Pharmacokinetic models for first-in-human dose selection of immune-activating products in oncology.

Pharmacokinetic (PK) models are increasingly submitted to the FDA to support first-in-human (FIH) dose selection of immune-oncology products. To examine whether a simple PK modeling (SPM) using clearance for scaling was acceptable for dose estimation, FIH(SPM) doses were computed and compared to doses that were safely administered to patients. We concluded that the SPM approach is acceptable in FIH dose estimation, but the variables should be carefully selected for CD3 constructs. For CD3 constructs, use of 60 kg BWh, a clearance exponent of 0.75, and a targeted plasma concentration based on relevant and/or sensitive activity assays was an acceptable approach for FIH dose selection; use of 0.85 as the scaling factor is questionable at this time as it resulted in a FIH dose that was too close to the AHD for one product (7%). Immune activating mAbs were not sensitive to changes in the clearance exponent (0.75-0.85) or body weight (60-70 kg). For PD-1/PD-L1 mAbs, using products' in vitro EC50 in the model resulted in suboptimal FIH doses and clinical data of closely related products informed FIH dose selection. PK models submitted by sponsors were diverse in methods, assumptions, and variables, and the resulting FIH doses were not always optimal.

An FDA analysis of clinical hold deficiencies affecting investigational new drug applications for oncology products.

A systematic analysis of new commercial investigational new drug applications (IND) submitted to the FDA's Office of Hematology and Oncology Products (OHOP) in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research was conducted to quantify the most common reasons INDs for oncology indications go on clinical hold. In OHOP, less than 10% of INDs went on hold or were withdrawn within the 30-day safety review period. Of INDs that were placed on hold, deficiencies were mainly clinical, followed by concerns related to pharmaceutical quality and nonclinical development. INDs were also characterized based on phase of development, product type, sponsors' regulatory experience, and occurrence of a pre-IND meeting. INDs that were placed on hold were mostly for first-in-human trials or submitted by sponsors with limited regulatory experience. INDs that went on hold or were safe-to-proceed had pre-IND meetings with comparable rates but sponsors with substantial experience appeared to benefit more from pre-IND meetings compared to those with limited experience. The time interval between the pre-IND meeting and the IND submission was longer for INDs that went on hold. To obtain useful FDA feedback on product development, it is essential to provide focused questions and supporting information in pre-IND meeting packages.

An FDA oncology analysis of toxicities associated with PBD-containing antibody-drug conjugates.

With a new generation of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) that contain a drug-to-antibody ratio (DAR) of 2, the question remains whether advances in technology have resulted in more stable and tumor-specific ADCs. These ADCs are anticipated to cause minimal systemic exposures of payloads, with toxicities being evident mainly at tumor sites. We examined 15 ADCs with PBD-dimer payloads and a DAR of 2 and concluded that dose limiting toxicities in animals and in humans are generally related to the payload. Both the payloads and the ADCs had pro-inflammatory responses causing severe toxicities that were at times of low incidence, making it difficult to assess a cause-effect relationship. Due to their low incidence, single-patient cohorts may not detect these events and such design may not be suitable in first-in-human (FIH) trials. The commonly proposed approach by the sponsors for FIH dose selection was 1/6th highest non-severely toxic dose (HNSTD) in monkeys. This approach resulted in an acceptable balance of safety and efficient dose escalation in phase 1 trials, when using data from repeat-dose toxicology studies and body surface area for scaling. No sponsor used the data generated in rodents or proposed novel approaches for FIH dose selection.

An FDA oncology analysis of CD3 bispecific constructs and first-in-human dose selection.

We retrospectively examined the nonclinical studies conducted with 17 CD3 bispecific constructs in support of first-in-human (FIH) trials in oncology. We also collected information on the design of dose-finding clinical trials. Sponsors have used different MABEL approaches for FIH dose selection. To better assess acceptable approaches, FIH doses were computed from nonclinical studies and compared to the maximum tolerated doses (MTDs) in patients, to the highest human doses (HHDs) when an MTD was not identified, or to the recommended human dose (RHD) for blinatumomab. We concluded that approaches based on receptor occupancy, highest non-severely toxic dose, or no-observed adverse effect level are not acceptable for selecting the FIH dose as they resulted in doses close to or above the MTDs, HHDs, or the RHD. A FIH dose corresponding to 10%-30% pharmacologic activity (PA) was an acceptable approach. A FIH dose corresponding to 50% PA was acceptable for all except one construct, potentially due to its biological or structural properties. The most common toxicities in animals and patients were those related to cytokine release. Doses were better tolerated when intra-animal or intra-patient dose escalation was used. Exposing naïve patients to an MTD achieved with intra-patient dose escalation design may be unsafe.

