Benefit-Risk Summary of Nivolumab for the Treatment of Patients with Unresectable Advanced, Recurrent, or Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma After Prior Fluoropyrimidine- and Platinum-Based Chemotherapy.

On June 10, 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved nivolumab (OPDIVO; Bristol Myers Squibb, New York, NY) for the treatment of patients with unresectable advanced, recurrent, or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) after prior fluoropyrimidine- and platinum-based chemotherapy. Approval was based on the results of a single, randomized, active-control study (ATTRACTION-3) that randomized patients to receive nivolumab or investigator's choice of taxane chemotherapy (docetaxel or paclitaxel). The study demonstrated a significant improvement in overall survival (OS; hazard ratio = 0.77; 95% confidence interval: 0.62-0.96; p = .0189) with an estimated median OS of 10.9 months in the nivolumab arm compared with 8.4 months in the chemotherapy arm. Overall, fewer patients in the nivolumab arm experienced treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of any grade, grade 3-4 TEAEs, and serious adverse events compared with the control arm. The safety profile of nivolumab in patients with ESCC was generally similar to the known safety profile of nivolumab in other cancer types with the following exception: esophageal fistula was identified as a new, clinically significant risk in patients with ESCC treated with nivolumab. Additionally, the incidence of pneumonitis was higher in the ESCC population than in patients with other cancer types who are treated with nivolumab. This article summarizes the FDA review of the data supporting the approval of nivolumab for the treatment of ESCC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The approval of nivolumab for the treatment of adult patients with unresectable advanced, recurrent, or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) after prior fluoropyrimidine- and platinum-based chemotherapy was based on an overall survival (OS) benefit from a randomized, open-label, active-controlled study called ATTRACTION-3. Prior to this study, no drug or combination regimen had demonstrated an OS benefit in a randomized study for patients with ESCC after prior fluoropyrimidine- and platinum-based chemotherapy.

FDA Approval Summary: Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab for the Treatment of Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Previously Treated with Sorafenib.

On March 10, 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval to nivolumab in combination with ipilimumab for the treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) previously treated with sorafenib. The recommended approved dosage was nivolumab 1 mg/kg i.v. plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg i.v. every 3 weeks for four cycles, followed by nivolumab 240 mg i.v. every 2 weeks. The approval was based on data from cohort 4 of CheckMate 040, which randomized patients with advanced unresectable or metastatic HCC previously treated with or who were intolerant to sorafenib to receive one of three different dosing regimens of nivolumab in combination with ipilimumab. Investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR) was the primary endpoint, and ORR assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) was an exploratory endpoint. BICR-assessed ORR and duration of response (DoR) form the primary basis of the FDA's regulatory decision, and BICR-assessed ORR was comparable in all three arms at 31%-32% with 95% confidence interval [CI] 18%-47%. The DoR ranged from 17.5 to 22.2 months across the three arms, with overlapping 95% CIs. Adverse events (AEs) were generally consistent with the known AE profiles of nivolumab and ipilimumab, and no new safety events were identified. This article summarizes the FDA review of the data supporting the approval of nivolumab and ipilimumab for the treatment of HCC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Nivolumab and ipilimumab combination therapy is another option for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who experience radiographic progression during or after sorafenib or sorafenib intolerance. No new toxicities were identified, but, as expected, increased toxicity was observed with the addition of ipilimumab to nivolumab as compared with nivolumab alone, which is also approved for the same indication. Whether to administer nivolumab as a single agent or in combination with ipilimumab is expected to be a joint decision between the oncologist and patient, taking into consideration the potential for a higher likelihood of response and the potentially higher rate of toxicity with the combination.

Benefit-Risk Summary of Regorafenib for the Treatment of Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma That Has Progressed on Sorafenib.

