FDA out­lines a laun­dry list of sur­ro­gate end­points with an eye to ex­pand­ing the ros­ter for drug de­vel­op­ers

The FDA on Wednes­day pub­lished a list of sur­ro­gate end­points to help in­form drug de­vel­op­er dis­cus­sions with rel­e­vant Cen­ter for Bi­o­log­ics Eval­u­a­tion and Re­search (CBER) or Cen­ter for Drug Eval­u­a­tion and Re­search (CDER) re­view di­vi­sions.

The list, which was cre­at­ed thanks to the 21st Cen­tu­ry Cures Act, in­cludes sur­ro­gate end­points that spon­sors have used as pri­ma­ry ef­fi­ca­cy clin­i­cal tri­al end­points for ap­proval of new drug ap­pli­ca­tions (NDAs) or bi­o­log­ics li­cense ap­pli­ca­tions (BLAs). It al­so in­cludes sur­ro­gate end­points that may be ap­pro­pri­ate for use as pri­ma­ry ef­fi­ca­cy clin­i­cal tri­al end­points for drug or bi­o­log­ic ap­provals, al­though they have not yet been used to sup­port an ap­proved NDA or BLA.

The list, which will be up­dat­ed every six months, fea­tures sur­ro­gate end­points for nu­mer­ous dis­eases in­clud­ing acromegaly, dif­fer­ent can­cers, chron­ic kid­ney dis­ease, cys­tic fi­bro­sis, he­pati­tis A, B and C, HIV, hy­per­ten­sion and os­teo­poro­sis, among oth­ers.

“The ac­cept­abil­i­ty of these sur­ro­gate end­points for use in a par­tic­u­lar drug or bi­o­log­ic de­vel­op­ment pro­gram will be de­ter­mined on a case-by-case ba­sis,” the FDA said.

The list, which sep­a­rates adult and pe­di­atric end­points, does not in­clude com­pos­ite end­points that are a com­bi­na­tion of bio­mark­er sur­ro­gate end­points and clin­i­cal end­points. The ta­ble al­so does not in­clude sur­ro­gate end­points that may have been ac­cept­ed for past drug de­vel­op­ment pro­grams but are no longer ac­cept­able as an end­point to sup­port reg­is­tra­tion.

And crit­ics of the list note a lack of speci­fici­ty.

Vinay Prasad

Vinay Prasad, as­so­ciate pro­fes­sor of med­i­cine at Ore­gon Health and Sci­ence Uni­ver­si­ty, told Fo­cus: “I would say, at least for can­cer, it is done at such a high lev­el with so lit­tle de­tail, it is pret­ty much use­less. A bet­ter sum­ma­ry of sur­ro­gates used to jus­ti­fy ap­provals and their strength can be found in our pa­per from the Mayo clin­ic pro­ceed­ings…We are show­ing the sur­ro­gate used by ap­proval, the path­way of ap­proval, and the strength of the sur­ro­gate in the bio­med­ical lit­er­a­ture. They just say what sur­ro­gates are used in what tu­mors, but do not ex­plain the line of ther­a­py, the drugs that uti­lized the path­way or the strength of cor­re­la­tion.”

Back­ground

Ac­cord­ing to sec­tion 507(e)(9) of the Food Drug & Cos­met­ic Act, “[t]he term ‘sur­ro­gate end­point’ means a mark­er, such as a lab­o­ra­to­ry mea­sure­ment, ra­di­ograph­ic im­age, phys­i­cal sign, or oth­er mea­sure, that is not it­self a di­rect mea­sure­ment of clin­i­cal ben­e­fit, and (A) is known to pre­dict clin­i­cal ben­e­fit and could be used to sup­port tra­di­tion­al ap­proval of a drug or bi­o­log­i­cal prod­uct; or (B) is rea­son­ably like­ly to pre­dict clin­i­cal ben­e­fit and could be used to sup­port the ac­cel­er­at­ed ap­proval of a drug or bi­o­log­i­cal prod­uct in ac­cor­dance with sec­tion 506(c).”


First pub­lished here. Reg­u­la­to­ry Fo­cus is the flag­ship on­line pub­li­ca­tion of the Reg­u­la­to­ry Af­fairs Pro­fes­sion­als So­ci­ety (RAPS), the largest glob­al or­ga­ni­za­tion of and for those in­volved with the reg­u­la­tion of health­care and re­lat­ed prod­ucts, in­clud­ing med­ical de­vices, phar­ma­ceu­ti­cals, bi­o­log­ics and nu­tri­tion­al prod­ucts. Email news@raps.org for more in­for­ma­tion. 

Author

Zachary Brennan

managing editor, RAPS

John Hood [file photo]

UP­DATE: Cel­gene and the sci­en­tist who cham­pi­oned fe­dra­tinib's rise from Sanofi's R&D grave­yard win FDA OK

Six years after Sanofi gave it up for dead, the FDA has approved the myelofibrosis drug fedratinib, now owned by Celgene.

