New era in drug interaction evaluation: US Food and Drug Administration update on CYP enzymes, transporters, and the guidance process.

Predicting clinically significant drug interactions during drug development is a challenge for the pharmaceutical industry and regulatory agencies. Since the publication of the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) first in vitro and in vivo drug interaction guidance documents in 1997 and 1999, researchers and clinicians have gained a better understanding of drug interactions. This knowledge has enabled the FDA and the industry to progress and begin to overcome these challenges. The FDA has continued its efforts to evaluate methodologies to study drug interactions and communicate recommendations regarding the conduct of drug interaction studies, particularly for CYP-based and transporter-based drug interactions, to the pharmaceutical industry. A drug interaction Web site was established to document the FDA's current understanding of drug interactions (http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/drugInteractions/default.htm). This report provides an overview of the evolution of the drug interaction guidances, includes a synopsis of the steps taken by the FDA to revise the original drug interaction guidance documents, and summarizes and highlights updated sections in the current guidance document, Drug Interaction Studies-Study Design, Data Analysis, and Implications for Dosing and Labeling.

Vorinostat for treatment of cutaneous manifestations of advanced primary cutaneous T-cell lymphoma.

PURPOSE: To discuss vorinostat approval for treatment of cutaneous manifestations of advanced cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Data from 1 single-arm, open-label, multicenter pivotal trial and 11 other trials submitted to support the new drug application for vorinostat in the treatment of advanced primary CTCL were reviewed. The pivotal trial assessed responses by changes in overall skin disease score using a severity-weighted assessment tool (SWAT). Vorinostat could be considered active in CTCL if observed response rate was at least 20% and the lower bound of the corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) excluded 5%. Patients reported pruritus relief using a questionnaire and a visual analogue scale. RESULTS: The pivotal trial enrolled 74 patients with stage IB or higher CTCL. Median number of prior treatments was 3, and 61 patients (82%) had stage IIB or higher disease. The objective response rate in the skin disease assessed by change in the overall SWAT score from the baseline was 30% (95% CI, 18.5 to 42.6) in patients with stage IIB or higher disease. Median response duration (end of response defined by 50% increase in SWAT score from the nadir) was 168 days. Median time to tumor progression was 148 days for overall population and 169 days for patients with stage IIB or higher disease. Assessment of pruritus relief was considered unreliable. CONCLUSIONS: Vorinostat showed activity in CTCL, and skin responses were a clinical benefit. Vorinostat was approved for treatment of cutaneous manifestations of CTCL. A nonblinded, single-arm trial did not allow a reliable assessment of pruritus relief.

Approval summary: sunitinib for the treatment of imatinib refractory or intolerant gastrointestinal stromal tumors and advanced renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To describe the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) review and approval of sunitinib malate (Sutent). Sunitinib received regular approval for the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) after disease progression or intolerance to imatinib mesylate (Gleevec). Additionally, sunitinib received accelerated approval for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: For the GIST indication, FDA reviewed data from a randomized, placebo-controlled trial with supportive evidence from a single-arm study. For the advanced renal cell carcinoma indication, FDA reviewed data from two single-arm studies of patients with cytokine-refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma. RESULTS: In patients with imatinib refractory or intolerant GIST, time-to-tumor progression of sunitinib-treated patients was superior to that of placebo-treated patients. Median time-to-tumor progression of sunitinib-treated patients was 27.3 weeks, compared with 6.4 weeks for placebo-treated patients (P < 0.0001). Partial responses were observed in 6.8% of sunitinib-treated patients. In patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma, partial responses were observed in 25.5% (95% confidence interval, 17.5, 34.9) and 36.5% (95% confidence interval, 24.7, 49.6) of patients treated with sunitinib. Median response durations were 27.1 and 54 weeks. The most common adverse events attributed to sunitinib included diarrhea, mucositis, skin abnormalities, and altered taste. Reductions in left ventricular ejection fraction and severe hypertension were also more common in sunitinib-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: On January 26, 2006, the FDA approved sunitinib for the treatment of patients with imatinib refractory or intolerant GIST. Accelerated approval was granted for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Approval summary: nelarabine for the treatment of T-cell lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma.