On April 27, 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved regorafenib for the treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who had previously been treated with sorafenib. Approval was based on the results of a single, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (RESORCE) that demonstrated an improvement in overall survival (OS). Patients were randomly allocated to receive regorafenib160 mg orally once daily or matching placebo for the first 21 days of each 28-day cycle. The trial demonstrated a significant improvement in OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.79, p < .0001) with an estimated median OS of 10.6 months in the regorafenib arm and 7.8 months in the placebo arm. A statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) based on modified RECIST for HCC [Semin Liver Dis 2010;30:52-60] (HR = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.37-0.56, p < .0001) was also demonstrated; the estimated median PFS was 3.1 and 1.5 months in the regorafenib and placebo arms, respectively. The overall response rate, based on modified RECIST for HCC, was 11% in the regorafenib arm and 4% in the placebo arm. The toxicity profile was consistent with that observed in other indications; the most clinically significant adverse reactions were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, diarrhea, and hypertension. Based on the improvement in survival and acceptable toxicity, a favorable benefit-to-risk evaluation led to approval for treatment of patients with advanced HCC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Regorafenib is the first drug approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma that has progressed on sorafenib and is expected to become a standard of care for these patients.

FDA Approval Summary: Durvalumab and Pembrolizumab, Immune Checkpoint inhibitors for the Treatment of Biliary Tract Cancer.

On September 2, 2022, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved durvalumab in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine, for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic biliary tract cancers (BTC). On October 31, 2023, the FDA approved pembrolizumab in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine for the same indication. Approvals were based on two randomized, multiregional, placebo-controlled trials, which randomly allocated patients to receive durvalumab (TOPAZ-1) or pembrolizumab (KEYNOTE-966) in combination with chemotherapy or placebo in combination with chemotherapy. Overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint in both studies. In both studies, a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in OS was demonstrated. In the TOPAZ-1 trial the median OS of patients receiving durvalumab was 12.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.1, 14.0) and 11.5 months (95% CI 10.1, 12.5) in patients receiving placebo (HR 0.80 [95% CI 0.66, 0.97]). In the KEYNOTE-966 trial, the median OS of patients receiving pembrolizumab was 12.7 months (95% CI 11.5, 13.6) and 10.9 months (95% CI 9.9, 11.6) in patients receiving placebo (HR 0.83 [95% CI 0.72, 0.95]). The addition of checkpoint inhibitors to standard of care chemotherapy for this indication did not reveal any new adverse event signals and the safety profile was generally consistent with the known clinical experience with durvalumab, pembrolizumab, and the backbone chemotherapy regimen. The approvals of durvalumab and pembrolizumab in combination with standard of care cisplatin and gemcitabine for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic BTC add two new therapeutic option for these patients.

FDA Approval Summary: Fruquintinib for the Treatment of Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

On November 8, 2023, the FDA approved fruquintinib, an inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFR)-1, -2, and -3, for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who have been previously treated with fluoropyrimidine­, oxaliplatin­, and irinotecan­based chemotherapy, an anti­VEGF therapy, and, if RAS wild­type and medically appropriate, an anti EGFR therapy. Approval was based on Study FRESCO-2, a globally-conducted, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The key secondary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). A total of 691 patients were randomized (461 and 230 into the fruquintinib and placebo arms, respectively). Fruquintinib provided a statistically significant improvement in OS with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.66 (95% CI: 0.55, 0.80; p<0.001). The median OS was 7.4 months (95% CI: 6.7, 8.2) in the fruquintinib arm and 4.8 months (95% CI: 4.0, 5.8) for the placebo arm. Adverse events observed were generally consistent with the known safety profile associated with inhibition of the VEGFR. The results of FRESCO-2 were supported by the FRESCO study, a double-blind, single country, placebo-controlled, randomized trial in patients with refractory mCRC who have been previously treated with fluoropyrimidine­, oxaliplatin­, and irinotecan­based chemotherapy. In FRESCO, the OS HR was 0.65 (95% CI: 0.51, 0.83; p<0.001). FDA concluded that the totality of the evidence from FRESCO-2 and FRESCO supported an indication for patients with mCRC with prior treatment with fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin-, and irinotecan-based chemotherapy, an anti-VEGF biological therapy, and if RAS wild­type and medically appropriate, an anti-EGFR therapy.

