EMA Review of Daratumumab (Darzalex) for the Treatment of Adult Patients Newly Diagnosed with Multiple Myeloma.

The use of daratumumab in combination with established regimens for the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma has recently been authorized by the European Medicines Agency based on results from three separate phase III randomized, active controlled, open-label studies that have confirmed enhanced efficacy and tolerability in both transplant-ineligible (MMY3008 and MMY3007) and transplant-eligible (MMY3006) patients, without compromising transplant ability. Trial MMY3008 showed an improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) when daratumumab was added to lenalidomide and dexamethasone compared with lenalidomide and dexamethasone; the median PFS had not been reached in the daratumumab arm and was 31.9 months in the control arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43-0.73; p < .0001). Trial MMY3007 showed an improvement in PFS when daratumumab was added to bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone compared with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone; PFS had not been reached in the daratumumab arm and was 18.1 months in the control arm (HR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.38-0.65; p < .0001). In trial MMY3006, daratumumab added to bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone was compared with bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone as induction and consolidation treatment prior to autologous stem cell transplant. The stringent complete response rate at day 100 after transplant in the daratumumab group was 29% compared with 20% in the control group (odds ratio, 1.60; 1.21-2.12 95% CI; p = .0010). Overall adverse events were manageable, with an increased rate of neutropenia and infections in the daratumumab arms. Regulatory assessment of efficacy and safety results from trials MMY3006, MMY3007, and MMY3008 confirmed a positive benefit-risk ratio leading to an approval of the extensions of indication. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A set of extensions of indication was recently approved for daratumumab (Darzalex) in the setting of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in combination with established regimens. Results of the MMY3006, MMY3007, and MMY3008 trials have shown enhanced efficacy and a favorable side effect profile of several daratumumab-based combinations in patients both ineligible and eligible for transplant, without compromising transplant ability. The combinations of daratumumab with either lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone or bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone were approved for transplant-ineligible patients. The combination of daratumumab with bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone was approved for transplant-eligible patients. These combinations are expected to improve the survival outlook for patients with multiple myeloma, without an unacceptable risk of increase in adverse events, and updated information on progression-free survival and overall survival is expected from the above trials.

ACCELERATE and European Medicines Agency Paediatric Strategy Forum for medicinal product development of checkpoint inhibitors for use in combination therapy in paediatric patients.

The third multistakeholder Paediatric Strategy Forum organised by ACCELERATE and the European Medicines Agency focused on immune checkpoint inhibitors for use in combination therapy in children and adolescents. As immune checkpoint inhibitors, both as monotherapy and in combinations have shown impressive success in some adult malignancies and early phase trials in children of single agent checkpoint inhibitors have now been completed, it seemed an appropriate time to consider opportunities for paediatric studies of checkpoint inhibitors used in combination. Among paediatric patients, early clinical studies of checkpoint inhibitors used as monotherapy have demonstrated a high rate of activity, including complete responses, in Hodgkin lymphoma and hypermutant paediatric tumours. Activity has been very limited, however, in more common malignancies of childhood and adolescence. Furthermore, apart from tumour mutational burden, no other predictive biomarker for monotherapy activity in paediatric tumours has been identified. Based on these observations, there is collective agreement that there is no scientific rationale for children to be enrolled in new monotherapy trials of additional checkpoint inhibitors with the same mechanism of action of agents already studied (e.g. anti-PD1, anti-PDL1 anti-CTLA-4) unless additional scientific knowledge supporting a different approach becomes available. This shared perspective, based on scientific evidence and supported by paediatric oncology cooperative groups, should inform companies on whether a paediatric development plan is justified. This could then be proposed to regulators through the available regulatory tools. Generally, an academic-industry consensus on the scientific merits of a proposal before submission of a paediatric investigational plan would be of great benefit to determine which studies have the highest probability of generating new insights. There is already a rationale for the evaluation of combinations of checkpoint inhibitors with other agents in paediatric Hodgkin lymphoma and hypermutated tumours in view of the activity shown as single agents. In paediatric tumours where no single agent activity has been observed in multiple clinical trials of anti-PD1, anti-PDL1 and anti-CTLA-4 agents as monotherapy, combinations of checkpoint inhibitors with other treatment modalities should be explored when a scientific rationale indicates that they could be efficacious in paediatric cancers and not because these combinations are being evaluated in adults. Immunotherapy in the form of engineered proteins (e.g. monoclonal antibodies and T cell engaging agents) and cellular products (e.g. CAR T cells) has great therapeutic potential for benefit in paediatric cancer. The major challenge for developing checkpoint inhibitors for paediatric cancers is the lack of neoantigens (based on mutations) and corresponding antigen-specific T cells. Progress critically depends on understanding the immune macroenvironment and microenvironment and the ability of the adaptive immune system to recognise paediatric cancers in the absence of high neoantigen burden. Future clinical studies of checkpoint inhibitors in children need to build upon strong biological hypotheses that take into account the distinctive immunobiology of childhood cancers in comparison to that of checkpoint inhibitor responsive adult cancers.

The European medicines agency review of abiraterone for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in adult men after docetaxel chemotherapy and in chemotherapy-naive disease: summary of the scientific assessment of the committee for medicinal products for human use.

On September 5, 2011, abiraterone was approved in the European Union in combination with prednisone or prednisolone for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) in adult men whose disease has progressed on or after a docetaxel-based chemotherapy regimen. On December 18, 2012, the therapeutic indication was extended to include the use of abiraterone in combination with prednisone or prednisolone for the treatment of metastatic CRPC in adult men who are asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic after failure of androgen deprivation therapy in whom chemotherapy is not yet clinically indicated. Abiraterone is a selective, irreversible inhibitor of cytochrome P450 17α, an enzyme that is key in the production of androgens. Inhibition of androgen biosynthesis deprives prostate cancer cells from important signals for growth, even in cases of resistance to castration. At the time of European Union approval and in a phase III trial in CRPC patients who had failed at least one docetaxel-based chemotherapy regimen, median overall survival for patients treated with abiraterone was 14.8 months versus 10.9 months for those receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval 0.54-0.77; p < .0001). In a subsequent phase III trial in a similar but chemotherapy-naïve patient population, median radiographic progression-free survival was 16.5 months for patients in the abiraterone treatment arm versus 8.3 months for patients in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.62; p < .0001). Abiraterone was most commonly associated with adverse reactions resulting from increased or excessive mineralocorticoid activity. These were generally manageable with basic medical interventions. The most common side effects (affecting more than 10% of patients) were urinary tract infection, hypokalemia, hypertension, and peripheral edema.