experience and research needed to address both general issues in case-based reasoning using AI and specific needs for individual case safety report assessment. Beginning with the recognition that the trustworthiness of the AI algorithm is the main determinant of its acceptance by human experts, we apply the Diffusion of Innovations theory to help explain why certain algorithms for evaluating AEs at the FDA were accepted by safety reviewers and others were not. This analysis reveals that the process by which clinicians decide from case reports whether a drug is likely to cause an AE is not well defined beyond general principles. This makes the development of high performing, transparent, and explainable AI algorithms challenging, leading to a lack of trust by the safety reviewers. Even accounting for the introduction of large language models, the pharmacovigilance community needs an improved understanding of causal inference and of the cognitive framework for determining the causal relationship between a drug and an AE. We describe specific future research directions that underpin facilitating implementation and trust in AI for drug safety applications, including improved methods for measuring and controlling of algorithmic uncertainty, computational reproducibility, and clear articulation of a cognitive framework for causal inference in case-based reasoning.

Safety analysis of Oseltamivir and Baloxavir Marboxil after market approval: a pharmacovigilance study based on the FDA adverse event reporting system.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Amidst limited influenza treatment options, evaluating the safety of Oseltamivir and Baloxavir Marboxil is crucial, particularly given their comparable efficacy. This study investigates post-market safety profiles, exploring adverse events (AEs) and their drug associations to provide essential clinical references. METHODS: A meticulous analysis of FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) data spanning the first quarter of 2004 to the fourth quarter of 2022 was conducted. Using data mining techniques like reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio, Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network, and Multiple Gamma Poisson Shrinkage, AEs related to Oseltamivir and Baloxavir Marboxil were examined. Venn analysis compared and selected specific AEs associated with each drug. RESULTS: Incorporating 15,104 Oseltamivir cases and 1,594 Baloxavir Marboxil cases, Wain analysis unveiled 21 common AEs across neurological, psychiatric, gastrointestinal, dermatological, respiratory, and infectious domains. Oseltamivir exhibited 221 significantly specific AEs, including appendicolith [ROR (95% CI), 459.53 (340.88 ∼ 619.47)], acne infantile [ROR (95% CI, 368.65 (118.89 ∼ 1143.09)], acute macular neuroretinopathy [ROR (95% CI), 294.92 (97.88 ∼ 888.64)], proctitis [ROR (95% CI), 245.74 (101.47 ∼ 595.31)], and Purpura senile [ROR (95% CI), 154.02 (81.96 ∼ 289.43)]. designated adverse events (DMEs) associated with Oseltamivir included fulminant hepatitis [ROR (95% CI), 12.12 (8.30-17.72), n=27], ventricular fibrillation [ROR (95% CI), 7.68 (6.01-9.83), n=64], toxic epidermal necrolysis [ROR (95% CI), 7.21 (5.74-9.05), n=75]. Baloxavir Marboxil exhibited 34 specific AEs, including Melaena [ROR (95% CI), 21.34 (14.15-32.18), n = 23], cystitis haemorrhagic [ROR (95% CI), 20.22 (7.57-54.00), n = 4], ileus paralytic [ROR (95% CI), 18.57 (5.98-57.71), n = 3], and haemorrhagic diathesis [ROR (95% CI), 16.86 (5.43-52.40)), n = 3]. DMEs associated with Baloxavir Marboxil included rhabdomyolysis [ROR (95% CI), 15.50 (10.53 ∼ 22.80), n = 26]. CONCLUSION: Monitoring fulminant hepatitis during Oseltamivir treatment, especially in patients with liver-related diseases, is crucial. Oseltamivir's potential to induce abnormal behavior, especially in adolescents, necessitates special attention. Baloxavir Marboxil, with lower hepatic toxicity, emerges as a potential alternative for patients with liver diseases. During Baloxavir Marboxil treatment, focused attention on the occurrence of rhabdomyolysis is advised, necessitating timely monitoring of relevant indicators for those with clinical manifestations. The comprehensive data aims to provide valuable insights for clinicians and healthcare practitioners, facilitating an understanding of the safety profiles of these influenza treatments in real-world scenarios.