Association between antibiotics and adverse oncological outcomes in patients receiving targeted or immune-based therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Background & Aims: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) alone or in combination with other ICIs or vascular endothelial growth factor pathway inhibitors are therapeutic options in unresectable/metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Whether antibiotic (ATB) exposure affects outcome remains unclear. Methods: This study retrospectively analysed an FDA database including 4,098 patients receiving ICI (n = 842) either as monotherapy (n = 258) or in combination (n = 584), tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) (n = 1,968), vascular endothelial growth factor pathway inhibitors (n = 480), or placebo (n = 808) as part of nine international clinical trials. Exposure to ATB within 30 days before or after treatment initiation was correlated with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) across therapeutic modality before and after inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Results: Of 4,098 patients with unresectable/metastatic HCC, of which 39% were of hepatitis B aetiology and 21% were of hepatitis C aetiology, 83% were males with a median age of 64 years (range 18-88), a European Collaborative Oncology Group performance status of 0 (60%), and Child-Pugh A class (98%). Overall, ATB exposure (n = 620, 15%) was associated with shorter median PFS (3.6 months in ATB-exposed vs. 4.2 months; hazard ratio [HR] 1.29; 95% CI 1.22, 1.36) and OS (8.7 months in ATB-exposed vs. 10.6 months; HR 1.36; 95% CI 1.29, 1.43). In IPTW analyses, ATB was associated with shorter PFS in patients treated with ICI (HR 1.52; 95% CI 1.34, 1.73), TKI (HR 1.29; 95% CI 1.19, 1.39), and placebo (HR 1.23; 95% CI 1.11, 1.37). Similar results were observed in IPTW analyses of OS in patients treated with ICI (HR 1.22; 95% CI 1.08, 1.38), TKI (HR 1.40; 95% CI 1.30, 1.52), and placebo (HR 1.40; 95% CI 1.25, 1.57). Conclusions: Unlike other malignancies where the detrimental effect of ATB may be more prominent in ICI recipients, ATB is associated with worse outcomes in this study across different therapies for HCC including placebo. Whether ATB is causally linked to worse outcomes through disruption of the gut-liver axis remains to be demonstrated in translational studies. Impact and Implications: A growing body of evidence suggests the host microbiome, frequently altered by antibiotic treatment, as an important outcome predictor in the context of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. In this study, we analysed the effects of early antibiotic exposure on outcomes in almost 4,100 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated within nine multicentre clinical trials. Interestingly, early exposure to antibiotic treatment was associated with worse outcomes not only in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors but also in those treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors and placebo. This is in contrast to data published in other malignancies, where the detrimental effect of antibiotic treatment may be more prominent in immune checkpoint inhibitor recipients, highlighting the uniqueness of hepatocellular carcinoma given the complex interplay between cirrhosis, cancer, risk of infection, and the pleiotropic effect of molecular therapies for this disease.

FDA Approval Summary: Tucatinib with Trastuzumab for Advanced Unresectable or Metastatic, Chemotherapy Refractory, HER2-Positive RAS Wild-Type Colorectal Cancer.