PURPOSE: To describe the clinical studies, chemistry manufacturing and controls, and clinical pharmacology and toxicology that led to Food and Drug Administration approval of nelarabine (Arranon) for the treatment of T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoblastic lymphoma. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Two phase 2 trials, one conducted in pediatric patients and the other in adult patients, were reviewed. The i.v. dose and schedule of nelarabine in the pediatric and adult studies was 650 mg/m2/d daily for 5 days and 1,500 mg/m2 on days 1, 3, and 5, respectively. Treatments were repeated every 21 days. Study end points were the rates of complete response (CR) and CR with incomplete hematologic or bone marrow recovery (CR*). RESULTS: The pediatric efficacy population consisted of 39 patients who had relapsed or had been refractory to two or more induction regimens. CR to nelarabine treatment was observed in 5 (13%) patients and CR+CR* was observed in 9 (23%) patients. The adult efficacy population consisted of 28 patients. CR to nelarabine treatment was observed in 5 (18%) patients and CR+CR* was observed in 6 (21%) patients. Neurologic toxicity was dose limiting for both pediatric and adult patients. Other severe toxicities included laboratory abnormalities in pediatric patients and gastrointestinal and pulmonary toxicities in adults. CONCLUSIONS: On October 28, 2005, the Food and Drug Administration granted accelerated approval for nelarabine for treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoblastic lymphoma after at least two prior regimens. This use is based on the induction of CRs. The applicant will conduct postmarketing clinical trials to show clinical benefit (e.g., survival prolongation).

Endothelial and Astrocytic Support by Human Bone Marrow Stem Cell Grafts into Symptomatic ALS Mice towards Blood-Spinal Cord Barrier Repair.

Vascular pathology, including blood-CNS barrier (B-CNS-B) damage via endothelial cell (EC) degeneration, is a recently recognized hallmark of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) pathogenesis. B-CNS-B repair may be a new therapeutic approach for ALS. This study aimed to determine effects of transplanted unmodified human bone marrow CD34+ (hBM34+) cells into symptomatic G93A mice towards blood-spinal cord barrier (BSCB) repair. Thirteen weeks old G93A mice intravenously received one of three different doses of hBM34+ cells. Cell-treated, media-treated, and control mice were euthanized at 17 weeks of age. Immunohistochemical (anti-human vWF, CD45, GFAP, and Iba-1) and motor neuron histological analyses were performed in cervical and lumbar spinal cords. EB levels in spinal cord parenchyma determined capillary permeability. Transplanted hBM34+ cells improved behavioral disease outcomes and enhanced motor neuron survival, mainly in high-cell-dose mice. Transplanted cells differentiated into ECs and engrafted within numerous capillaries. Reduced astrogliosis, microgliosis, and enhanced perivascular end-feet astrocytes were also determined in spinal cords, mostly in high-cell-dose mice. These mice also showed significantly decreased parenchymal EB levels. EC differentiation, capillary engraftment, reduced capillary permeability, and re-established perivascular end-feet astrocytes in symptomatic ALS mice may represent BSCB repair processes, supporting hBM34+ cell transplantation as a future therapeutic strategy for ALS patients.

Topotecan in combination with cisplatin for the treatment of stage IVB, recurrent, or persistent cervical cancer.

PURPOSE: Topotecan, a camptothecin analog previously approved for the treatment of ovarian cancer and small-cell lung cancer, was granted regular approval by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on June 14, 2006, for use in combination with cisplatin to treat women with stage IVB, recurrent, or persistent carcinoma of the cervix not amenable to curative treatment with surgery and/or radiation therapy. The purpose of this summary is to review the database supporting this approval. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In a randomized multicenter study enrolling 293 eligible patients, topotecan plus cisplatin (TC) was compared with cisplatin monotherapy. The TC regimen consisted of cisplatin 50 mg/m2 IV over 1 hour on day 1 and topotecan 0.75 mg/m2 IV over 30 minutes on days 1, 2, and 3 every 21 days. RESULTS: There was a clinically relevant and statistically significant improvement in overall survival in the TC treatment arm. Median overall survival was 9.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]:7.9-11.9) in the TC arm, compared to 6.5 months (95% CI:5.8-8.8) with cisplatin alone. The unadjusted hazard ratio for overall survival between treatment arms was 0.76 (95% CI: 0.59-0.98, P = .033) favoring the combination arm. The most common toxicities with TC included myelosuppression, nausea and vomiting, mucositis, rash, and hepatotoxicity. CONCLUSIONS: This report describes the FDA's review supporting this first approval of a chemotherapeutic drug for advanced cervical cancer based on demonstration of a survival benefit.

