FDA-EMA work­shop dis­cuss­es qual­i­ty chal­lenges for PRIME, break­through ther­a­pies

Last No­vem­ber, of­fi­cials from the EMA and FDA met with in­dus­try rep­re­sen­ta­tives in Lon­don to dis­cuss the var­i­ous qual­i­ty chal­lenges that arise when the de­vel­op­ment of in­ves­ti­ga­tion­al prod­ucts is ac­cel­er­at­ed.

The EMA’s launch of its pri­or­i­ty med­i­cines (PRIME) scheme and the FDA’s break­through ther­a­py des­ig­na­tion have en­abled com­pa­nies to speed cer­tain treat­ments to mar­ket, al­though there have been dif­fi­cul­ties in iden­ti­fy­ing pos­si­ble sci­en­tif­ic and reg­u­la­to­ry ap­proach­es to fa­cil­i­tate the type of ro­bust qual­i­ty da­ta pack­ages nec­es­sary to en­sure that pa­tient safe­ty and prod­uct qual­i­ty and ef­fi­ca­cy are not com­pro­mised, ac­cord­ing to a re­port re­leased Wednes­day on the work­shop.

Ramesh Sood

In ad­di­tion to the fo­cus on ear­ly ac­cess ap­proach­es, the work­shop dis­cussed process val­i­da­tion, con­trol strate­gies, good man­u­fac­tur­ing prac­tice (GMP) com­pli­ance, com­pa­ra­bil­i­ty, sta­bil­i­ty and reg­u­la­to­ry tools.

Ramesh Sood, se­nior sci­en­tif­ic ad­vi­sor at the FDA’s Of­fice of New Drugs, dis­cussed the agency’s break­through pro­gram, not­ing the chal­lenges faced by ap­pli­cants col­lect­ing the nec­es­sary man­u­fac­tur­ing da­ta and pro­vid­ing an ad­e­quate man­u­fac­tur­ing con­trol strat­e­gy.

“It be­comes im­por­tant for the Agency re­view­ers to do a risk-ben­e­fit as­sess­ment re­gard­ing [the] risk of less man­u­fac­tur­ing in­for­ma­tion ver­sus pa­tient ben­e­fit,” the work­shop re­port says of Sood’s pre­sen­ta­tion. “This re­quires in­no­v­a­tive risk-mit­i­ga­tion strate­gies to en­sure prod­uct qual­i­ty and re­duce the qual­i­ty-re­lat­ed prod­uct risk to an ac­cept­able lev­el.”

Veroni­ka Jek­er­le

Veroni­ka Jek­er­le of the EMA’s qual­i­ty of­fice al­so dis­cussed the sci­en­tif­ic chal­lenges for PRIME can­di­dates, which in­clude ab­bre­vi­at­ed time­lines that add con­straints to set­ting up com­mer­cial man­u­fac­tur­ing sites.

“An analy­sis ex­am­in­ing sci­en­tif­ic is­sues most com­mon­ly iden­ti­fied by PRIME ap­pli­cants (as in­di­cat­ed by SA [sci­en­tif­ic ad­vice] re­quests) re­vealed the fol­low­ing ar­eas as the most crit­i­cal: start­ing ma­te­ri­als, com­pa­ra­bil­i­ty, process val­i­da­tion, an­a­lyt­i­cal con­trol strat­e­gy, spec­i­fi­ca­tions and sta­bil­i­ty,” the re­port says.

Stu­art Finnie, di­rec­tor of reg­u­la­to­ry CMC at As­traZeneca, al­so pre­sent­ed on a small mol­e­cule prod­uct that earned the FDA’s break­through des­ig­na­tion but ran in­to process val­i­da­tion prob­lems that meant sup­plies of the drug would come four months af­ter ap­proval.

As­traZeneca ap­proached the FDA and dis­cussed de­cou­pling the val­i­da­tion of drug sub­stance and drug prod­uct, and dis­cussed plans to use drug sub­stance man­u­fac­tured in the clin­i­cal fa­cil­i­ty to sup­ply drug prod­uct val­i­da­tion.