On January 19, 2023, the FDA granted accelerated approval to tucatinib in combination with trastuzumab for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic RAS wild-type, HER2-positive colorectal cancer who have received prior treatment with fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan. Approval was based on the pooled analysis of patients receiving tucatinib in combination with trastuzumab in MOUNTAINEER (NCT03043313), an open-label, multicenter trial. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1 as per blinded central review committee (BIRC) assessment. The main secondary endpoint was duration of response (DOR) per BIRC assessment. Eighty-four eligible patients received the combination tucatinib and trastuzumab. With a median follow-up of 16 months, the ORR was 38% [95% confidence interval (CI): 28-49] and median DOR was 12.4 months (95% CI: 8.5-20.5); 81% of responders had a response lasting more than 6 months. The most common adverse reactions observed in at least 20% of patients receiving tucatinib in combination with trastuzumab were diarrhea, fatigue, rash, nausea, abdominal pain, infusion-related reactions, and fever. FDA concluded that the magnitude of ORR and durable responses observed in patients treated with tucatinib in combination with trastuzumab in the MOUNTAINEER trial are clinically meaningful, particularly in the context of a disease with estimated survival of 6-7 months with available therapy. This is the first approval for the subset of patients with HER2-positive colorectal cancer. This article summarizes the FDA's thought process and review of the data supporting this accelerated approval.

FDA Approval Summary: Futibatinib for Unresectable Advanced or Metastatic, Chemotherapy Refractory Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma with FGFR2 Fusions or Other Rearrangements.

On September 30, 2022, the FDA granted accelerated approval to futibatinib for the treatment of adult patients with previously treated, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) with FGFR2 fusions or other rearrangements. Approval was based on Study TAS-120-101, a multicenter open-label, single-arm trial. Patients received futibatinib 20-mg orally once daily. The major efficacy outcome measures were overall response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DoR) as determined by an independent review committee (IRC) according to RECIST v1.1. ORR was 42% (95% confidence interval, 32%-52%). Median DoR was 9.7 months. Adverse reactions occurring in ≥30% patients were nail toxicity, musculoskeletal pain, constipation, diarrhea, fatigue, dry mouth, alopecia, stomatitis, and abdominal pain. The most common laboratory abnormalities (≥50%) were increased phosphate, increased creatinine, decreased hemoglobin, and increased glucose. Ocular toxicity (including dry eye, keratitis, and retinal epithelial detachment) and hyperphosphatemia are important risks of futibatinib, which are listed under Warnings and Precautions. This article summarizes the FDA's thought process and data supporting the approval of futibatinib.

FDA Approval Summary: Nivolumab for the Adjuvant Treatment of Adults with Completely Resected Esophageal/Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer and Residual Pathologic Disease.

The FDA approved nivolumab on May 20, 2021, for the adjuvant treatment of completely resected (negative margins) esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer (EC/GEJC) in patients who had residual pathologic disease following chemoradiotherapy. The approval was based on data from the double-blind CheckMate 577 trial, which randomly allocated patients to receive nivolumab or placebo. Disease-free survival (DFS) was the primary endpoint. At the time of the final DFS analysis and the prespecified interim overall survival (OS) analysis, the estimated median DFS was 22.4 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 16.6-34.0] in the nivolumab arm versus 11.0 months (95% CI, 8.3-14.3) in the placebo arm, with an HR of 0.69 (95% CI, 0.56-0.85; two-sided P value = 0.0003). An unblinded review of OS did not indicate a detrimental effect on survival. Adverse reactions occurring in ≥20% of patients receiving nivolumab were fatigue/asthenia, diarrhea, nausea, rash, musculoskeletal pain, and cough. Approval of nivolumab is likely to change the treatment paradigm for the adjuvant treatment of patients with completely resected (negative margins) EC/GEJC who have residual pathologic disease following chemoradiotherapy based on the study results and favorable risk:benefit of nivolumab administration.

FDA Approval Summary: Ivosidenib for the Treatment of Patients with Advanced Unresectable or Metastatic, Chemotherapy Refractory Cholangiocarcinoma with an IDH1 Mutation.

