Complete remission with partial hematological recovery as a palliative endpoint for treatment of acute myeloid leukemia.

ABSTRACT: Complete remission with partial hematological recovery (CRh) has been used as an efficacy endpoint in clinical trials of nonmyelosuppressive drugs for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). We conducted a pooled analysis to characterize the clinical outcomes for patients with AML who achieved CRh after treatment with ivosidenib, olutasidenib, enasidenib, or gilteritinib monotherapy in clinical trials used to support marketing applications. The study cohort included 841 adult patients treated at the recommended drug dosage; 64.6% were red blood cell or platelet transfusion dependent at study baseline. Correlations between disease response and outcomes were assessed by logistic regression modeling for categorical variables and by Cox proportional hazards modeling for time-to-event variables. Patients with CRh had a higher proportion with transfusion independence (TI) for at least 56 days (TI-56; 92.3% vs 22.3%; P < .0001) or TI for at least 112 days (TI-112; 63.5% vs 8.7%; P < .0001), a reduced risk over time for severe infection (hazard ratio [HR], 0.43; P = .0007) or severe bleeding (HR, 0.17; P = .01), and a longer overall survival (OS; HR, 0.31; P < .0001) than patients with no response. The effects were consistent across drugs. In comparison with patients with CR, the effect sizes for CRh were similar for TI-56 and for risk over time of infection or bleeding but less for TI-112 and OS. CRh is associated with clinical benefits consistent with clinically meaningful palliative effects for the treatment of AML with nonmyelosuppressive drugs, although less robustly than for CR.

FDA Approval Summary: Revised Indication and Dosing Regimen for Ponatinib Based on the Results of the OPTIC Trial.

On December 18, 2020, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a supplemental application for ponatinib extending the indication in patients with chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CP-CML) to patients with resistance or intolerance of at least 2 prior kinase inhibitors. Ponatinib was initially approved in December 2012 but was briefly voluntarily withdrawn due to serious safety concerns including the risk of arterial occlusive events (AOE). It returned to the market in December 2013 with an indication limited to patients with T315I mutation or for whom no other tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy was indicated with revised warnings and precautions. A post-marketing requirement was issued to identify the optimal safe and effective dose for CP-CML. Thus, the OPTIC trial was performed, which randomized patients to 1 of 3 doses, 45 mg, 30 mg, or 15 mg, with a dose reduction to 15 mg on achievement of MR2 (BCR-ABLIS ≤1%). Patients enrolled were treated with at least 2 prior TKIs or had a T315I mutation. Patients with a history of clinically significant, uncontrolled, or active cardiovascular disease were excluded. Efficacy was established on an interim analysis based on the rate of MR2 at 12 months in the modified intent-to-treat population of 261 patients, with 88, 86, and 87 patients in the 45, 30, and 15 mg cohorts, respectively. With a median follow-up of 28 months, the rate of achievement of MR2 at 12 months was 42%, 28%, and 24% in the respective cohorts. The safety profile was consistent with that observed in prior evaluations of ponatinib with notable adverse reactions including pancreatitis, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, liver dysfunction, and AOE. Of patients treated at the 45/15 mg dose, AOEs were seen in 13%, with a higher rate being observed in patients age 65 or older compared to younger patients. A readjudication of AOEs seen on the prior pivotal phase 2 study resulted in a rate of 26%. Overall, the results supported a modification of the recommended dose for patients with CP-CML to 45 mg until the achievement of MR2 followed by a reduction to 15 mg. The expansion of the indication to patients with exposure to 2 prior TKIs was approved given data showing that ponatinib could be successfully used for the treatment of this population with appropriate monitoring and screening for risk factors.

Need for aligning the definition and reporting of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) in immuno-oncology clinical trials.

As cancer immunotherapies continue to expand across all areas of oncology, it is imperative to establish a standardized approach for defining and capturing clinically important toxicities, such as cytokine release syndrome (CRS). In this paper, we provide considerations for categorizing the variety of adverse events that may accompany CRS and for recognizing that presentations of CRS may differ among various immunotherapies (e.g., monoclonal antibodies, CAR T cell therapies and T cell engagers, which can include bispecific antibodies and other constructs). The goals of this paper are to ensure accurate and consistent identification of CRS in patients receiving immunotherapies in clinical studies to aid in reporting; enable more precise evaluation of the therapeutic risk-benefit profile and cross-study analyses; support evidence-based monitoring and management of important toxicities related to cancer immunotherapies; and improve patient care and outcomes. These efforts will become more important as the number and variety of molecular targets for immunotherapies broaden and as therapies with novel mechanisms continue to be developed.

