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.

FDA Oncology Center of Excellence Crowdsourcing Initiative: Outreach to the Scientific Community to Identify Research Questions for Pooled Analyses of Oncology Clinical Trial Data.

The FDA Oncology Center of Excellence recently launched a crowdsourcing pilot to request ideas from the scientific community for research questions that FDA could address with pooled analyses of clinical trial data submitted to the agency for regulatory purposes. This effort builds on FDA's track record of publishing pooled analyses to explore scientific questions that cannot be addressed in a single trial due to limited sample size. The research crowdsourcing pilot tested a new approach for obtaining external input on regulatory science activities, because FDA is generally unable to share patient-level data outside of the agency due to federal disclosure laws and regulations protecting different types of data submitted in regulatory applications. We received 29 submissions over the 28-day crowdsourcing campaign, including one research idea that we are exploring for possible follow-up. Based on our experience with this pilot, we learned that crowdsourcing is a promising new approach to gather external input and feedback. We identified opportunities to build understanding in the external oncology community about the types of data typically included in regulatory applications and expand the dissemination of published FDA pooled analyses to help inform future drug development and clinical practice.

FDA Approval Summary: Atezolizumab as Adjuvant Treatment following Surgical Resection and Platinum-Based Chemotherapy for Stage II to IIIA NSCLC.

On October 15, 2021, the FDA approved atezolizumab as adjuvant therapy in patients with stage II to IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose tumors have programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression on ≥1% of tumor cells (TC), as detected by an FDA-approved test. The approval was based on results from the IMpower010 trial, in which 1,005 patients with NSCLC who had completed tumor resection and cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive atezolizumab for 16 cycles or best supportive care. The primary endpoint of disease-free survival (DFS) as assessed by investigator was tested hierarchically in the following analysis populations: stage II-IIIA NSCLC with PD-L1 expression on ≥1% of TCs (PD-L1 ≥ 1% TC); all randomly assigned patients with stage II-IIIA NSCLC; and the intent-to-treat population comprising all randomly assigned patients. At the prespecified interim DFS analysis, IMpower010 demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in DFS in the stage II-IIIA PD-L1 ≥ 1% TC analysis population, with an HR of 0.66 (95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.88; P = 0.004) favoring the atezolizumab arm. The safety profile of atezolizumab was generally consistent with known toxicities of anti-PD-(L) antibodies. The VENTANA PD-L1 (SP263) Assay (Ventana Medical Systems, Inc.) was contemporaneously approved as a companion diagnostic device to select patients with NSCLC who are PD-L1 ≥ 1% TC for adjuvant treatment with atezolizumab. Atezolizumab is the first immune checkpoint inhibitor approved by FDA for the adjuvant treatment of NSCLC.

Highlights of FDA Oncology Approvals in 2022: Tissue-Agnostic Indications, Dosage Optimization, and Diversity in Drug Development.

In 2022, cancer drug development continued to progress rapidly despite the lingering COVID-19 pandemic. Highlights of U.S. drug approvals for oncology indications this year include ongoing development in rare diseases and molecular subgroups, improved dosage optimization, and updated data for drugs granted accelerated approval, with confirmatory studies demonstrating verification of clinical benefit in some instances, as well as indication withdrawal when clinical benefit was not verified.

FDA Approval Summary: Ruxolitinib for Treatment of Chronic Graft-Versus-Host Disease after Failure of One or Two Lines of Systemic Therapy.