Mechanism of action, potency and efficacy: considerations for cell therapies.

One of the most challenging aspects of developing advanced cell therapy products (CTPs) is defining the mechanism of action (MOA), potency and efficacy of the product. This perspective examines these concepts and presents helpful ways to think about them through the lens of metrology. A logical framework for thinking about MOA, potency and efficacy is presented that is consistent with the existing regulatory guidelines, but also accommodates what has been learned from the 27 US FDA-approved CTPs. Available information regarding MOA, potency and efficacy for the 27 FDA-approved CTPs is reviewed to provide background and perspective. Potency process and efficacy process charts are introduced to clarify and illustrate the relationships between six key concepts: MOA, potency, potency test, efficacy, efficacy endpoint and efficacy endpoint test. Careful consideration of the meaning of these terms makes it easier to discuss the challenges of correlating potency test results with clinical outcomes and to understand how the relationships between the concepts can be misunderstood during development and clinical trials. Examples of how a product can be "potent but not efficacious" or "not potent but efficacious" are presented. Two example applications of the framework compare how MOA is assessed in cell cultures, animal models and human clinical trials and reveals the challenge of establishing MOA in humans. Lastly, important considerations for the development of potency tests for a CTP are discussed. These perspectives can help product developers set appropriate expectations for understanding a product's MOA and potency, avoid unrealistic assumptions and improve communication among team members during the development of CTPs.

Premarket Evidence and Postmarketing Requirements for Real-Time Oncology Review Indication Approvals.

This cross-sectional study evaluates the use of the US Food and Drug Administration's Real-Time Oncology Review (RTOR) program in confirming the effectiveness of cancer drugs.

Beyond the Label: Real-World Side Effects Experienced With FDA-Approved Drugs for Non-Melanoma Skin Cancers.

With immunotherapy historically focused on cutaneous melanoma, there has been a new wave of systemic medications available for treating non-melanoma skin cancers including basal cell carcinoma (BCC), squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), and Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC). The immune checkpoint inhibitors approved by the FDA target programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and the Hedgehog (Hh) signaling pathway. These medications have expanded treatment options; however, side effects are an important consideration. We used the FDA Adverse Events Reporting System (FAERS) to characterize the most prevalent, real-world side effects experienced by patients on these agents. Muscle spasms (23.45%), alopecia (16.06%), ageusia (12.02%), taste disorder (11.91%), and fatigue (11.67%) were the five most common side effects reported with medications used for BCC treatment. Logistic regression analysis showed males on vismodegib for BCC having greater odds of experiencing muscle spasms (aOR 1.33, P<0.001) and ageusia (aOR 1.34,  P<0.001) versus females, who were more likely to exhibit alopecia (aOR 1.82, P<0.001) and nausea (aOR 1.96, P<0.001). With SCC treatment, the 5 most reported adverse events were fatigue (5.58%), rash (3.59%), asthenia (3.59%), pruritus (3.19%), and pyrexia (2.79%). Patients taking cemiplimab-rwlc for BCC compared to SCC were more likely to experience disease progression (aOR 10.98, P=0.02). With medication labels providing an excessively daunting list of side effects, we characterize practical side effects seen in patients receiving systemic treatments for non-melanoma skin cancers.  J Drugs Dermatol. 2024;23(5):301-305. doi:10.36849/JDD.7968.

Editorial: First Regulatory Approval for Adoptive Cell Therapy with Autologous Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes (TILs) - Lifileucel (Amtagvi).