FDA approval summary: Dalteparin for the treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolism in pediatric patients.

On May 16, 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved dalteparin sodium for the treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) to reduce the risk of recurrence in pediatric patients 1 month of age and older. Approval was primarily based on FDA review of a single-arm trial evaluating dalteparin administered subcutaneous twice daily in 38 pediatric patients with symptomatic VTE. Efficacy was based on the achievement of therapeutic plasma anti-Xa levels. The FDA concluded that dalteparin has efficacy and acceptable safety for pediatric patients.

FDA review summary of patient-reported outcome results for ibrutinib in the treatment of chronic graft versus host disease.

PURPOSE: On August 2, 2017, the Food and Drug Administration approved ibrutinib (IMBRUVICA) for the treatment of patients with chronic graft versus host disease (cGVHD) after the failure of one or more lines of systemic therapy. The approval was based on results from a single-arm, multicenter trial that enrolled patients with refractory cGVHD. This paper describes the FDA review of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) data from Study PCYC-1129-CA and the decision to incorporate descriptive PRO data in the FDA label to support the primary clinician-reported outcome results. METHODS: In this trial, the Lee Chronic GVHD Symptom Scale (LSS) was used to capture patient-reported symptom bother. The 42 patients who received treatment were included in the analysis and completed the PRO tool. Post hoc descriptive analyses were conducted to further understand the measurement properties of the LSS. RESULTS: The analysis submitted to FDA reported that 18 patients had a ≥ 7-point improvement on the LSS overall summary score at any point during the assessment period. For 10 patients, the ≥ 7-point improvement was sustained for ≥ 2 consecutive PRO assessments. An assessment of the responder threshold suggested the threshold submitted to the FDA was reasonable and in line with clinical findings. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, study PCYC-1129-CA demonstrated favorable clinician-reported cGVHD efficacy results that were complemented by results from PRO data, supporting the FDA's positive benefit-risk assessment leading to regular approval. Limitations included the single-arm trial design, responder definition, and instrument shortcomings. These limitations were thoroughly explored through additional FDA post hoc analyses.

A Bayesian approach in design and analysis of pediatric cancer clinical trials.

It is well recognized that cancer drug development for children and adolescents has many challenges, from biological and societal to economic. Pediatric cancer consists of a diverse group of rare diseases, and the relatively small population of children with multiple, disparate tumor types across various age groups presents a significant challenge for drug development programs as compared to oncology drug development programs for adults. Due to the different types of cancers, limited opportunities exist for extrapolation of efficacy from adult cancer indications to children. Thus, innovative study designs including Bayesian statistical approaches should be considered. A Bayesian approach can be a flexible tool to formally leverage prior knowledge of adult or external controls in pediatric cancer trials. In this article, we provide in a case example of how Bayesian approaches can be used to design, monitor, and analyze pediatric trials. Particularly, Bayesian sequential monitoring can be useful to monitor pediatric trial results as data accumulate. In addition, designing a pediatric trial with both skeptical and enthusiastic priors with Bayesian sequential monitoring can be an efficient mechanism for early trial cessation for both efficacy and futility. The interpretation of efficacy using a Bayesian approach is based on posterior probability and is intuitive and interpretable for patients, parents and prescribers given limited data.

FDA Approval Summary: Brentuximab Vedotin in First-Line Treatment of Peripheral T-Cell Lymphoma.

In November 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved brentuximab vedotin (BV) for the treatment of adult patients with previously untreated systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma or other CD30-expressing peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCL), including angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma and PTCL not otherwise specified, in combination with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (CHP). Approval was based on ECHELON-2, a randomized, double-blind, actively controlled trial that compared BV+CHP with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) in 452 patients with newly diagnosed, CD30-expressing PTCL. Efficacy was based on independent review facility-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). The median PFS was 48.2 months with BV+CHP versus 20.8 months with CHOP, resulting in a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.54-0.93). The trial also demonstrated improvement in overall survival (HR 0.66; 95% CI: 0.46-0.95), complete response rate (68% vs. 56%), and overall response rate (83% vs. 72%) with BV+CHP. The most common adverse reactions (incidence ≥20%) observed ≥2% more with BV+CHP were nausea, diarrhea, fatigue or asthenia, mucositis, pyrexia, vomiting, and anemia. Peripheral neuropathy rates were similar (52% with BV+CHP, 55% with CHOP). Through the Real-Time Oncology Review pilot program, which allows FDA early access to key data, FDA granted this approval less than 2 weeks after official submission of the application. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This is the first U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval for treatment of patients with newly diagnosed peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCL). Improvement in progression-free and overall survival over cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone chemotherapy, which has been the standard of care for decades, is unprecedented. The new regimen represents a major advance for the frontline treatment of patients with CD30-expressing PTCL.