On September 22, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration approved ruxolitinib for the treatment of chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) after the failure of one or two lines of systemic therapy in adult and pediatric patients 12 years and older. Approval was based on Study INCB 18424-365 (REACH-3; CINC424D2301; NCT03112603), a randomized, open-label, multicenter trial of ruxolitinib in comparison to best available therapy (BAT) for the treatment of corticosteroid-refractory cGVHD occurring after the allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. A total of 329 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either ruxolitinib 10 mg twice daily (n = 165) or BAT (n = 164). BAT was selected by the investigator prior to randomization. The overall response rate through Cycle 7 Day 1 was 70% (95% CI, 63-77) in the ruxolitinib arm, and 57% (95% CI, 49-65) in the BAT arm. The median duration of response, calculated from first response to progression, death, or initiation of new systemic therapies for cGVHD, was 4.2 months (95% CI, 3.2-6.7) for the ruxolitinib arm and 2.1 months (95% CI, 1.6-3.2) for the BAT arm; and the median time from first response to death or initiation of new systemic therapies for cGVHD was 25 months (95% CI, 16.8-not estimable) for the ruxolitinib arm and 5.6 months (95% CI, 4.1-7.8) for the BAT arm. Common adverse reactions included anemia, thrombocytopenia, and infections. Given the observed response rate with durability, the clinical benefit of ruxolitinib appears to outweigh the risks of treatment for cGVHD after the failure of one or two lines of systemic therapy.

FDA Approval Summary: Belumosudil for Adult and Pediatric Patients 12 Years and Older with Chronic GvHD after Two or More Prior Lines of Systemic Therapy.

On July 16, 2021, the FDA approved belumosudil, a kinase inhibitor, for adult and pediatric patients 12 years and older with chronic GvHD (cGvHD) after failure of at least two prior lines of systemic therapy. Approval was based on the results of Study KD025-213, which included 65 patients with cGvHD treated with belumosudil 200 mg daily in an open-label, single-arm cohort. Efficacy was determined by the overall response rate (ORR) through Cycle 7 Day 1, which included complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to the 2014 NIH consensus criteria, and durability of response. The ORR through Cycle 7 Day 1 was 75% [95% confidence interval (CI), 63-85]; 6% of patients achieved a CR, and 69% achieved a PR. The median duration of response was 1.9 months (95% CI, 1.2-2.9), and 62% (95% CI, 46-74) of responding patients remained alive without new systemic therapy for at least 12 months from response. The common adverse reactions were infections, asthenia, nausea, diarrhea, dyspnea, cough, edema, hemorrhage, abdominal pain, musculoskeletal pain, headache, phosphate decreased, gamma-glutamyl transferase increased, lymphocytes decreased, and hypertension. Additional study is warranted to confirm safety with long-term use.

FDA Approval Summary: Capmatinib and Tepotinib for the Treatment of Metastatic NSCLC Harboring MET Exon 14 Skipping Mutations or Alterations.

The FDA approved capmatinib and tepotinib on May 6, 2020, and February 3, 2021, respectively. Capmatinib is indicated for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) whose tumors have a mutation leading to mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) exon 14 skipping as detected by an FDA-approved test. Tepotinib is indicated for mNSCLC harboring MET exon 14 skipping alterations. The approvals were based on trials GEOMETRY mono-1 (capmatinib) and VISION (tepotinib). In GEOMETRY mono-1, overall response rate (ORR) per Blinded Independent Review Committee (BIRC) was 68% [95% confidence interval (CI), 48-84] with median duration of response (DoR) 12.6 months (95% CI, 5.5-25.3) in 28 treatment-naïve patients and 41% (95% CI: 29, 53) with median DoR 9.7 months (95% CI, 5.5-13) in 69 previously treated patients with NSCLC with mutations leading to MET exon 14 skipping. In VISION, ORR per BIRC was 43% (95% CI: 32, 56) with median DoR 10.8 months (95% CI, 6.9-not estimable) in 69 treatment-naïve patients and 43% (95% CI, 33-55) with median DoR 11.1 months (95% CI, 9.5-18.5) in 83 previously-treated patients with NSCLC harboring MET exon 14 alterations. These are the first two therapies to be FDA approved specifically for patients with metastatic NSCLC with MET exon 14 skipping.

FDA Approval Summary: Tivozanib for Relapsed or Refractory Renal Cell Carcinoma.