“Three key el­e­ments lead to the suc­cess of this pro­pos­al,” the re­port says of the As­traZeneca work. “First­ly, the ap­pli­cant pro­vid­ed the Agency with sig­nif­i­cant ev­i­dence of sim­i­lar­i­ty in terms of qual­i­ty, man­u­fac­tur­ing process and qual­i­ty sys­tem be­tween the clin­i­cal cam­paigns and the pro­posed com­mer­cial cam­paign. Sec­ond­ly, dur­ing the site in­spec­tion there was open and close en­gage­ment be­tween the in­spec­tors, re­view­ers, sub­ject mat­ter ex­perts and qual­i­ty de­part­ments en­sur­ing that ques­tions raised were an­swered swift­ly lead­ing to a bal­anced and aligned view on risk as­sess­ment. Fi­nal­ly, and most im­por­tant­ly, it was clear that through­out the in­ter­ac­tions all par­ties were fo­cused on en­sur­ing sup­ply to the pa­tient.”

Oth­er in­dus­try pre­sen­ta­tions in­volved rep­re­sen­ta­tives from Pfiz­er, Am­gen, Cel­gene, MSD (known as Mer­ck in the US), Bio­gen and sev­er­al vac­cine man­u­fac­tur­ers, among oth­ers.

As far as fu­ture joint EMA-FDA ac­tions, the re­port points to the use of mod­els for sta­bil­i­ty and shelf life de­ter­mi­na­tions, in­no­v­a­tive process val­i­da­tion ap­proach­es and al­low­ing launch­es from clin­i­cal man­u­fac­tur­ing sites.

Ned Sharp­less NIH

“In ad­di­tion, the or­ga­niz­ing com­mit­tee pro­pos­es to de­vel­op a ‘Tool­box- guid­ance’ for PRIME prod­ucts, which shall sum­marise the iden­ti­fied sci­en­tif­ic el­e­ments/reg­u­la­to­ry tools that are al­ready avail­able in the EU to ad­dress some of the chal­lenges faced dur­ing the de­vel­op­ment of prod­ucts un­der PRIME and gen­er­a­tion of ro­bust qual­i­ty pack­ages for MAA [mar­ket­ing au­tho­riza­tion ap­pli­ca­tion] re­view,” the re­port says.

Act­ing FDA Com­mis­sion­er Ned Sharp­less added in a state­ment: “We will con­tin­ue to work with our EMA col­leagues and in­dus­try to dis­cuss ways to ad­dress qual­i­ty chal­lenges as­so­ci­at­ed with ex­pe­dit­ed de­vel­op­ment pro­grams to help en­sure pa­tients re­ceive safe, ef­fec­tive drugs.”

Work­shop Re­port


RAPS: First pub­lished in Reg­u­la­to­ry Fo­cus™ by the Reg­u­la­to­ry Af­fairs Pro­fes­sion­als So­ci­ety, the largest glob­al or­ga­ni­za­tion of and for those in­volved with the reg­u­la­tion of health­care prod­ucts. Click here for more in­for­ma­tion.

Is a pow­er­house Mer­ck team prepar­ing to leap past Roche — and leave Gilead and Bris­tol My­ers be­hind — in the race to TIG­IT dom­i­na­tion?

Roche caused quite a stir at ASCO with its first look at some positive — but not so impressive — data for their combination of Tecentriq with their anti-TIGIT drug tiragolumab. But some analysts believe that Merck is positioned to make a bid — soon — for the lead in the race to a second-wave combo immuno-oncology approach with its own ambitious early-stage program tied to a dominant Keytruda.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

Unlock this article along with other benefits by subscribing to one of our paid plans.

BiTE® Plat­form and the Evo­lu­tion To­ward Off-The-Shelf Im­muno-On­col­o­gy Ap­proach­es

Despite rapid advances in the field of immuno-oncology that have transformed the cancer treatment landscape, many cancer patients are still left behind.1,2 Not every person has access to innovative therapies designed specifically to treat his or her disease. Many currently available immuno-oncology-based approaches and chemotherapies have brought long-term benefits to some patients — but many patients still need other therapeutic options.3

Pfiz­er’s Doug Gior­dano has $500M — and some ad­vice — to of­fer a cer­tain breed of 'break­through' biotech

So let’s say you’re running a cutting-edge, clinical-stage biotech, probably public, but not necessarily so, which could see some big advantages teaming up with some marquee researchers, picking up say $50 million to $75 million dollars in a non-threatening minority equity investment that could take you to the next level.

Doug Giordano might have some thoughts on how that could work out.