FDA Approval Summary: Nivolumab for the Treatment of Relapsed or Progressive Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma.

On May 17, 2016, after an expedited priority review, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted accelerated approval to nivolumab for the treatment of patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) that has relapsed or progressed after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and post-transplantation brentuximab vedotin (BV). Nivolumab in cHL had been granted breakthrough therapy designation. Accelerated approval was based on two single-arm, multicenter trials in adults with cHL. In 95 patients with relapsed or progressive cHL after autologous HSCT and post-transplantation BV, nivolumab, dosed at 3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks, produced a 65% (95% confidence interval: 55%-75%) objective response rate (58% partial remission, 7% complete remission). The estimated median duration of response was 8.7 months, with 4.6-month median follow-up for response duration. The median time to response was 2.1 (range: 0.7-5.7) months. Among 263 patients with cHL treated with nivolumab, 21% reported serious adverse reactions (ARs). The most common all-grade ARs (reported in ≥20%) were fatigue, upper respiratory tract infection, cough, pyrexia, diarrhea, elevated transaminases, and cytopenias. Infusion-related reaction and hypothyroidism or thyroiditis occurred in >10% of patients; other immune-mediated ARs, occurring in 1%-5%, included rash, pneumonitis, hepatitis, hyperthyroidism, and colitis. A new Warning and Precaution was issued for complications of allogeneic HSCT after nivolumab, including severe or hyperacute graft-versus-host disease, other immune-mediated ARs, and transplant-related mortality. Continued approval for the cHL indication may be contingent upon verification of clinical benefit in a randomized trial. The Oncologist 2017;22:585-591 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Based on response rate and duration in single-arm studies, nivolumab is a new treatment option for patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) that has relapsed or progressed despite autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and brentuximab vedotin. This was the first U.S. Food and Drug Administration marketing application for a programmed cell death 1 inhibitor in hematologic malignancies. The use of immune checkpoint blockade in cHL represents a new treatment paradigm. The safety of allogeneic HSCT after nivolumab requires further evaluation, as does the safety of nivolumab after allogeneic HSCT.

FDA Approval Summary: Ivosidenib in Combination with Azacitidine for Treatment of Patients with Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia with an IDH1 Mutation.

On May 25, 2022, FDA approved a supplemental application for ivosidenib (Tibsovo; Servier) extending the indication in patients with newly diagnosed IDH1-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in older adults or those with comorbidities to include the combination with azacitidine. The efficacy of ivosidenib in combination with azacitidine was evaluated in Study AG120-C-009, a phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized (1:1), controlled study of ivosidenib or matched placebo in combination with azacitidine in adults with previously untreated AML with an IDH1 mutation who were 75 years or older or had comorbidities that precluded use of intensive induction chemotherapy. Efficacy was established on the basis of improved event-free survival and overall survival on the ivosidenib + azacitidine arm [HR, 0.35; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.17-0.72; P = 0.0038, and HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.27-0.73; P = 0.0010], respectively. Furthermore, the rate and duration of complete remission (CR) were improved with ivosidenib versus placebo [CR 47% versus 15%, two-sided P < 0.0001; median duration of CR not estimable (NE; 95% CI, 13.0-NE) months versus 11.2 (95% CI, 3.2-NE) months. The safety profile of ivosidenib in combination with azacitidine was consistent with that of ivosidenib monotherapy, with important adverse reactions including differentiation syndrome (15%) and QT interval prolongation (20%).

Externally Controlled Studies Using Real-World Data in Patients With Hematological Cancers: A Systematic Review.