On March 10, 2021, the FDA granted regular approval to tivozanib for treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) following two or more prior systemic therapies. Approval was based on the TIVO-3 study, a randomized trial of tivozanib versus sorafenib in patients with R/R advanced RCC. In TIVO-3, patients were randomized to receive either tivozanib 1.34 mg orally once daily for 21 consecutive days of every 28-day cycle or sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily continuously. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) per RECIST v1.1. Tivozanib demonstrated efficacy compared with sorafenib with an improvement in PFS [HR, 0.73; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.56-0.95; P = 0.016]. The estimated median PFS was 5.6 months and 3.9 months in the tivozanib and sorafenib arms, respectively. There was no evidence of a detrimental effect on overall survival: HR, 0.97 (95% CI, 0.75-1.24). The most common grade 3 to 4 adverse reaction on the tivozanib arm was hypertension (24%). Compared with sorafenib, tivozanib was associated with lower rates of grade 3 to 4 diarrhea, rash, and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia. Patients receiving tivozanib in TIVO-3 had lower rates of dose reduction, interruption, or permanent discontinuation than those receiving sorafenib.

Refining neoadjuvant therapy clinical trial design for muscle-invasive bladder cancer before cystectomy: a joint US Food and Drug Administration and Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network workshop.

The success of the use of novel therapies in the treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma has contributed to growing interest in evaluating these therapies at earlier stages of the disease. However, trials evaluating these therapies in the neoadjuvant setting must have clearly defined study elements and appropriately selected end points to ensure the applicability of the trial and enable interpretation of the study results. To advance the development of rational trial design, a public workshop jointly sponsored by the US Food and Drug Administration and the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network convened in August 2019. Clinicians, clinical trialists, radiologists, biostatisticians, patients, advocates and other stakeholders discussed key elements and end points when designing trials of neoadjuvant therapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), identifying opportunities to refine eligibility, design and end points for neoadjuvant trials in MIBC. Although pathological complete response (pCR) is already being used as a co-primary end point, both individual-level and trial-level surrogacy for time-to-event end points, such as event-free survival or overall survival, remain incompletely characterized in MIBC. Additionally, use of pCR is limited by heterogeneity in pathological evaluation and the fact that the magnitude of pCR improvement that might translate into a meaningful clinical benefit remains unclear. Given existing knowledge gaps, capture of highly granular patient-related, tumour-related and treatment-related characteristics in the current generation of neoadjuvant MIBC trials will be critical to informing the design of future trials.

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.

Treatment-related toxicity and improved outcome from immunotherapy in hepatocellular cancer: Evidence from an FDA pooled analysis of landmark clinical trials with validation from routine practice.

PURPOSE: The development of treatment-related adverse events (trAE) correlates favorably with clinical outcomes in multiple studies of patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI); however, this relationship is undefined in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We derived a cohort of 406 patients with unresectable/advanced HCC receiving ICI therapy as part of international clinical trials submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in support of marketing applications. We tested whether the development of clinically significant trAE (i.e. graded ≥2, trAE2) predicted improved overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rates (ORR) following ICI. We established an international consortium of 10 tertiary-care referral centres located in Europe (n = 67), United States (US, n = 248) and Asia (n = 42) to validate this association. RESULTS: In the FDA dataset of 406 patients, 325 (80%) with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C HCC mostly treated with ICI monotherapy (n = 258, 64%), trAE2 were reported in 228 patients (56.1%). Development of trAE2 was associated with longer OS (16.7 versus 11.2 months) and PFS (5.5 versus 2.2 months) and persisted as an independent predictor of outcome after adjusting for viral aetiology, gender, Child-Pugh class, BCLC stage, AFP levels, ECOG-PS, ICI regimen (mono/combination therapy) and receipt of corticosteroid therapy. In a multi-institutional cohort of 357 patients with similar characteristics mostly treated with ICI monotherapy (n = 304, 85%), the development of trAE2 was associated with longer OS (23.3 versus 12.1 months) and PFS (9.6 versus 3.9 months). TrAE2 were confirmed predictors of improved OS (HR 0.43; 95% CI:0.25-0.75) and PFS (HR 0.48; 95% CI: 0.31-0.75), with multivariable analyses confirming their association with outcome independent of clinicopathologic features of interest. Additional time-varying multivariable analyses also indicated that trAEs were associated with a decreased risk of progression (HR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.46-0.67) in the FDA dataset and death (HR 0.55; 95% CI: 0.32-0.95) in the multi-institutional dataset. CONCLUSION: Development of trAE2 correlates with improved outcomes in patients with HCC receiving ICI in clinical trials and in routine practice. Prospective studies aimed at understanding the underlying immunologic foundations of such relationships are warranted to identify predictive biomarkers of toxicity and response.