Approval summary: azacitidine for treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome subtypes.

PURPOSE: This article summarizes data submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for marketing approval of azacitidine as injectable suspension (Vidaza, Pharmion Corporation, Boulder, CO) for treatment of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In one phase 3 controlled trial, 191 study subjects were randomized to treatment with azacitidine or to observation; an additional 120 patients were treated with azacitidine in two phase 2 single arm studies. The primary efficacy end point was the overall response rate, defined as complete or partial normalization of peripheral blood counts and bone marrow blast percentages for at least 4 weeks. RESULTS: In the controlled trial, the overall response rate was 15.7% in the azacitidine treatment group; there were no responders in the observation group (P < 0.0001). Response rates were similar in the two single arm studies. During response patients stopped being red cell or platelet transfusion dependent. Median duration of responses was at least 9 months. An additional 19% of azacitidine-treated patients had less than partial responses, most becoming transfusion independent. The most common adverse events attributed to azacitidine were gastrointestinal, hematologic, local (injection site), and constitutional. There were no azacitidine-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: On May 19, 2004 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved azacitidine as injectable suspension for treatment of patients with the following myelodysplastic syndrome subtypes: refractory anemia or refractory anemia with ringed sideroblasts (if accompanied by neutropenia or thrombocytopenia or requiring transfusions), refractory anemia with excess blasts, refractory anemia with excess blasts in transformation, and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia. Full prescribing information is available at http://www.fda.gov/cder/foi/label/2004/050794lbl.pdf. Azacitidine is the first agent approved for treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome.

Approval summary: Docetaxel in combination with prednisone for the treatment of androgen-independent hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Docetaxel, a taxane previously approved for the treatment of breast cancer and non-small cell lung cancer, was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration on May 19, 2004 for use in combination with prednisone for the treatment of metastatic androgen-independent (hormone-refractory) prostate cancer. The purpose of this summary is to review the database supporting this approval. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In a randomized, global study enrolling 1,006 patients, two schedules of docetaxel were compared with mitoxantrone + prednisone as follows: MTZ q 3w, mitoxantrone 12 mg/m2 every 21 days + prednisone 5 mg twice a day for a total of 10 cycles; TXT q 3w, docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 21 days + prednisone 5 mg twice a day for a total of 10 cycles; and TXT qw, docetaxel 30 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 15, 22, and 29 every 6 weeks + prednisone 5 mg twice a day for a total of 5 cycles. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant overall survival advantage shown for the TXT q 3w arm over MTZ q 3w (median survival 18.9 months versus 16.5 months, P = 0.0094). No overall survival advantage was shown for TXT qw compared with MTZ q 3w. The most commonly occurring adverse events included anemia, neutropenia, infection, nausea, sensory neuropathy, fluid retention, alopecia, nail changes, diarrhea, and fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: This report describes the Food and Drug Administration review supporting this first approval of a combination therapy for hormone-refractory prostate cancer based on demonstration of a survival benefit.

United States Food and Drug Administration Drug Approval summary: Gefitinib (ZD1839; Iressa) tablets.

