Next-gen­er­a­tion se­quenc­ing: FDA of­fers guid­ance to stream­line path to mar­ket

The FDA on Thurs­day fi­nal­ized two guid­ance doc­u­ments re­lat­ed to next-gen­er­a­tion se­quenc­ing (NGS) and draft­ed new guid­ance on in­ves­ti­ga­tion­al in vit­ro di­ag­nos­tics (IVDs) in on­col­o­gy tri­als – all of which of­fer rec­om­men­da­tions to pro­vide test de­vel­op­ers with a more ef­fi­cient path to mar­ket.

The fi­nal­ized guid­ance doc­u­ments pro­vide NGS test de­vel­op­ers with rec­om­men­da­tions for de­sign­ing, de­vel­op­ing and val­i­dat­ing tests, as well as us­ing ge­net­ic vari­ant data­bas­es to sup­port clin­i­cal va­lid­i­ty.

Jef­frey Shuren

“The rapid adop­tion of NGS tech­nolo­gies in re­search and clin­i­cal set­tings is help­ing to iden­ti­fy count­less new ge­net­ic vari­ants. How­ev­er, in­for­ma­tion about ge­net­ic vari­ants is gen­er­al­ly stored in a man­ner that is not pub­licly ac­ces­si­ble,” ex­plained Jef­frey Shuren, di­rec­tor of FDA’s Cen­ter for De­vices and Ra­di­o­log­i­cal Health. “To­day’s re­lease of the FDA’s fi­nal guid­ance on ge­net­ic vari­ant data­bas­es will help change this par­a­digm by en­cour­ag­ing da­ta shar­ing and the ac­cu­mu­la­tion in pub­lic data­bas­es of ev­i­dence sup­port­ing the clin­i­cal va­lid­i­ty of ge­nom­ic tests to help pro­vide an even more ef­fi­cient path to mar­ket.”

The 7-page draft guid­ance, mean­while, de­scribes how spon­sors of cer­tain on­col­o­gy tri­als can use an op­tion­al stream­lined sub­mis­sion process to de­ter­mine whether use of an in­ves­ti­ga­tion­al IVD — in­clud­ing those that in­cor­po­rate NGS tech­nol­o­gy — in a tri­al of in­ves­ti­ga­tion­al can­cer drug or bi­o­log­i­cal prod­ucts is con­sid­ered sig­nif­i­cant risk, non­signif­i­cant risk or ex­empt from re­view.

Scott Got­tlieb

“This is a step to­ward our goal of hav­ing a com­mon fil­ing for a drug and di­ag­nos­tic sys­tem where the drug is co-de­vel­oped with a di­ag­nos­tic test,” FDA Com­mis­sion­er Scott Got­tlieb said in re­marks on Thurs­day.

Back­ground

NGS can en­able doc­tors to look across mil­lions of DNA changes that may de­ter­mine whether a per­son has or is at risk of de­vel­op­ing a ge­net­ic dis­ease, or to in­form treat­ment de­ci­sions, FDA ex­plained.

“The rapid adop­tion of NGS-based tests in both re­search and clin­i­cal prac­tice is lead­ing to iden­ti­fi­ca­tion of an in­creas­ing num­ber of ge­net­ic vari­ants (e.g., path­o­gen­ic, be­nign, and of un­known sig­nif­i­cance), in­clud­ing rare vari­ants that may be unique to a sin­gle in­di­vid­ual or fam­i­ly,” FDA said.

To date, FDA has au­tho­rized three NGS on­co-pan­els:

  • Foun­da­tionOne CDx, which was ap­proved in No­vem­ber 2017, and can de­tect ge­net­ic mu­ta­tions in 324 genes;
  • MSK-IM­PACT, al­so ap­proved in No­vem­ber 2017, which can de­tect ge­net­ic mu­ta­tions in 468 genes; and
  • On­comine Dx Tar­get Test, ap­proved in June 2017, which can de­tect ge­net­ic mu­ta­tions in 23 genes.

“Oth­er tests us­ing NGS tech­nol­o­gy au­tho­rized by FDA to date in­clude: Prax­is Ex­tend­ed RAS Pan­el (de­tects two genes) and Foun­da­tion­Fo­cus BR­CA (al­so de­tects two genes),” an FDA spokesper­son told Fo­cus.