Systematic Review of PD-1/PD-L1 Inhibitors in Oncology: From Personalized Medicine to Public Health.

BACKGROUND: To review and summarize all U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals of programmed death (PD)-1 and PD-ligand 1 blocking antibodies (collectively referred to as PD-[L]1 inhibitors) over a 6-year period and corresponding companion/complementary diagnostic assays. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To determine the indications and pivotal trials eligible for inclusion, approval letters and package inserts available on Drugs@FDA were evaluated for approved PD-[L]1 inhibitors to identify all new indications granted from the first approval of a PD-[L]1 inhibitor on September 4, 2014, through September 3, 2020. The corresponding FDA drug and device reviews from the marketing applications for the approved indications were identified through FDA internal records. Two reviewers independently extracted information for the endpoints, efficacy data, basis for approval, type of regulatory approval, and corresponding in vitro diagnostic device test. The results were organized by organ system and tumor type. RESULTS: Of 70 Biologic Licensing Application or supplement approvals that resulted in new indications, 32 (46%) were granted based on response rate (ORR) and durability of response, 26 (37%) on overall survival, 9 (13%) on progression-free survival, 2 (3%) on recurrence-free survival, and 1 (1%) on complete response rate. Most ORR-based approvals were granted under the accelerated approval provisions and were supported with prolonged duration of response. Overall, 21% of approvals were granted with a companion diagnostic. Efficacy results according to tumor type are discussed. CONCLUSION: PD-[L]1 inhibitors are an effective anticancer therapy in a subset of patients. This class of drugs has provided new treatment options for patients with unmet need across a wide variety of cancer types. Yet, the modest response rates in several tumor types signal a lack of understanding of the biology of these diseases. Further preclinical and clinical investigation may be required to identify a more appropriate patient population, particularly as drug development continues and additional treatment alternatives become available. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The number of PD-[L]1 inhibitors in drug development and the associated companion and complementary diagnostics have led to regulatory challenges and questions regarding generalizability of trial results. The interchangeability of PD-L1 immunohistochemical assays between PD-1/PD-L1 drugs is unclear. Furthermore, robust responses in some patients with low levels of PD-L1 expression have limited the use of PD-L1 as a predictive biomarker across all cancers, particularly in the setting of diseases with few alternative treatment options. This review summarizes the biomarker thresholds and assays approved as complementary and companion diagnostics and provides regulatory perspective on the role of biomarkers in oncology drug development.

Oncology Expanded Access and FDA's Project Facilitate.

The Oncology Center of Excellence at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration launched Project Facilitate on May 31, 2019, to assist oncology health care providers with Expanded Access requests for investigational drugs. Expanded Access, sometimes called "compassionate use," is a regulatory pathway for physicians caring for patients who have a life-threatening condition or a serious disease to gain access to an investigational drug for treatment when no comparable or satisfactory alternative treatment options are available. Herein we describe the Project Facilitate program and the process for requesting Expanded Access to an investigational drug.