Importance: The use of real-world data (RWD) external control arms in prospective studies is increasing. The advantages, including the immediate availability of a control population, must be balanced with the requirements of meeting evidentiary standards. Objective: To address the question of whether and to what extent the methods of RWD studies compare to standard methods used in randomized clinical trials. Evidence Review: A systematic search across 4 electronic databases and Google Scholar was conducted from January 1, 2000, to October 23, 2023. Studies were included in the systematic review if they compared an intervention arm in a clinical trial to an RWD control arm in patients with hematological cancers and if they were published between 2000 and 2023. Findings: Thirty-two prospective intervention studies incorporating external control data from RWD sources of patients with hematological cancers were identified. A total of 4306 patients from intervention arms and 10 594 from RWD control arms were included across all studies. Only 2 studies (6%) included prospectively collected RWD. The complete trial inclusion criteria were applied to the RWD cohort in 7 studies (22%). Four studies (13%) published the statistical analysis plan and prespecified use of RWD. A total of 23 studies (72%) applied matching algorithms for trial and RWD cohorts, including matching for demographic, disease, and/or therapy-related characteristics. The end point criteria were the same as the trial in 8 studies (25%). In contrast, 12 studies (38%) used different end points, and 12 (38%) did not provide an end point definition for the RWD. Twelve studies (38%) had a median follow-up difference of less than a year between arms. Eight studies (25%) reported toxic effect data for the trial arm, of which 5 studies reported toxic effect data for the RWD arm. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review, limitations were observed in the application of clinical trial eligibility criteria to RWD, statistical rigor and application of matching methods, the definition of end points, follow-up, and reporting of adverse events, which may challenge the conclusions reported in studies using RWD.

FDA Approval Summary: Asciminib for Ph+ CML in Chronic Phase Treated with Two or More Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors and for the T315I Mutation.

On October 29, 2021, FDA granted accelerated approval to asciminib (SCEMBLIX; Novartis), a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), for the treatment of adult patients with Philadelphia chromosome positive chronic myeloid leukemia (Ph+ CML) in chronic phase (CP), previously treated with two or more TKIs, and granted traditional approval to asciminib for adult patients with Ph+ CML in CP with the T315I mutation. The first indication was approved based on major molecular response (MMR) at 24 weeks in the ASCEMBL study, a randomized trial comparing asciminib with bosutinib in patients who had failed two or more TKIs. This indication was ultimately granted traditional approval on October 12, 2022, based on safety data and MMR rate at 96 weeks of 38% [95% confidence interval (CI), 30-46] in the asciminib arm versus 16% (95% CI, 8-26) in the bosutinib arm (P value: 0.001). The second indication was approved based on MMR rate by 96 weeks of 49% (95% CI, 34-64) in the single-arm CABL001X2101 study. The most common (≥20%) adverse reactions included upper respiratory tract infections, musculoskeletal pain, headache, fatigue, nausea, rash, and diarrhea. The most common (≥20%) laboratory abnormalities were thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, anemia, lymphopenia, hypertriglyceridemia, hyperuricemia, and increases in creatine kinase, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, lipase, and amylase. This manuscript describes the basis for approval of these indications.

FDA Approval Summary: Olutasidenib for Adult Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia with an Isocitrate Dehydrogenase-1 Mutation.

On December 1st, 2022, the FDA approved the new molecular entity olutasidenib (Rezlidhia: Rigel Pharmaceuticals), a small-molecule inhibitor of isocitrate dehydrogenase-1 (IDH1), for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (R/R AML) with a susceptible IDH1 mutation as detected by an FDA-approved test. The efficacy of olutasidenib was established based on complete remission (CR) + CR with partial hematological recovery (CRh) rate, duration of CR + CRh, and conversion of transfusion dependence (TD) to transfusion independence (TI) in Study 2102-HEM-101. In the pivotal trial, 147 adult patients treated with 150mg twice daily (BID) of olutasidenib were evaluable for efficacy. With a median follow-up of 10.2 months, the CR/CRh rate was 35% (95% CI: 27-43%), with a median duration of response of 25.9 months (95% CI: 13.5 months, not reached [NR]). Of the 86 patients that were TD at baseline, 29 became TI (34%). The most common (≥20%) adverse reactions were nausea, fatigue, arthralgia, leukocytosis, dyspnea, pyrexia, rash, mucositis, diarrhea, and transaminitis. An assessment of long-term safety of olutasidenib is a condition of this approval.

Perspectives on Drug Development for the Treatment of Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Pregnant Patients and Patients Who Are Breastfeeding.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) have improved the outcome and life expectancy of patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Patients are diagnosed with CML at younger ages, and patients treated for CML may become pregnant or choose to breastfeed. The information available to date on the safety of TKIs during pregnancy and lactation and the optimal management of these patients is largely anecdotal, based on personal or small-group experience, and heterogeneous. A panel of interested parties was convened by U.S. Food and Drug Administration to analyze the current data and discuss possible solutions. Possible solutions include prospective data collection, in clinical trials and in routine clinical practice, a more uniform and specific data collection, and greater coordination among involved entities. As patients with cancer are living longer, frequently receiving therapies for extended periods of time (or for life), data on appropriate management of patients through different reproductive phases of life are needed. It is thus time to change our approach for how to study treatment of cancer (including CML) during pregnancy or breastfeeding to develop evidence-based guidelines for safe and effective patient care.