The drug will be sold as Inrebic, and will soon land in the portfolio at Bristol-Myers Squibb, which is finalizing a deal to acquire Celgene.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

UP­DAT­ED: AveX­is sci­en­tif­ic founder was axed — and No­var­tis names a new CSO in wake of an ethics scan­dal

Now at the center of a storm of controversy over its decision to keep its knowledge of manipulated data hidden from regulators during an FDA review, Novartis CEO Vas Narasimhan has found a longtime veteran in the ranks to head the scientific work underway at AveXis, where the incident occurred. And the scientific founder has hit the exit.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Ab­b­Vie gets its FDA OK for JAK in­hibitor upadac­i­tinib, but don’t look for this one to hit ex­ecs’ lofty ex­pec­ta­tions

Another big drug approval came through on Friday afternoon as the FDA OK’d AbbVie’s upadacitinib — an oral JAK1 inhibitor that is hitting the rheumatoid arthritis market with a black box warning of serious malignancies, infections and thrombosis reflecting fears associated with the class.

It will be sold as Rinvoq — at a wholesale price of $59,000 a year — and will likely soon face competition from a drug that AbbVie once controlled, and spurned. Reuters reports that a 4-week supply of Humira, by comparison, is $5,174, adding up to about $67,000 a year.

The top 10 fran­chise drugs in bio­phar­ma his­to­ry will earn a to­tal of $1.4T (tril­lion) by 2024 — what does that tell us?

Just in case you were looking for more evidence of just how important Amgen’s patent win on Enbrel is for the company and its investors, EvaluatePharma has come up with a forward-looking consensus estimate on what the list of top 10 drugs will look like in 2024.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

UP­DAT­ED: Sci­en­tist-CEO ac­cused of im­prop­er­ly us­ing con­fi­den­tial in­fo from uni­corn Alec­tor

The executive team at Alector $ALEC has a bone to pick with scientific co-founder Asa Abeliovich. Their latest quarterly rundown has this brief note buried inside:

On June 18, 2019, we initiated a confidential arbitration proceeding against Dr. Asa Abeliovich, our former consulting co-founder, related to alleged breaches of his consulting agreement and the improper use of our confidential information that he learned during the course of rendering services to us as our consulting Chief Scientific Officer/Chief Innovation Officer. We are in the early stage of this arbitration proceeding and are unable to assess or provide any assurances regarding its possible outcome.

There’s no explicit word in the filing on what kind of confidential info was involved, but the proceeding got started 2 days ahead of Abeliovich’s IPO.

Abeliovich, formerly a tenured associate professor at Columbia, is a top scientist in the field of neurodegeneration, which is where Alector is targeted. More recently, he’s also helped start up Prevail Therapeutics as the CEO, which raised $125 million in an IPO. And there he’s planning on working on new gene therapies that target genetically defined subpopulations of Parkinson’s disease. Followup programs target Gaucher disease, frontotemporal dementia and synucleinopathies.

But this time Abeliovich is the CEO rather than a founding scientist. And some of their pipeline overlaps with Alector’s.

Abeliovich and Prevail, though, aren’t taking this one lying down.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Chi­na has be­come a CEO-lev­el pri­or­i­ty for multi­na­tion­al phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal com­pa­nies: the trend and the im­pli­ca­tions

After a “hot” period of rapid growth between 2009 and 2012, and a relatively “cooler” period of slower growth from 2013 to 2015, China has once again become a top-of-mind priority for the CEOs of most large, multinational pharmaceutical companies.

At the International Pharma Forum, hosted in March in Beijing by the R&D Based Pharmaceutical Association Committee (RDPAC) and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), no fewer than seven CEOs of major multinational pharmaceutical firms participated, including GSK, Eli Lilly, LEO Pharma, Merck KGaA, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB. A few days earlier, the CEOs of several other large multinationals attended the China Development Forum, an annual business forum hosted by the research arm of China’s State Council. It’s hard to imagine any other country, except the US, having such drawing power at CEO level.

As dis­as­ter struck, Ab­b­Vie’s Rick Gon­za­lez swooped in on Al­ler­gan with an of­fer Brent Saun­ders couldn’t say no to

Early March was a no good, awful, terrible time for Allergan CEO Brent Saunders. His big lead drug had imploded in a Phase III disaster and activists were after his hide — or at least his chairman’s title — as the stock price continued a steady droop that had eviscerated share value for investors.

But it was a perfect time for AbbVie CEO Rick Gonzalez to pick up the phone and ask Saunders if he’d like to consider a “strategic” deal.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

CEO Pascal Soriot via Getty Images

As­traZeneca's jug­ger­naut PARP play­er Lyn­parza scoops up an­oth­er dom­i­nant win in PhI­II as the FDA adds a 'break­through' for Calquence

AstraZeneca’s oncology R&D group under José Baselga keeps churning out hits.

Wednesday morning the pharma giant and their partners at Merck parted the curtains on a successful readout for their Phase III PAOLA-1 study, demonstrating statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival for women with ovarian cancer in a first-line maintenance setting who added their PARP Lynparza to Avastin. This is their second late-stage success in ovarian cancer, which will help stave off rivals like GSK.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

ICER blasts FDA, PTC and Sarep­ta for high prices on DMD drugs Em­flaza, Ex­ondys 51

ICER has some strong words for PTC, Sarepta and the FDA as the US drug price watchdog concludes that as currently priced, their respective new treatments for Duchenne muscular dystrophy are decidedly not cost-effective.

The final report — which cements the conclusions of a draft issued in May — incorporates the opinion of a panel of 17 experts ICER convened in a public meeting last month. It also based its analysis of Emflaza (deflazacort) and Exondys 51 (eteplirsen) on updated annual costs of $81,400 and over $1 million, respectively, after citing “incorrect” lower numbers in the initial calculations.