Survival outcomes in older men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with androgen receptor inhibitors: a US Food and Drug Administration pooled analysis of patient-level data from three randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the benefit-risk profile of second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors in older men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. We aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors in men aged 80 years or older with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: We searched for all randomised controlled clinical trials evaluating second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration before Aug 15, 2020, and pooled data from three trials that met the selection criteria. All three trials enrolled patients who were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, castration-resistant prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 2·0 µg/L or greater, PSA doubling time of 10 months or less, and no evidence of distant metastatic disease on conventional imaging per the investigator's assessment at the time of screening. All patients had histologically or cytologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate without neuroendocrine differentiation or small-cell features. All patients who were randomly assigned to androgen receptor inhibitor or placebo groups in these trials were considered assessable and were included in this pooled analysis. We evaluated the effect of age on metastasis-free survival and overall survival across age groups (<80 years vs ≥80 years) in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. FINDINGS: Between Oct 14, 2013, and March 9, 2018, 4117 patients were assigned to androgen receptor inhibitor (apalutamide, enzalutamide, or daralutamide; n=2694) or placebo (n=1423) across three randomised trials. The median follow-up duration for metastasis-free survival was 18 months (IQR 11-26) and for overall survival was 44 months (32-55). In patients aged 80 years or older (n=1023), the estimated median metastasis-free survival was 40 months (95% CI 36-41) in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups and 22 months (18-29) in the placebo groups (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·37 [95% CI 0·28-0·47]), and the median overall survival was 54 months (50-61) versus 49 months (43-58), respectively (adjusted HR 0·79 [0·64-0·98]). In patients younger than 80 years of age (n=3094), the estimated median metastasis-free survival was 41 months (95% CI 36-not estimable [NE]) in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups and 16 months (15-18) in the placebo groups (adjusted HR 0·31 [95% CI 0·27-0·35]), and the median overall survival was 74 months (74-NE) versus 61 months (56-NE), respectively (adjusted HR 0·69 [0·60-0·80]). In patients aged 80 years or older, grade 3 or worse adverse events were reported in 371 (55%) of 672 patients in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups and 140 (41%) of 344 patients in the placebo groups, compared with 878 (44%) of 2015 patients in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups and 321 (30%) of 1073 patients in the placebo groups among patients younger than 80 years. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (168 [8%] of 2015 patients aged <80 years and 51 [8%] of 672 patients aged ≥80 years in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups vs 53 [5%] of 1073 patients aged <80 years and 22 [6%] of 344 patients aged ≥80 years in the placebo groups) and fracture (61 [3%] and 36 [5%] in the androgen receptor inhibitor groups vs 15 [1%] and 11 [3%] in the placebo groups). INTERPRETATION: The findings of this pooled analysis support the use of androgen receptor inhibitors in older men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Incorporating geriatric assessment tools in the care of older adults with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer might help clinicians to offer individualised treatment to each patient. FUNDING: None.

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.

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.

The FDA Oncology Center of Excellence Scientific Collaborative: Charting a Course for Applied Regulatory Science Research in Oncology.

The FDA Oncology Center of Excellence (OCE) is a leader within the agency in scientific outreach activities and regulatory science research. On the basis of analysis of scientific workshops, internal meetings, and publications, the OCE identified nine scientific priority areas and one cross-cutting area of high interest for collaboration with external researchers. This article describes the process for identifying these scientific interest areas and highlights funded and unfunded opportunities for external researchers to work with FDA staff on critical regulatory science challenges.

FDA Approval Summary: Fam-Trastuzumab Deruxtecan-Nxki for the Treatment of Unresectable or Metastatic HER2-Positive Breast Cancer.