Considerations for Drug Development in Myelodysplastic Syndromes.

Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) have historically been challenging diseases for drug development due to their biology, preclinical modeling, and the affected patient population. In April 2022, the FDA convened a panel of regulators and academic experts in MDS to discuss approaches to improve MDS drug development. The panel reviewed challenges in MDS clinical trial design and endpoints and outlined considerations for future trial design in MDS to facilitate drug development to meaningfully meet patient needs. Challenges for defining clinical benefit in patients with MDS include cumbersome response criteria, standardized transfusion thresholds, and application and validation of patient reported outcome instruments. Clinical trials should reflect the biology of disease evolution, the advanced age of patients with MDS, and how patients are treated in real-world settings to maximize the likelihood of identifying active drugs. In patients with lower-risk disease, response criteria for anemic patients should be based on baseline transfusion dependency, improvement in symptoms, and quality of life. For higher-risk patients with MDS, trials should include guidance to prevent dose reductions or delays that could limit efficacy, specify minimal durations of treatment (in the absence of toxicity or progression), and have endpoints focused on overall survival and durable responses. MDS trials should be designed from the outset to allow the practicable application of new therapies in this high-needs population, with drugs that can be administered and tolerated in community settings, and with endpoints that meaningfully improve patients' lives over existing therapies.

The Impact of Improved Treatments on Survival of Adult U.S. Leukemia Patients: 1990-2018.

INTRODUCTION: Molecularly targeted therapies such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) are effective treatments for B-cell receptor (BCR)-ABL-bearing leukemias. We evaluated the impact of TKIs on historical chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) mortality trends compared with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and chronic lymphoblastic leukemia (CLL). METHODS: Because mortality trends reflect combined effects of leukemia incidence and survival, we also evaluated the contribution of incidence and survival trends to mortality trends by subtypes. We used data from 13 U.S. (SEER) registries (1992-2017) among U.S. adults. We utilized histology codes to identify cases of CML, ALL, and CLL and death certificate data to calculate mortality. We used Joinpoint to characterize incidence (1992-2017) and mortality (1992-2018) trends by subtype and diagnosis year. RESULTS: For CML, mortality rates started declining in 1998 at an average rate of 12% annually. Imatinib was approved by the FDA for treating CML and ALL in 2001, leading to clear benefits for patients with CML. Five-year CML survival increased dramatically over time, especially between 1996 to 2011, 2.3% per year on average. ALL incidence increased 1.5% annually from 1992 to 2017. ALL mortality decreased 0.6% annually during 1992 to 2012 and then stopped declining. CLL incidence fluctuated during 1992 to 2017 while mortality decreased 1.1% annually during 1992 to 2011 and at a faster rate of 3.6% per year from 2011. Five-year survival increased 0.7% per year on average during 1992 to 2016. CONCLUSIONS: Survival benefit from TKIs and other novel therapies for treating leukemia subtypes has been demonstrated in clinical trials. IMPACT: Our study highlights the impact of molecularly targeted therapies at the population level.

FDA Analysis of Ineligibility for Acute Myeloid Leukemia Clinical Trials by Race and Ethnicity.

BACKGROUND: Patients of certain racial and ethnic groups have been underrepresented in clinical trials for treatment of malignancy. One potential barrier to participation is entry requirements that lead to patients in various racial and ethnic groups not meeting eligibility criteria for studies (ie, "screen failure"). The objective of this study was to analyze the rates and reasons for trial ineligibility by race and ethnicity in trials of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 2016 and 2019. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multicenter, global clinical trials submitted to the FDA to support AML drugs and biologics. We examined the rate of ineligibility among participants screened for studies of AML therapies submitted to the FDA from 2016 to 2019. Data were extracted from 13 trials used in approval evaluations, including race, screen status, and reason for ineligibility. RESULTS: Overall, patients in historically underrepresented racial and ethnic groups were less likely to meet entry criteria for studies compared to White patients, with 26.7% of White patients, 29.4% of Black patients, and 35.9% of Asian patients not meeting entry criteria. Lack of relevant disease mutation was the reason for ineligibility more frequently among Black and Asian patients. The findings were limited by the small number of underrepresented patients screened for participation. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that entry requirements for studies may put underrepresented patients at a disadvantage, leading to less eligible patients and thus lower participation in clinical trials.