An FDA oncology analysis of immune activating products and first-in-human dose selection.

As sub-therapeutic doses are not medically justifiable in patients with cancer, we retrospectively analyzed data on immune activating products, to assess approaches used in first-in-human (FIH) dose selection, the utility of animal toxicology studies in dose selection, and the length of time to complete FIH trials. The information collected included pharmacology and toxicology data, FIH dose and rationale, and dose-finding trial design. We used the principles of the Hill equation to estimate the FIH doses for antibodies and compared them to the doses administered to patients with acceptable toxicities. For approximately half the antibodies (44%) examined, the FIH doses were at least a hundred-fold lower than the doses safely administered to patients, indicating optimization of FIH dose selection and/or optimization of dose-finding trial design is needed to minimize patient exposure to sub-therapeutic doses. However, selection of the FIH dose for antibodies based on animal toxicology studies using 1/6th the HNSTD or 1/10th the NOAEL resulted in human doses that were unsafe for several antibodies examined. We also concluded that antibodies with Fc-modifications for increased effector function may be less tolerated, resulting in toxicities at lower doses than those without such modifications. There was insufficient information to evaluate CD3 bispecific products.

An FDA oncology analysis of antibody-drug conjugates.

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are complex molecules composed of monoclonal antibodies conjugated to potent cytotoxic agents through chemical linkers. Because of this complexity, sponsors have used different approaches for the design of nonclinical studies to support the safety evaluation of ADCs and first-in-human (FIH) dose selection. We analyzed this data with the goal of describing the relationship between nonclinical study results and Phase 1 study outcomes. We summarized the following data from investigational new drug applications (INDs) for ADCs: plasma stability, animal study designs and toxicities, and algorithms used for FIH dose selection. Our review found that selecting a FIH dose that is 1/6th the highest non-severely toxic dose (HNSTD) in cynomolgus monkeys or 1/10th the STD10 in rodents scaled according to body surface area (BSA) generally resulted in the acceptable balance of safety and efficient dose-escalation in a Phase 1 trial. Other approaches may also be acceptable, e.g. 1/10th the HNSTD in monkeys using BSA or 1/10th the NOAEL in monkeys or rodents using body weight for scaling. While the animal data for the vc-MMAE platform yielded variable range of HNSTDs in cynomolgus monkeys, MTDs were in a narrow range in patients, suggesting that for ADCs sharing the same small molecule drug, linker and drug:antibody ratio, prior clinical data can inform the design of a Phase 1 clinical trial.

FDA Approval Summary: Repotrectinib for locally advanced or metastatic ROS1-positive non-small cell lung cancer.

On November 15, 2023, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted traditional approval to repotrectinib (Augtyro®, Bristol Myers Squibb Corporation), for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic ROS1-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The approval was based on TRIDENT-1, a single arm trial with multiple cohorts of patients with ROS1 fusion-positive (hereafter "ROS1-positive") NSCLC, (NCT03093116), who were either treatment naïve or had received prior ROS1 TKI and/or platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary efficacy outcome measure is objective response rate (ORR) assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) using response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. ORR was assessed in 71 patients who were ROS1 TKI naïve and 56 patients who had received a prior ROS1 TKI. Among 71 patients who were ROS1 TKI naïve, the ORR was 79% (95% CI 68, 88); median duration of response was 34.1 months (95% CI 26, NE). In patients who had received a prior ROS1 TKI and no prior chemotherapy, the ORR was 38% (95% CI 25, 52). The median duration of response was 14.8 months (95% CI 7.6, NE) BICR-assessed responses were observed in CNS metastases in patients in both cohorts, and in patients who developed resistance mutations following prior TKI therapy. The most common (> 20%) adverse reactions were dizziness, dysgeusia, peripheral neuropathy, constipation, dyspnea, ataxia, fatigue, cognitive disorders, and muscular weakness. A unique feature of this ROS1 TKI approval is the inclusion of robust evidence of efficacy in patients with ROS1-positive NSCLC who had progressed on prior ROS1 TKIs.