On February 16, 2024, the US Food and Drug Agency (FDA) granted accelerated approval to lifileucel (Amtagvi), an adoptive immune cell therapy with autologous ex vivo-expanded tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) for adult patients with advanced or unresectable melanoma progressing after treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors and, if BRAF V600 mutation-positive, BRAF/MEK inhibitors. The clinical studies supporting this regulatory approval have highlighted the complexity of the treatment manufacturing process and the requirements for patient selection, a pretreatment lymphodepletion regimen, followed by a single infusion of lifileucel (Amtagvi), and up to six treatments with high-dose IL-2, with the potential for adverse events at each stage of treatment. In early 2024, expert consensus guidelines were published on best practices and patient management for adoptive cell therapy with autologous, ex vivo-expanded TILs, and an international TIL Working Group was formed in anticipation of further regulatory approvals bringing these treatments to the clinic. This editorial aims to provide an update on the importance of a first approval for adoptive cell therapy with autologous, ex vivo-expanded TILs and the challenges of implementing a complex, time-consuming, and potentially costly immunotherapy.

Health care decision-maker perceptions and trends in the utilization of preapproval information for formulary decision-making.

BACKGROUND: Preapproval information exchange (PIE) has increased between biopharma companies and health care decision-makers (HCDMs) over the last several years. However, there still exists a gap in what HCDMs need and what biopharma companies are providing. OBJECTIVE: To assess trends in the utilization of preapproval information by HCDMs and identify resources that may best support organizations in evaluating product information for formulary coverage prior to US Food and Drug Administration approval. METHODS: A double-blinded, web-based survey was fielded to a research panel of HCDMs from FormularyDecisions from May 16, 2022, to May 23, 2022. RESULTS: A total of 30 advisors were invited to take the survey and 17 responded to the survey, with representation largely from health plans (41%), pharmacy benefit managers (24%), and integrated delivery networks (12%) across commercial, Medicare, and Medicaid lines of business. Of the respondents, 47% noted that the availability of preapproval information has shortened the time to make a formulary decision. Almost all respondents (90%) ranked the availability of clinical and economic information in a timely manner to evaluate budget impact as a top benefit for PIE. Respondents noted that Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP) preapproval dossiers (88%), AMCP PIE webinars (76%), preapproval presentations/videos (65%), and posters and abstracts of clinical trials results (59%) were the main resources used to facilitate PIE. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of preapproval information for HCDMs (particularly content related to anticipated place in therapy and product pricing) has an impact on shortening formulary decision-making timelines.

Adverse events associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer: a safety analysis of clinical trials and FDA pharmacovigilance system.

Objectives: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the application of ICIs can also cause treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) and immune-related adverse events (irAEs). This study was to evaluate both the irAEs and trAEs of different ICI strategies for NSCLC based on randomized clinical trials (RCTs). The study also examined real-world pharmacovigilance data from the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) regarding claimed ICI-associated AEs in clinical practice. Methods: Based on Pubmed, Embase, Medline, and the Cochrane CENTRAL, we retrieved RCTs comparing ICIs with chemotherapy drugs or with different ICI regimens for the treatment of NSCLC up to October 20, 2023. Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed using odds ratios (ORs) with 95% credible intervals (95%CrI). Separately, a retrospective pharmacovigilance study was performed based on FAERS database, extracting ICI-associated AEs in NSCLC patients between the first quarter (Q1) of 2004 and Q4 of 2023. The proportional reports reporting odds ratio was calculated to analyze the disproportionality. Results: The NMA included 51 RCTs that involved a total of 26,958 patients with NSCLC. Based on the lowest risk of any trAEs, cemiplimab, tislelizumab, and durvalumab were ranked as the best. Among the agents associated with the lowest risk of grades 3-5 trAEs, tislelizumab, avelumab, and nivolumab were most likely to rank highest. As far as any or grades 3-5 irAEs are concerned, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab plus chemotherapy is considered the most safety option. However, it is associated with a high risk of grades 3-5 trAEs. As a result of FAERS pharmacovigilance data analysis, 9,420 AEs cases have been identified in 7,339 NSCLC patients treated with ICIs, and ICIs were related to statistically significant positive signal with 311 preferred terms (PTs), and comprehensively investigated and identified those AEs highly associated with ICIs. In total, 152 significant signals were associated with Nivolumab, with malignant neoplasm progression, death, and hypothyroidism being the most frequent PTs. Conclusion: These findings revealed that ICIs differed in their safety profile. ICI treatment strategies can be improved and preventive methods can be developed for NSCLC patients based on our results.