On December 20, 2019, the FDA granted accelerated approval to fam-trastuzumab deruxtecan-nxki [DS-8201a; T-DXd; tradename ENHERTU (Daiichi Sankyo)] for the treatment of adult patients with unresectable or metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer who have received two or more prior anti-HER2-based regimens in the metastatic setting. Approval was based on data from study DS8201-A-U201 (DESTINY-Breast01) with supportive safety data from study DS8201-A-J101. The primary efficacy endpoint in DESTINY-Breast01 was overall response rate (ORR) based on confirmed responses by blinded independent central review (ICR) using RECIST v1.1 in all participants who were assigned to receive the recommended dose of 5.4 mg/kg while secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR). The confirmed ORR based on ICR in these 184 patients was 60.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 52.9-67.4] and the median DoR was 14.8 months (95% CI: 13.8-16.9). Interstitial lung disease, including pneumonitis, was experienced in patients treated with T-DXd and can be severe, life threatening, or fatal. In addition, neutropenia and left ventricular dysfunction were included as Warnings and Precautions in labeling. Other important common adverse reactions were nausea, fatigue, vomiting, alopecia, constipation, decreased appetite, anemia, diarrhea, and thrombocytopenia. Overall, the totality of efficacy and safety data supported the accelerated approval of T-DXd for the intended indication.

FDA Approval Summary: Atezolizumab and Durvalumab in Combination with Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Extensive Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted approval to atezolizumab and durvalumab in March of 2019 and 2020, respectively, for use in combination with chemotherapy for first-line treatment of patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer. These approvals were based on data from two randomized controlled trials, IMpower133 (atezolizumab) and CASPIAN (durvalumab). Both trials demonstrated an improvement in overall survival (OS) with anti-programmed death ligand 1 antibodies when added to platinum-based chemotherapy as compared with chemotherapy alone. In IMpower133, patients receiving atezolizumab with etoposide and carboplatin demonstrated improved OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.91; p = .0069), with median OS of 12.3 months compared with 10.3 months in patients receiving etoposide and carboplatin. In CASPIAN, patients receiving durvalumab with etoposide and either cisplatin or carboplatin also demonstrated improved OS (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59-0.91; p = .0047) with median OS of 13.0 months compared with 10.3 months in patients receiving etoposide and either cisplatin or carboplatin. The safety profiles of both drugs were generally consistent with known toxicities of immune-checkpoint inhibitor therapies. This review summarizes the FDA perspective and data supporting the approval of these two agents. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Effective therapeutic options for small cell lung cancer (SCLC) are limited, and there has been modest improvement in the overall survival (OS) of patients with SCLC over the past 3 decades. The approvals of atezolizumab and of durvalumab in combination with chemotherapy for first-line treatment of patients with extensive stage SCLC represent the first approved therapies with OS benefit for this patient population since the approval of etoposide in combination with other approved chemotherapeutic agents. Additionally, the efficacy results from IMpower133 and CASPIAN lay the groundwork for possible further evaluation in other treatment settings in this disease.

FDA Approval Summary: Selumetinib for Plexiform Neurofibroma.

On April 10, 2020, the FDA approved selumetinib (KOSELUGO, AstraZeneca) for the treatment of pediatric patients 2 years of age and older with neurofibromatosis type 1 who have symptomatic, inoperable plexiform neurofibromas. Approval was based on demonstration of a durable overall response rate per Response Evaluation in Neurofibromatosis and Schwannomatosis criteria and supported by observed clinical improvements in plexiform neurofibroma-related symptoms and functional impairments in 50 pediatric patients with inoperable plexiform neurofibromas in a single-arm, multicenter trial. The overall reponse rate per NCI investigator assessment was 66% (95% confidence interval, 51-79) with at least 12 months of follow-up. The median duration of response was not reached, and 82% of responding patients experienced duration of response ≥12 months. Clinical outcome assessment endpoints provided supportive efficacy data. Risks of selumetinib are consistent with MAPK (MEK) inhibitor class effects, including ocular, cardiac, musculoskeletal, gastrointestinal, and dermatologic toxicities. Safety was assessed across a pooled database of 74 pediatric patients with plexiform neurofibromas and supported by adult and pediatric selumetinib clinical trial data in cancer indications. The benefit-risk assessment for selumetinib in patients with inoperable plexiform neurofibromas was considered favorable.