FDA Approval Summary: Cabozantinib for Differentiated Thyroid Cancer.

On September 17, 2021, the FDA approved cabozantinib (Cabometyx; Exelixis, Inc.) for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients 12 years of age and older with locally advanced or metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) that has progressed following prior VEGFR-targeted therapy and who are radioactive iodine (RAI)-refractory or ineligible. This is the first approval for patients with RAI-refractory locally advanced or metastatic DTC who have progressed following prior therapy and the first approval in pediatric patients with DTC. The approval was based on data from COSMIC-311 (Study XL184-311, NCT03690388), an international, randomized, double-blind trial in which patients with locally advanced or metastatic RAI-refractory DTC that progressed during or following treatment with at least one VEGFR-targeting tyrosine kinase inhibitor were treated with either cabozantinib 60 mg orally once daily (N = 170) or placebo with best supportive care (N = 88). The primary efficacy outcome measures were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review per RECIST 1.1. The median PFS was 11.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.4-13.8] in the cabozantinib arm compared with 1.9 months (95% CI, 1.9-3.7) in the control arm, with an HR of 0.22 (95% CI, 0.15-0.31). The endpoint of ORR was not met. No new safety signals were identified with the exception of hypocalcemia, which was added as a warning in the product labeling.

FDA Approval Summary: Margetuximab plus Chemotherapy for Advanced or Metastatic HER2-Positive Breast Cancer.

On December 16, 2020, the FDA granted regular approval to margetuximab-cmkb (MARGENZA), in combination with chemotherapy, for the treatment of adult patients with HER2-positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer who have received two or more prior anti-HER2 regimens, at least one of which was for metastatic disease. Approval was based on data from SOPHIA, a multicenter, randomized, open-label, active controlled study comparing margetuximab with trastuzumab, in combination with chemotherapy. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review. SOPHIA demonstrated a 0.9-month difference in median PFS between the two treatment arms [5.8 vs. 4.9 months, respectively; stratified HR, 0.76 (95% confidence interval: 0.59-0.98; P = 0.0334)]. Overall survival (OS) was immature at the data cut-off date of September 10, 2019. Infusion-related reactions (IRR) are an important safety signal associated with margetuximab plus chemotherapy. In SOPHIA, 13% of patients treated with margetuximab plus chemotherapy reported IRRs, of which 1.5% were grade 3. The most commonly reported adverse drug reactions (>10%) with margetuximab in combination with chemotherapy were fatigue/asthenia, nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, constipation, headache, pyrexia, alopecia, abdominal pain, peripheral neuropathy, arthralgia/myalgia, cough, decreased appetite, dyspnea, IRR, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, and extremity pain. Overall, the favorable risk-benefit profile for margetuximab when added to chemotherapy supported its approval for the intended indication.

Summary of a workshop on preclinical and translational safety assessment of CD3 bispecifics.

Currently, there is a multitude of CD3 bispecifics with different molecular designs and binding properties in preclinical and clinical development for the treatment of liquid or solid tumors. The key safety concerns with CD3 bispecifics are excessive release of cytokines, which may translate to potentially life-threating cytokine release syndrome (CRS), target organ toxicity due to redirection of T-cells to normal tissues expressing the tumor-associated antigen (TAA) (off-tumor/on-target cytotoxicity), and, in some instances, neurotoxicity. Another key challenge is to arrive at a safe clinical starting dose and an efficient escalating strategy that allows patients in early dose cohorts the potential for clinical benefit in Phase 1 trials. To expand the therapeutic index and bring more treatment options to patients, there are intense efforts to overcome these challenges through improvements in molecular design, preclinical safety assessment strategies, and clinical management practices. A recent workshop at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with industry, academic, and regulatory agency representation was held to discuss the challenges and explore where such improvements to the development of CD3 bispecifics can be implemented. Here, the content of the presentations and the discussion that occurred during this workshop are summarized.