On August 25, 2021, the FDA approved ivosidenib for the treatment of adult patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic hepatocellular isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutated cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) as detected by an FDA-approved test with disease progression after 1 to 2 prior lines of systemic therapy for advanced disease. The approval was based on data from Study AG120-C-005 (ClarIDHy), a double-blind placebo-controlled trial that randomly allocated (2:1) patients to receive either ivosidenib or placebo. Independently assessed progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary endpoint. With a median follow-up of 6.9 months, the HR for PFS was 0.37 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.25-0.54; P < 0.0001). Overall survival (OS) was the key secondary endpoint. At the final analysis of OS, with 70.5% of patients in the placebo arm receiving ivosidenib post disease progression, a non-statistically significant improvement in the ivosidenib arm with an HR = 0.79 (95% CI, 0.56-1.12) and median OS of 10.3 months (95% CI, 7.8-12.4) and 7.5 months (95% CI, 4.8-11.1) in the ivosidenib and placebo arms, respectively, were reported. Adverse reactions occurring in >20% of patients receiving ivosidenib were fatigue/asthenia, nausea, diarrhea, abdominal pain, ascites, vomiting, cough, and decreased appetite. Adverse reactions occurring in >20% of patients receiving placebo were fatigue/asthenia, nausea, abdominal pain, and vomiting. This is the first approval for the subset of patients with CCA harboring an IDH1 mutation.

U.S. Food and drug administration approval: rituximab in combination with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide for the treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

PURPOSE: To describe the clinical studies that led to the FDA approval of rituximab in combination with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide (FC) for the treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The results of two multinational, randomized trials in CLL patients comparing rituximab combined with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide versus FC were reviewed. The primary endpoint of both studies was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: The addition of rituximab to FC decreased the risk of a PFS event by 44% in 817 previously untreated patients and by 24% in 552 previously treated patients. Median survival times could not be estimated. Exploratory analysis in patients older than 70 suggested that there was no benefit to patients when rituximab was added to FC. The safety profile observed in both trials was consistent with the known toxicity profile of rituximab, FC, or CLL. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the demonstration of clinically meaningful prolongation of PFS, the FDA granted regular approval to rituximab in combination with FC for the treatment of patients with CLL. The magnitude of the treatment effect in patients 70 years and older is uncertain.

FDA Approval Summary: Pembrolizumab for the First-line Treatment of Patients with MSI-H/dMMR Advanced Unresectable or Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma.

The FDA approved pembrolizumab on June 29, 2020, for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) colorectal cancer with no prior systemic treatment for advanced disease. The approval was based on data from Study Keynote-177, which randomly allocated patients to receive either pembrolizumab or standard of care (SOC) with chemotherapy. Overall survival (OS) and independently assessed progression-free survival (PFS) were the primary endpoints. At the time of the final PFS analysis and second prespecified interim OS analysis, the estimated median PFS was 16.5 months (95% CI: 5.4-32.4) versus 8.2 months (95% CI: 6.1-10.2) in the pembrolizumab and SOC arms, respectively [HR: 0.60 (95% CI: 0.45-0.80); two-sided P = 0.0004]. FDA assessed unblinded OS data during the review of the application and identified no safety concerns that would preclude approval of this supplement. Adverse reactions occurring in >30% of patients receiving pembrolizumab were diarrhea, fatigue/asthenia, and nausea. Adverse reactions occurring in >30% of patients receiving SOC were diarrhea, nausea, fatigue/asthenia, neutropenia, decreased appetite, peripheral neuropathy (high-level term), vomiting, abdominal pain, constipation, and stomatitis. Duration of treatment in the pembrolizumab arm was almost double (median 11.1 months, range 0-30.6 months) than the duration of treatment in patients receiving SOC (median, 5.7 months). Approval of pembrolizumab is likely to change the treatment paradigm for first-line treatment with MSI-H advanced colorectal cancer given the study results and different safety profile.