Development and approval of novel injectables: enhancing therapeutic innovations.

INTRODUCTION: Novel injectables possess applications in both local and systemic therapeutics delivery. The advancement in utilized materials for the construction of complex injectables has tremendously upgraded their safety and efficacy. AREAS COVERED: This review focuses on various strategies to produce novel injectables, including oily dispersions, in situ forming implants, injectable suspensions, microspheres, liposomes, and antibody-drug conjugates. We herein present a detailed description of complex injectable technologies and their related drug formulations permitted for clinical use by the United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA). The excipients used, their purpose and the challenges faced during manufacturing such formulations have been critically discussed. EXPERT OPINION: Novel injectables can deliver therapeutic agents in a controlled way at the desired site. However, several challenges persist with respect to their genericization. Astronomical costs incurred by innovator companies during product development, complexity of the product itself, supply limitations with respect to raw materials, intricate manufacturing processes, patent evergreening, product life-cycle extensions, relatively few and protracted generic approvals contribute to the exorbitant prices and access crunch. Moreover, regulatory guidance are grossly underdeveloped and significant efforts have to be directed toward development of effective characterization techniques.

Exploring adverse events of Vilazodone: evidence from the FAERS database.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to conduct an exhaustive evaluation of Vilazodone's safety in clinical application and to unearth the potential adverse event (AE) risks associated with its utilization based on FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. METHODS: This research employed data spanning from the first quarter of 2011 to the third quarter of 2023 from the FAERS database. Various signal detection methodologies, including the Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR), Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR), Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network (BCPNN), and Empirical Bayesian Geometric Mean (EBGM), were utilized to ascertain the correlation between Vilazodone and specific AEs. RESULTS: The study compiled a total of 17,439,268 reports of drug AEs, out of which 5,375 were related to Vilazodone. Through signal mining, 125 Preferred Terms (PTs) encompassing 27 System Organ Classes (SOCs) were identified. The findings indicated a higher prevalence among females and patients within the 45 to 65 age bracket. The principal categories of AEs included Psychiatric disorders, Nervous system disorders, and Gastrointestinal disorders, with prevalent incidents of Diarrhoea, Nausea, and Insomnia. Moreover, the study identified robust signals of novel potential AEs, notably in areas such as sleep disturbances (Sleep paralysis, Hypnagogic hallucination, Rapid eye movements sleep abnormal, Sleep terror, Terminal insomnia, Tachyphrenia), sexual dysfunctions (Female orgasmic disorder, Orgasm abnormal, Disturbance in sexual arousal, Spontaneous penile erection, Anorgasmia, Sexual dysfunction, Ejaculation delayed), and other symptoms and injuries (Electric shock sensation, Violence-related symptom, Gun shot wound). CONCLUSION: Although Vilazodone presents a positive prospect in the management of MDD, the discovery of AEs linked to its use, particularly the newly identified potential risks such as sleep and sexual dysfunctions, necessitates heightened vigilance among clinicians.

United Kingdom Data Deficiencies Influencing U.S. FDA Decisions.

The U.S. FDA has permanently removed the in-person prescribing requirements that previously safeguarded the use of mifepristone/misoprostol medical abortions, allowing prescribing through telemedicine or on-line ordering and distribution through the mail and pharmacies, without standard pre-abortion testing. This will increase the risk of complications due to failure to adequately determine the gestational age or rule out ectopic pregnancy by ultrasound or physical exam, failure to perform labs to document whether RhoGAM is indicated, and failure to obtain appropriate informed consent to prevent unwanted abortions, among other concerns. The FDA justified this action by referencing flawed studies with significantly undercounted complications. The details of these study deficiencies are examined in this paper.