Project Confirm: Accelerated Drug Approvals for Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.

The FDA has an accelerated approval program for drugs that have been identified as promising treatments for serious conditions when the available data suggest that the benefits outweigh the foreseeable risks. All of the currently available treatment options for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) initially went through the accelerated approval program. Here, a group of academic CML experts, patient panelists, and members from the FDA convened to discuss the utility of the accelerated approval program as it pertains to CML, and the utility of this program in future drug development in this disease. The results of that discussion are summarized here.

Use of Single-Arm Trials for US Food and Drug Administration Drug Approval in Oncology, 2002-2021.

Importance: Single-arm trials have allowed for transformative therapies to be made available to patients expeditiously. However, using single-arm trials to support drug approval presents several challenges that must be carefully considered. Observations: Between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration granted 176 new malignant hematology and oncology indications based on single-arm trials, including 116 accelerated approvals (AAs) and 60 traditional approvals. Overall, 87 approvals (49%) were for new molecular entities or original biologics and 89 (51%) were supplemental indications. Response rate (RR) was the most common end point used to support approval in these single-arm trials (173 of 176 [98%]). Of the 116 AAs based on single-arm trials, 45 (38%) fulfilled their postmarketing requirement to verify clinical benefit, 61 (52%) are pending verification of benefit, and 10 (9%) were withdrawn from the market as of December 31, 2021. Most (56 of 61 [92%]) AAs based on single-arm trials pending verification of benefit occurred during the previous 5 years and have ongoing confirmatory trials as of December 2021. Conclusions and Relevance: Single-arm trials have been a common development strategy to support regulatory approval as early-stage expansion cohorts with promising durable RRs have become more prevalent. In the appropriate context, single-arm trials using durable RRs can allow patients expedited access to novel therapies and will continue to serve a role in advancing drug development in oncology. However, single-arm trials have a smaller noncomparative safety data set, inability to use time-to-event end points, and other limitations that require careful consideration within the context of the disease and available therapies. The randomized clinical trial remains the preferred approach in clinical investigation.

Comparative Expedited Regulatory Programs of U.S Food & Drug Administration and Project Orbis Partners.

Project Orbis was initiated in May 2019 by the Oncology Center of Excellence to facilitate faster patient access to innovative cancer therapies by providing a framework for concurrent submissions and review of oncology products among international partners. Since its inception, Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), Canada's Health Canada (HC), Singapore's Health Sciences Authority (HSA), Switzerland's Swissmedic (SMC), Brazil's National Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA), United Kingdom's Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), and most recently Israel's Ministry of Health (IMoH) Medical Technologies, Health Information, Innovation and Research (MTIIR) Directorate, have joined Project Orbis. While each country has its own expedited review pathways to bring promising therapies to patients, there are some similarities and differences in pathways and timelines. FDA's fast-track designation and MHRA's marketing authorization under exceptional circumstances (MAEC) allow non-clinical and limited clinical evidence to support approval under these programs. HC's Extraordinary Use New Drug (EUND) pathway allows granting exceptional use authorization with limited clinical evidence. ANVISA, HSA, MTIIR, and TGA do not have standard pathways that allow non-clinical evidence and limited clinical evidence. While there is no definite regulatory pathway for HSA, the current framework for approval does allow flexibility in the type of data (non-clinical or clinical) required to demonstrate the benefit-risk profile of a product. HSA may register a product if the agency is satisfied that the overall benefit outweighs the risk. All Project Orbis Partner (POP) countries have similar programs to the FDA accelerated approval program except ANVISA. Although HSA and MTIIR do not have defined pathways for accelerated approval programs, there are opportunities to request accelerated approval per these agencies. All POP countries have pathways like the FDA priority review except MHRA. Priority review timelines for new drugs range from 120 to 264 calendar days (cd). Standard review timelines for new drugs range from 180 to 365 cd.

Highlights of FDA Oncology Approvals in 2023: Bispecific T-cell Engagers, Pediatric Indications, and Inclusive Drug Development.

SUMMARY: Cancer drug development remained robust in 2023. Highlights of U.S. drug approvals this year include new immunotherapies and targeted drug development in adult and pediatric patients as well as patients with rare diseases.