The SVP of business development at the pharma giant has helped forge a new fund called the Pfizer Breakthrough Growth Initiative. And he has $500 million of Pfizer’s money to put behind 7 to 10 — or so — biotech stocks that fit that general description.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 82,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

FDA de­lays de­ci­sion on No­var­tis’ po­ten­tial block­buster MS drug, wip­ing away pri­or­i­ty re­view

So much for a speedy review.

In February, Novartis announced that an application for their much-touted multiple sclerosis drug ofatumumab had been accepted and, with the drug company cashing in on one of their priority review vouchers, the agency was due for a decision by June.

But with June less than 48 hours old, Novartis announced the agency has extended their review, pushing back the timeline for approval or rejection to September. The Swiss pharma filed the application in December, meaning their new schedule will be nearly in line with the standard 10-month window period had they not used the priority voucher.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 82,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

President Donald Trump (left) and Moncef Slaoui, head of Operation Warp Speed (Alex Brandon, AP Images)

White House names fi­nal­ists for Op­er­a­tion Warp Speed — with 5 ex­pect­ed names and one no­table omis­sion

A month after word first broke of the Trump Administration’s plan to rapidly accelerate the development and production of a Covid-19 vaccine, the White House has selected the five vaccine candidates they consider most likely to succeed, The New York Times reported.

Most of the names in the plan, known as Operation Warp Speed, will come as little surprise to those who have watched the last four months of vaccine developments: Moderna, which was the first vaccine to reach humans and is now the furthest along of any US effort; J&J, which has not gone into trials but received around $500 million in funding from BARDA earlier this year; the joint AstraZeneca-Oxford venture which was granted $1.2 billion from BARDA two weeks ago; Pfizer, which has been working with the mRNA biotech BioNTech; and Merck, which just entered the race and expects to put their two vaccine candidates into humans later this year.

UP­DAT­ED: Es­ti­mat­ing a US price tag of $5K per course, remde­sivir is set to make bil­lions for Gilead, says key an­a­lyst

Data on remdesivir — the first drug shown to benefit Covid-19 patients in a randomized, controlled trial setting — may be murky, but its maker Gilead could reap billions from the sales of the failed Ebola therapy, according to an estimate by a prominent Wall Street analyst. However, the forecast, which is based on a $5,000-per-course US price tag, triggered the ire of one top drug price expert.

Credit: AP Images

Covid-19 roundup: BAR­DA sup­ports Op­er­a­tion Warp Speed with big $628M con­tract to ser­vice Amer­i­ca's vac­cine pro­duc­tion needs

Another BARDA contract designed to service America’s Covid-19 vaccine needs has been deployed.

The White House-led initiative designed to bankroll development to bring a vaccine to the American public by this fall — Operation Warp Speed — has via BARDA handed a meaty contract to the maker of an FDA-licensed anthrax vaccine to open up its manufacturing apparatus to shore up production of Covid-19 vaccines.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 82,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Fangliang Zhang (Imaginechina via AP Images)

The big mon­ey: Poised to make drug R&D his­to­ry, a Chi­na biotech un­veils uni­corn rac­ing am­bi­tions in a bid to raise $350M-plus on Nas­daq

Almost exactly three years after Shanghai-based Legend came out of nowhere to steal the show at ASCO with jaw-dropping data on their BCMA-targeted CAR-T for multiple myeloma, the little player with Big Pharma connections is taking a giant step toward making it big on Wall Street. And this time they want to seal the deal on a global rep after staking out a unicorn valuation in what’s turned out to be a bull market for biotech IPOs — in the middle of a pandemic.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

Unlock this article along with other benefits by subscribing to one of our paid plans.

Ken Frazier, AP Images

Why Mer­ck wait­ed, and what they now bring to the Covid-19 fight

Nicholas Kartsonis had been running clinical infectious disease research at Merck for almost 2 years when, in mid-January, he got a new assignment: searching the pharma giant’s vast libraries for something that could treat the novel coronavirus.

The outbreak was barely two weeks old when Kartsonis and a few dozen others got to work, first in small teams and then in a larger task force that sucked in more and more parts of the sprawling company as Covid-19 infected more and more of the globe. By late February, the group began formally searching for vaccine and antiviral candidates to license. Still, while other companies jumped out to announce their programs and, eventually and sometimes controversially, early glimpses at human data, Merck remained silent. They made only a brief announcement about a data collection partnership in April and mentioned vaguely a vaccine and antiviral search in their April 28 earnings call.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 82,300+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.