FDA Approval Summary: Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab for the Treatment of Patients with Advanced Unresectable or Metastatic Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

On May 29, 2020, the FDA approved atezolizumab for use in combination with bevacizumab, for the treatment of adult patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with no prior systemic treatment. The approval was based on data from Study IMbrave150, which randomly allocated (2:1) patients to receive either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (atezolizumab-bevacizumab) or sorafenib. Overall survival (OS) and independently assessed progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat population were the primary endpoints. At the time of the primary analysis, the estimated median OS could not be estimated in the atezolizumab-bevacizumab arm and was 13.2 months in the sorafenib arm [HR, 0.58; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.42-0.79]. The estimated median PFS was 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.8-8.3) and 4.3 months (95% CI, 4.0-5.6) in the atezolizumab-bevacizumab and sorafenib arms, respectively. Adverse reactions occurring in >20% of patients receiving atezolizumab-bevacizumab were hypertension, fatigue/asthenia, and proteinuria. Adverse reactions occurring in >20% of patients receiving sorafenib were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, diarrhea, hypertension, and decreased appetite. Hemorrhage was reported more frequently in patients receiving atezolizumab-bevacizumab (25%) than in patients receiving sorafenib (17%). An evaluation for the presence of varices is recommended within 6 months of initiation of atezolizumab-bevacizumab in patients with HCC. Approval of atezolizumab-bevacizumab is likely to change the treatment paradigm for HCC, given that treatment with atezolizumab-bevacizumab resulted in improved OS and PFS compared with sorafenib, an accepted standard of care for first-line treatment of patients with unresectable HCC.See related commentary by Castet et al., p. 1827.

FDA's Approval of the First Biosimilar to Bevacizumab.

Passage of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 created an abbreviated licensure pathway for biosimilar products. The FDA approved ABP215 (MVASI, bevacizumab-awwb; Amgen) as a biosimilar to U.S.-licensed Avastin (bevacizumab; Genentech) based on an extensive comparative analytic characterization, data obtained in a pharmacokinetic similarity study in healthy subjects, and a comparative clinical study in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. The totality of the evidence for biosimilarity supported extrapolation of the data to support licensure as a biosimilar for other approved indications of U.S.-licensed Avastin, without the need of additional clinical studies. Clin Cancer Res; 24(18); 4365-70. ©2018 AACR.

The Majority of Expedited Investigational New Drug Safety Reports Are Uninformative.

Sponsors of human drug and biologic products subject to an investigational new drug (IND) application are required to distribute expedited safety reports of serious and unexpected suspected adverse reactions to participating investigators and the FDA to assure the protection of human subjects participating in clinical trials. On September 29, 2010, the FDA issued a final rule amending its regulations governing expedited IND safety reporting requirements that revised the definitions used for reporting and clarified when to submit relevant and useful information to reduce the number of uninformative reports distributed by sponsors. From January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2014, the FDA's Office of Hematology and Oncology Products received an average of 17,686 expedited safety reports per year. An analysis of FDA submissions by commercial sponsors covering this time period suggested a slight increase in the number of expedited safety reports per IND per year after publication of the final rule. An audit of 160 randomly selected expedited safety reports submitted to the FDA's Office of Hematology and Oncology Products in 2015 revealed that only 22 (14%) were informative. The submission of uninformative expedited safety reports by commercial sponsors of INDs continues to be a significant problem that can compromise detection of valid safety signals. Clin Cancer Res; 22(9); 2111-3. ©2016 AACR.

Statistical Considerations in Evaluating a Biosimilar Product in an Oncology Clinical Study.

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCI Act) established an abbreviated approval pathway for biosimilar and interchangeable biological products that was intended to balance innovation and consumer interests. The FDA has published several guidance documents to facilitate implementation of the BPCI Act. Here we discuss the role of comparative clinical studies in the assessment of clinically meaningful differences and illustrate the underlying scientific concepts with a hypothetical example of a clinical study comparing a product to US-licensed bevacizumab. Clin Cancer Res; 22(21); 5167-70. ©2016 AACR.

FDA Approval Summary: Ramucirumab for Gastric Cancer.

