FDA Approval Summary: Dabrafenib in Combination with Trametinib for BRAFV600E Mutation-Positive Low-Grade Glioma.

On March 16, 2023, the FDA approved dabrafenib in combination with trametinib (Tafinlar, Mekinist; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation) for the treatment of pediatric patients with low-grade glioma (LGG) with a BRAFV600E mutation who require systemic therapy. FDA also approved oral formulations of both drugs suitable for patients who cannot swallow pills. This approval was based on the LGG cohort from study CDRB436G2201 (NCT02684058), a multicenter, open-label trial in which pediatric patients with LGG with a BRAFV600E mutation were randomly assigned 2:1 to dabrafenib plus trametinib (D+T) or carboplatin plus vincristine (C+V). The overall response rate (ORR) by independent review based on Response Assessment in Neuro-oncology LGG (2017) criteria was assessed in 110 patients randomly assigned to D+T (n = 73) or C+V (n = 37). ORR was 47% [95% confidence interval (CI), 35-59] in the D+T arm and 11% (95% CI, 3.0-25) in the C+V arm. Duration of response (DOR) was 23.7 months (95% CI, 14.5-NE) in the D+T arm and not estimable (95% CI, 6.6- NE) in the C+V arm. Progression-free survival (PFS) was 20.1 months (95% CI: 12.8, NE) and 7.4 months (95% CI, 3.6- 11.8) [HR, 0.31 (95% CI, 0.17-0.55); P < 0.001] in the D+T and C+V arms, respectively. The most common (>20%) adverse reactions were pyrexia, rash, headache, vomiting, musculoskeletal pain, fatigue, diarrhea, dry skin, nausea, hemorrhage, abdominal pain, and dermatitis acneiform. This represents the first FDA approval of a systemic therapy for the first-line treatment of pediatric patients with LGG with a BRAFV600E mutation.

FDA Approval Summary: Selpercatinib for the Treatment of Advanced RET Fusion-Positive Solid Tumors.

On September 21, 2022, the FDA granted accelerated approval to selpercatinib (Retevmo, Eli Lilly and Company) for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors with a rearranged during transfection (RET) gene fusion that have progressed on or following prior systemic treatment or who have no satisfactory alternative treatment options. The approval was based on data from Study LOXO-RET-17001 (LIBRETTO-001; NCT03157128), an international, non-randomized, multi-cohort clinical trial that included patients with advanced solid tumors harboring RET alterations. The overall response rate in 41 patients with locally advanced or metastatic RET fusion-positive solid tumors other than non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or thyroid cancer was 44% [95% confidence interval (CI), 28%-60%], with median duration of response 24.5 months (95% CI, 9.2-not evaluable). Patients with 10 of 14 tumor types with a variety of fusion partners had objective responses, including patients with the following tumors: pancreatic adenocarcinoma, colorectal, salivary, unknown primary, breast, soft-tissue sarcoma, bronchial carcinoid, ovarian, small intestine, and cholangiocarcinoma. The recommendation for approval was supported by results from LIBRETTO-001 in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC and thyroid cancer, which formed the basis of prior approvals in these tumor types. The most common adverse reactions (>25%) were edema, diarrhea, fatigue, dry mouth, hypertension, abdominal pain, constipation, rash, nausea, and headache. This is the first tissue-agnostic approval of a RET-directed targeted therapy.

FDA Approval Summary: Mobocertinib for Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with EGFR Exon 20 Insertion Mutations.

On September 15, 2021, the FDA granted accelerated approval to mobocertinib (Exkivity, Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.) for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations, as detected by an FDA-approved test, whose disease has progressed on or after platinum-based chemotherapy. The approval was based on data from Study AP32788-15-101 (NCT02716116), an international, non-randomized, multi-cohort clinical trial that included patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations. The overall response rate in 114 patients whose disease had progressed on or after platinum-based chemotherapy was 28% [95% confidence interval (CI), 20%-37%] with a median duration of response of 17.5 months (95% CI, 7.4-20.3). The most common adverse reactions (>20%) were diarrhea, rash, nausea, stomatitis, vomiting, decreased appetite, paronychia, fatigue, dry skin, and musculoskeletal pain. Product labeling includes a Boxed Warning for QTc prolongation and torsades de pointes. This is the first approval of an oral targeted therapy for patients with advanced EGFR exon 20 insertion mutation-positive NSCLC.

FDA Approval Summary: Pembrolizumab for Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Treatment of Patients with High-Risk Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

On July 26, 2021, the FDA granted approval to pembrolizumab in combination with chemotherapy for neoadjuvant treatment and then continued as a single agent for adjuvant treatment following surgery for patients with high-risk, early-stage triple-negative breast cancer. Approval was based on results from KEYNOTE-522, an ongoing randomized (2:1) trial evaluating pembrolizumab or placebo in combination with chemotherapy for neoadjuvant treatment and then as a single agent for adjuvant treatment. The co-primary endpoints were pathological complete response (pCR) rate and event-free survival (EFS). The trial demonstrated an improvement in pCR and EFS in the pembrolizumab arm compared with the control arm. The number of patients who experienced an EFS event was 123 (16%) and 93 (24%), respectively [HR: 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.48-0.82, P = 0.00031]. Patients on the pembrolizumab arm experienced EFS benefit regardless of tumor PD-L1 status. The absolute pCR rate improvement with the addition of pembrolizumab was 7.5% (95% CI, 1.6-13.4). Among patients receiving pembrolizumab, 44% experienced an immune-related adverse reaction. This article summarizes FDA's review of pembrolizumab and the data supporting the favorable benefit-risk assessment.

