Factors associated with hematological adverse reactions of drugs authorized via the centralized procedure.

Serious hematological adverse drug reactions (HADRs) may lead to or prolong hospitalization and even cause death. The aim of this study was to determine the regulatory factors associated with HADRs caused by drugs that were authorized up to July 2023 by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and to evaluate the frequency of HADRs. Using a cross-sectional approach, the type and frequency of HADRs were collected from the Summaries of Product Characteristics of Drugs Authorized by the EMA and analyzed within proprietary, nonproprietary, and biosimilar/biological frameworks. Multivariate statistical analysis was used to investigate the associations of generic status, biosimilar status, conditional approval, exceptional circumstances, accelerated assessment, orphan drug status, years on the market, administration route, and inclusion on the Essential Medicines List (EML) with HADRs. In total, 54.78% of proprietary drugs were associated with HADRs at any frequency, while anemia, leucopenia, and thrombocytopenia were observed in approximately 36% of the patients. The predictors of any HADR, anemia, and thrombocytopenia of any frequency are generic status, biosimilar status, and inclusion on the EML, while the only protective factor is the administration route. Biosimilars and their originator biologicals have similar frequencies of HADRs; the only exception is somatropin. Knowledge of the regulatory factors associated with HADRs could help clinicians address monitoring issues when new drugs are introduced for the treatment of patients.

A Comprehensive Analysis of Biopharmaceutical Products Listed in the FDA's Purple Book.

Although biopharmaceuticals constitute around 10% of the drug landscape, eight of the ten top-selling products were biopharmaceuticals in 2023. This study did a comprehensive analysis of the FDA's Purple Book database. Firstly, our research uncovered market trends and provided insights into biologics distributions. According to the investigation, although biotechnology has advanced and legislative shifts have made the approval process faster, there are still challenges to overcome, such as molecular instability and formulation design. Moreover, our research comprehensively analyzed biological formulations, pointing out significant strategies regarding administration routes, dosage forms, product packaging, and excipients. In conjunction with biologics, the widespread integration of innovative delivery strategies will be implemented to confront the evolving challenges in healthcare and meet an expanding array of treatment needs.

An empirical analysis of overall survival in drug approvals by the US FDA (2006-2023).

BACKGROUND: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has expanded the use of surrogate markers in drugs approved for oncology/hematology indications. This has likely resulted in a greater number of approvals and possibly drugs coming to market faster, but it is unknown whether these drugs also improve overall survival (OS) for patients taking them. METHODS: We sought to estimate the percentage of oncology drugs that have shown to improve OS in a cross-sectional analysis of US FDA oncology drug approvals (2006-2023). We searched for OS data in registration trials and the peer-reviewed literature. RESULTS: We found 392 oncology drug approvals. Eighty-seven (22%) drug approvals were based on OS, 147 drug approvals were later tested for OS benefit (38% of all approvals and 48% of drugs approved on a surrogate), and 130 (33%) have yet to be tested for OS benefit. Of the 147 drug approvals later tested for OS, 109 (28% of all approvals and 74% of drugs later tested for OS) have yet to show OS benefit, whereas 38 (10% of all approvals and 26% of drugs later tested for OS benefit) were later shown to have OS benefit. In total, 125 out of 392 (32%) drugs approved for any indication have been shown to improve OS benefit at some point, and 267 (68%) have yet to show approval. CONCLUSION: About 32% of all oncology drug approvals have evidence for an improvement in OS. Higher standards are needed in drug regulation to ensure that approved drugs are delivering better patient outcomes, specifically in regards to survival.

Akt Inhibitor Advancements: From Capivasertib Approval to Covalent-Allosteric Promises.