The FDA approved ramucirumab (CYRAMZA; Eli Lilly and Company) for previously treated patients with advanced or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma initially as monotherapy (April 21, 2014) and subsequently as combination therapy with paclitaxel (November 5, 2014). In the monotherapy trial, 355 patients in the indicated population were randomly allocated (2:1) to receive ramucirumab or placebo, 8 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks. In the combination trial, 665 patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive ramucirumab or placebo, 8 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks, in combination with paclitaxel, 80 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day cycles. Overall survival (OS) was increased in patients who received ramucirumab in both the monotherapy [HR, 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.60-0.998; log rank P = 0.047] and combination trials (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.68-0.96; P = 0.017). The most common adverse reactions were hypertension and diarrhea in the monotherapy trial and fatigue, neutropenia, diarrhea, and epistaxis in the combination trial. Because of concerns about the robustness of the monotherapy trial results, FDA approved the original application after receiving the results of the combination trial confirming the OS effect. Based on exploratory exposure-response analyses, there is residual uncertainty regarding the optimal dose of ramucirumab.

Activity of topotecan in retinoblastoma.

PURPOSE: To report our experience with topotecan in children with relapsed/refractory metastatic and intraocular retinoblastoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Topotecan was administered intravenously as a 30-min infusion at a dose of 2 mg/m2/d for five consecutive days and repeated after three weeks. If obvious progression was detected by physical examination in patients with overt extraocular disease or if progressive disease was noted after fundoscopic examination in patients with intraocular disease, a second cycle was not administered. Response was evaluated at Week 6. RESULTS: Nine patients (6 extraocular, 3 intraocular) were treated from November 1998 to March 2002. A total of 16 cycles were administered. In patients with extraocular disease, there were three partial responses, two cases of stable disease, and one case of progressive disease. Two patients with relapsed/resistant intraocular disease had partial response. allowing local therapy to be performed, and the third patient had progressive disease. The drug was well-tolerated. No patient developed fever or documented infections. No other serious toxicity was found. CONCLUSION: Topotecan is active in extraocular and relapsed/resistant intraocular retinoblastoma. The role of this drug in the treatment of retinoblastoma should be explored in further studies.

Experience with chemoreduction and focal therapy for intraocular retinoblastoma in a developing country.

BACKGROUND: Chemoreduction is used for the treatment of retinoblastoma in industrialized nations; however, there are fewer data from developing countries. Before the implementation of this program, radiotherapy was used in almost all preserved eyes. METHODS: Retrospective evaluation from 1995 to 2001 at the Hospital Garrahan (Argentina). Carboplatin 18.7 mg/kg/day 1 and vincristine (0.05 mg/kg/day 1) were offered to patients with Reese-Ellsworth (RE) groups I-III and all unilateral cases. Etoposide (3.3 mg/kg/day 1 and 2) was added for groups IV and V. The number of cycles was tailored according to response. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients (78 eyes) were evaluated (39 bilateral, 19 unilateral). With a median follow-up of 47 months, 40 patients had unilateral enucleation, 14 were not enucleated, and 4 had bilateral enucleation. Nineteen patients had unilateral initial enucleation. Eye preservation at 5 years was: RE groups I-III (n = 24 eyes), 0.9 (SE: 0.095) IV-V (n = 54), 0.45 (SE 0.07). Patients received a median of four cycles of chemotherapy. Acute toxicity was mild. External beam radiotherapy was avoided in 41% of eyes with groups I-III. Etoposide was avoided in 24 patients. Two patients died of metastasis. No secondary malignancy occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to our previous experience, eye preservation was better and even though less radiotherapy was used, it was prescribed more often than currently recommended in eyes with less advanced disease because of limited availability of sophisticated local therapy.

Paediatric oncology in Argentina: medical and ethical issues.

The process of globalisation is affecting health and health care in Argentina, as it is in many other countries. The full extent of this effect is still unclear, but winners and losers in the world economy are emerging--not only different countries, but also sectors or populations within those countries. There are serious inequalities in health-care provision in Argentina, so that not all children with cancer receive the best possible therapy. What happens to those children who don't? How do staff feel when they have to turn away new patients? Only by asking these questions and examining and understanding the answers can we begin the process of improving the status of paediatric oncology in Argentina.