Tasigna for chronic and accelerated phase Philadelphia chromosome--positive chronic myelogenous leukemia resistant to or intolerant of imatinib.

PURPOSE: This Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval report describes the data and analyses leading to the approval by the FDA of nilotinib (Tasigna, AMN-107; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation), an inhibitor of Bcr-Abl tyrosine kinase, for the treatment of chronic-phase (CP) and accelerated-phase (AP) chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) resistant to or intolerant of imatinib. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The FDA approval of the efficacy and safety of nilotinib was based on the results of an ongoing single-arm, open-label, phase 2 clinical trial. The primary end point for CML-CP was unconfirmed major cytogenetic response. The efficacy end point for CML-AP was confirmed hematologic response. RESULTS: The major cytogenetic response rate in 232 evaluable CP patients was 40% (95% confidence interval, 33%, 46%). The hematologic response rate in 105 evaluable AP patients was 26% (95% confidence interval, 18%, 35%). The median duration of response has not been reached for both CML-CP and CML-AP responding patients. In CML-CP patients, the common serious drug-related adverse reactions were thrombocytopenia and neutropenia. In CML-AP patients, the common serious drug-related adverse reactions were thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, pneumonia, febrile neutropenia, leukopenia, intracranial hemorrhage, elevated lipase, and pyrexia. Nilotinib prolongs the QT interval and sudden deaths have been reported; these risks and appropriate risk minimization strategies are described in a boxed warning on the labeling. CONCLUSIONS: On October 29, 2007, the U.S. FDA granted accelerated approval to nilotinib (Tasigna) for use in the treatment of CP and AP Philadelphia chromosome positive CML in adult patients resistant to or intolerant of prior therapy that included imatinib.

Workgroup report: Review of genomics data based on experience with mock submissions--view of the CDER Pharmacology Toxicology Nonclinical Pharmacogenomics Subcommittee.

Over the past few years, both the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the pharmaceutical industry have recognized the potential importance of pharmacogenomics and toxicogenomics to drug development. To resolve the uncertainties surrounding the use of microarray technology and the presentation of genomics data for regulatory purposes, several pharmaceutical companies and genomics technology providers have provided the FDA with reports of genomics studies that included supporting toxicology data (e.g., serum chemistry, histopathology). These studies were not associated with any active drug application and were exploratory or hypothesis generating in nature. For training purposes, these reports were reviewed by the Nonclinical Pharmacogenomics Subcommittee consisting of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research pharmacology and toxicology researchers and reviewers. In this article, we describe some of these submissions and report on our assessment of data content, format, and quality control metrics that were useful for evaluating these nonclinical genomics submissions, specifically in relation to the proposed MIAME/MINTox (minimum information about a microarray experiment/minimum information needed for a toxicology experiment) recommendations. These genomics submissions allowed both researchers and regulators to gain experience in the process of reviewing and analyzing toxicogenomics data. The experience will allow development of recommendations for the submission and review of these data as the state of the science evolves.

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.

Application of emerging technologies in toxicology and safety assessment: regulatory perspectives.

Emerging technologies applied in the regulatory field encompass a group of technologies that are used in addition to or in replacement of the standard toxicology studies conducted to support an Investigational New Drug Application (IND) or New Drug Application (NDA). The standard package includes general toxicology studies of various duration, safety pharmacology studies, genetic toxicology studies, and reproductive toxicology studies. New and emerging technologies applied to the regulation of new drugs include the use of novel biomarkers, transfected cells and transgenic animals, and the "omics" technologies (toxicogenomics, proteomics, and metabonomics). These technologies are at various stages of regulatory development and acceptance. For example, the use of transgenic animals have gained acceptance by regulatory authorities to replace a 2-year carcinogenicity assay. Alternatively, the "omics" technologies are not sufficiently advanced to achieve regulatory acceptance as replacements, although these assays have a role early in drug development and they may prove useful as supplements to standard studies. Data from these assays have been used to address specific mechanistic questions in combination with standard toxicology assays.