On May 5, 2003, gefitinib (Iressa; ZD1839) 250-mg tablets (AstraZeneca Inc.) received accelerated approval by the United States Food and Drug Administration as monotherapy for patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer after failure of both platinum-based and docetaxel chemotherapies. Information provided in this summary includes chemistry manufacturing and controls, clinical pharmacology, and clinical trial efficacy and safety results. Gefitinib is an anilinoquinazoline compound with the chemical name 4-quinazolinamine,N-(3-chloro-4-flurophenyl)-7-methoxy-6-[3-(4-morpholinyl)propoxy]. It has the molecular formula C(22)H(24)ClFN(4)O(3). Gefitinib is often referred to as a "specific" or "selective" inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor. Studies demonstrate, however, that gefitinib inhibits the activity of other intracellular transmembrane tyrosine-specific protein kinases at concentrations similar to those at which it inhibits the epidermal growth factor signal. Maximum plasma concentrations resulting from clinically relevant doses are 0.5-1 microM or more, well within the IC(50) values of several tyrosine kinases. No clinical studies have been performed that demonstrate a correlation between epidermal growth factor receptor expression and response to gefitinib. Gefitinib is 60% available after oral administration and is widely distributed throughout the body. Gefitinib is extensively metabolized in the liver by cytochrome P450 3A4 enzyme. Over a 10-day period, approximately 86% of an orally administered radioactive dose is recovered in the feces, with <4% of the dose in the urine. After daily oral administration, steady-state plasma levels are reached in 10 days and are 2-fold higher than those achieved after single doses. Gefitinib effectiveness was demonstrated in a randomized, double-blind, Phase II, multicenter trial comparing two oral doses of gefitinib (250 versus 500 mg/day). A total of 216 patients were enrolled. The 142 patients who were refractory to or intolerant of a platinum and docetaxel comprised the evaluable population for the efficacy analysis. A partial tumor response occurred in 14% (9 of 66) of patients receiving 250 mg/day gefitinib and in 8% (6 of 76) of patients receiving 500 mg/day gefitinib. The overall objective response rate (RR) for both doses combined was 10.6% (15 of 142 patients; 95% confidence interval, 6.0-16.8%). Responses were more frequent in females and in nonsmokers. The median duration of response was 7.0 months (range, 4.6-18.6+ months). Other submitted data included the results of two large trials conducted in chemotherapy-naive, stage III and IV non-small cell lung cancer patients. Patients were randomized to receive gefitinib (250 or 500 mg daily) or placebo, in combination with either gemcitabine plus cisplatin (n = 1093) or carboplatin plus paclitaxel (n = 1037). Results from this study showed no benefit (RR, time to progression, or survival) from adding gefitinib to chemotherapy. Consequently, gefinitib is only recommended for use as monotherapy. Common adverse events associated with gefitinib treatment included diarrhea, rash, acne, dry skin, nausea, and vomiting. Interstitial lung disease has been observed in patients receiving gefitinib. Worldwide, the incidence of interstitial lung disease was about 1% (2% in the Japanese post-marketing experience and about 0.3% in a United States expanded access program). Approximately one-third of the cases have been fatal. Gefitinib was approved under accelerated approval regulations on the basis of a surrogate end point, RR. No controlled gefitinib trials, to date, demonstrate a clinical benefit, such as improvement in disease-related symptoms or increased survival. Accelerated approval regulations require the sponsor to conduct additional studies to verify that gefitinib therapy produces such benefit.

The interactions of anti-cancer drugs approved in the last decade in the United States with membrane transporters.

Membrane transporters play a role in determining the absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of small molecule anticancer drugs and mediating chemosensitivity and resistance of tumor cells to these drugs. Our understanding of the influence of these transporters on the pharmacokinetics, clinical effectiveness and tolerability has considerably increased in the last decade. Therefore, determining the interaction of membrane transporters with small molecule anticancer drugs can facilitate the development of effective and safe treatments. We reviewed the interaction of the small molecule anticancer drugs approved in the last decade with the more common membranes transporters, such as ABCB1, ABCG2, and OATP. The drugs were divided into three categories: targeted therapies, cytotoxic agents and hormonal therapies. The literature appears to focus on the interaction of the targeted therapies compared to the remaining two categories. Furthermore, most data stemmed from nonclinical studies with only a few clinical examples where transporters corresponded with systemic exposure or clinical effectiveness or tolerability. More nonclinical and clinical studies are needed to improve the ability to use the findings from these nonclinical studies to predict clinical outcomes, but the literature appears to be rapidly expanding as our understanding of these transporters groups. Therefore, determining the interaction of membrane transporters with small molecule anticancer drugs can be facilitate the development of effective and safe treatment.