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: 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.

Subgroup Analyses in Oncology Trials: Regulatory Considerations and Case Examples.

Subgroup analyses are assessments of treatment effects based on certain patient characteristics out of the total study population and are important for interpretation of pivotal oncology trials. However, appropriate use of subgroup analyses results for regulatory decision-making and product labeling is challenging. Typically, drugs approved by the FDA are indicated for use in the total patient population studied; however, there are examples of restriction to a subgroup of patients despite positive study results in the entire study population and also extension of an indication to the entire study population despite positive results appearing primarily in one or more subgroups. In this article, we summarize key issues related to subgroup analyses in the benefit-risk assessment of cancer drugs and provide case examples to illustrate approaches that the FDA Oncology Center of Excellence has taken when considering the appropriate patient population for cancer drug approval. In general, if a subgroup is of interest, the subgroup analysis should be hypothesis-driven and have adequate sample size to demonstrate evidence of a treatment effect. In addition to statistical efficacy considerations, the decision on what subgroups to include in labeling relies on the pathophysiology of the disease, mechanistic justification, safety data, and external information available. The oncology drug review takes the totality of the data into consideration during the decision-making process to ensure the indication granted and product labeling appropriately reflect the scientific evidence to support patient population for whom the drug is safe and effective.

Post-approval drug safety surveillance.

Following the drug-approval process, concerns remain regarding the safety of new drugs that are introduced into the marketplace. In the case of rare adverse events, the number of subjects that are treated in randomized controlled trials is invariably inadequate to determine the safety of the new pharmaceutical. Identifying safety signals for new and/or existing drugs is a major priority in the protection of public health. Unfortunately, design, analysis, and available data are often quite limited for detecting in a timely fashion any potentially harmful effects of drugs. In this review, we examine a variety of approaches for determining the possibility of adverse drug reactions. Our review includes spontaneous reports, meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials, ecological studies, and analysis of medical claims data. We consider both experimental design and analytic problems as well as potential solutions. Many of these methodologies are then illustrated through application to data on the possible relationship between taking antidepressants and increased risk of suicidality.

Deficits in complex motor functions, despite no evidence of procedural learning deficits, among HIV+ individuals with history of substance dependence.

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and drugs of abuse affect common neural systems underlying procedural memory, including the striatum. The authors compared performance of 48 HIV seropositive (HIV+) and 48 HIV seronegative (HIV-) participants with history of cocaine and/or heroin dependence across multiple Trial Blocks of three procedural learning (PL) tasks: Rotary Pursuit (RP), Mirror Star Tracing (MST), and Weather Prediction (WP). Groups were well matched on demographic, psychiatric, and substance use parameters, and all participants were verified abstinent from drugs. Mixed model analyses of variance revealed that the individuals in the HIV+ group performed more poorly across all tasks, with a significant main effect of HIV serostatus observed on the Mirror Star Tracing and a trend toward significance obtained for the Rotary Pursuit task. No significant differences were observed on the Weather Prediction task. Both groups demonstrated significant improvements in performance across all three procedural learning tasks. It is important to note that no significant Serostatus x Trial Block interactions were observed on any task. Thus, the individuals in the HIV+ group tended to perform worse than those in the HIV- group across all trial blocks of procedural learning tasks with motor demands, but showed no differences in their rate of improvement across all tasks. These findings are consistent with HIV--associated deficits in complex motor skills, but not in procedural learning.

Mixed-effects Poisson regression analysis of adverse event reports: the relationship between antidepressants and suicide.

A new statistical methodology is developed for the analysis of spontaneous adverse event (AE) reports from post-marketing drug surveillance data. The method involves both empirical Bayes (EB) and fully Bayes estimation of rate multipliers for each drug within a class of drugs, for a particular AE, based on a mixed-effects Poisson regression model. Both parametric and semiparametric models for the random-effect distribution are examined. The method is applied to data from Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) on the relationship between antidepressants and suicide. We obtain point estimates and 95 per cent confidence (posterior) intervals for the rate multiplier for each drug (e.g. antidepressants), which can be used to determine whether a particular drug has an increased risk of association with a particular AE (e.g. suicide). Confidence (posterior) intervals that do not include 1.0 provide evidence for either significant protective or harmful associations of the drug and the adverse effect. We also examine EB, parametric Bayes, and semiparametric Bayes estimators of the rate multipliers and associated confidence (posterior) intervals. Results of our analysis of the FDA AERS data revealed that newer antidepressants are associated with lower rates of suicide adverse event reports compared with older antidepressants. We recommend improvements to the existing AERS system, which are likely to improve its public health value as an early warning system.