Akt kinase is vital in cell growth, survival, metabolism, and migration. Dysregulation of Akt signaling is implicated in cancer and metabolic disorders. In the context of cancer, overactive Akt promotes cell survival and proliferation. This has spurred extensive research into developing Akt inhibitors as potential therapeutic agents to disrupt aberrant Akt signaling. Akt inhibitors are classified into three main types: ATP-competitive, allosteric, and covalent-allosteric inhibitors (CAAIs). ATP-competitive inhibitors compete with ATP for binding to Akt, allosteric inhibitors interact with the Pleckstrin homology (PH) domain, and covalent-allosteric inhibitors form covalent bonds, making them more potent and selective. Notably, capivasertib (AZD5363), a potent ATP-competitive Akt inhibitor, received FDA approval in November 2023 for use in combination with the estrogen receptor degrader fulvestrant to treat breast cancer. Challenges remain, including improving selectivity, identifying biomarkers to tailor treatments, and enhancing therapeutic efficacy while minimizing adverse effects. Particularly covalent-allosteric inhibitors hold promise for future more effective and personalized treatments.

A systematic review of real-world evidence (RWE) supportive of new drug and biologic license application approvals in rare diseases.

BACKGROUND: Real-world evidence (RWE) generated using real-world data (RWD) presents the potential to contextualize and/or supplement traditional clinical trials for regulatory approval of rare diseases (RDs). This systematic review evaluated the use of RWD for non-oncologic RD therapies with orphan drug designation (ODD) to support efficacy outcomes in regulatory application packages to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). New drug applications (NDAs) and biologic license applications (BLAs) submitted between January 2017 and October 2022 were obtained from publicly available FDA drug approval websites. NDAs and BLAs of non-oncologic RD therapies were screened, and manually reviewed using RWE-related keywords. Quantitative summary of number/proportion of study types was provided, whereas qualitative synthesis focused on key categories of output assessing the use of RWD in overall drug approval process, including agency's feedback on its strengths and key challenges. RESULTS: A total of 868 NDAs and BLAs were identified, of which 243 were screened for non-oncologic RDs with ODD, and 151 were subsequently reviewed for the RWD used to support efficacy outcomes. Twenty (12 NDAs, 8 BLAs) applications met the review inclusion criteria. Most (19; 95%) applications used only retrospective RWD, while one (5%) collected RWD both retrospectively and prospectively. RWD studies included natural history including registry-based/retrospective historical controls (14; 70%), retrospective medical chart-reviews (4; 20%), and external RWD controls from other studies (2; 10%). The FDA generally accepted RWD studies demonstrating a large effect size despite the noted concerns and criticisms. However, the agency expressed concerns about overall quality and comparability of RWD with trial data for some applications, including RWD study designs with respect to differences in patients' baseline characteristics, missing information, and potential bias and measurement errors. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights potential benefits of appropriately conducted RWE studies in RD, which can strengthen the clinical evidence for efficacy comparison and contextualization to support product approval efforts, particularly when a large magnitude of effect is observed for the new intervention. Nonetheless, quality and completeness of RWD and its comparability with trial data remain areas of concern that can serve as valuable learnings for advancing future science and regulatory approvals.

Synthetic Approaches to the New Drugs Approved During 2022.

In 2022, 23 new small molecule chemical entities were approved as drugs by the United States FDA, European Union EMA, Japan PMDA, and China NMPA. This review describes the synthetic approach demonstrated on largest scale for each new drug based on patent or primary literature. The synthetic routes highlight practical methods to construct molecules, sometimes on the manufacturing scale, to access the new drugs. Ten additional drugs approved in 2021 and one approved in 2020 are included that were not covered in the previous year's review.

The evolutionary safety of mutagenic drugs should be assessed before drug approval.

Some drugs increase the mutation rate of their target pathogen, a potentially concerning mechanism as the pathogen might evolve faster toward an undesired phenotype. We suggest a four-step assessment of evolutionary safety for the approval of such treatments.

Using real-world evidence in haematology.

Most new drug approvals are based on data from large randomized clinical trials (RCTs). However, there are sometimes contradictory conclusions from seemingly similar trials and generalizability of conclusions from these trials is limited. These considerations explain, in part, the gap between conclusions from data of RCTs and those from registries termed real world data (RWD). Recently, real-world evidence (RWE) from RWD processed by artificial intelligence has received increasing attention. We describe the potential of using RWD in haematology concluding RWE from RWD may complement data from RCTs to support regulatory decisions.