“These pan­els can ac­cel­er­ate can­cer drug de­vel­op­ment and im­prove clin­i­cal out­comes by re­duc­ing pa­tient screen­ing time and costs. These tech­nolo­gies can help re­duce the risks as­so­ci­at­ed with the need for mul­ti­ple tis­sue biop­sies. And these plat­forms can be rapid­ly up­dat­ed to de­tect new onco­genes or gene vari­ants as these mark­ers are iden­ti­fied by re­searchers,” Got­tlieb ex­plained.

In 2017, FDA al­so took sev­er­al ac­tions to stream­line the de­vel­op­ment and re­view of a va­ri­ety of ge­net­ic-based tests – au­tho­riz­ing a third-par­ty op­tion for au­tho­riz­ing tu­mor pro­fil­ing tests, and out­lin­ing stan­dard­ized de­vel­op­ment cri­te­ria for con­sumer car­ri­er screen­ing tests to al­low for their mar­ket­ing with­out pri­or agency re­view. FDA al­so es­tab­lished such cri­te­ria for ge­net­ic health risk tests and pro­posed to al­low their mar­ket­ing af­ter a one-time agency re­view.

Fi­nal Guid­ance

One 41-page guid­ance fi­nal­ized Thurs­day, known as “Con­sid­er­a­tions for De­sign, De­vel­op­ment, and An­a­lyt­i­cal Val­i­da­tion of Next Gen­er­a­tion Se­quenc­ing (NGS)–Based In Vit­ro Di­ag­nos­tics (IVDs) In­tend­ed to Aid in the Di­ag­no­sis of Sus­pect­ed Germline Dis­eases,” pro­vides rec­om­men­da­tions for de­sign­ing, de­vel­op­ing and val­i­dat­ing NGS-based tests.

The guid­ance of­fers per­spec­tive on what the agency looks for in pre­mar­ket sub­mis­sions to de­ter­mine a test’s an­a­lyt­i­cal va­lid­i­ty, in­clud­ing how well the test de­tects the pres­ence or ab­sence of a ge­nom­ic change.

The oth­er 16-page guid­ance is­sued Thurs­day, ti­tled “Use of Pub­lic Hu­man Ge­net­ic Vari­ant Data­bas­es to Sup­port Clin­i­cal Va­lid­i­ty for Ge­net­ic and Ge­nom­ic-Based In Vit­ro Di­ag­nos­tics,” de­scribes how test de­vel­op­ers may re­ly on clin­i­cal ev­i­dence from FDA-rec­og­nized pub­lic data­bas­es to sup­port clin­i­cal claims.

The guid­ance de­scribes how prod­uct de­vel­op­ers can use these data­bas­es to sup­port the clin­i­cal val­i­da­tion of NGS tests that they are de­vel­op­ing. These pub­lic data­bas­es may in­clude re­sources like Clin­Gen, which is main­tained by the Na­tion­al In­sti­tutes of Health (NIH). Us­ing FDA-rec­og­nized data­bas­es will pro­vide test de­vel­op­ers with an ef­fi­cient path for mar­ket­ing clear­ance or ap­proval of a new test.

On 26 April, FDA will hold a we­bi­nar on the two fi­nal guid­ance doc­u­ments.


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. 

Health­care Dis­par­i­ties and Sick­le Cell Dis­ease

In the complicated U.S. healthcare system, navigating a serious illness such as cancer or heart disease can be remarkably challenging for patients and caregivers. When that illness is classified as a rare disease, those challenges can become even more acute. And when that rare disease occurs in a population that experiences health disparities, such as people with sickle cell disease (SCD) who are primarily Black and Latino, challenges can become almost insurmountable.

Jacob Van Naarden (Eli Lilly)

Ex­clu­sives: Eli Lil­ly out to crash the megablock­buster PD-(L)1 par­ty with 'dis­rup­tive' pric­ing; re­veals can­cer biotech buy­out

It’s taken 7 years, but Eli Lilly is promising to finally start hammering the small and affluent PD-(L)1 club with a “disruptive” pricing strategy for their checkpoint therapy allied with China’s Innovent.

Lilly in-licensed global rights to sintilimab a year ago, building on the China alliance they have with Innovent. That cost the pharma giant $200 million in cash upfront, which they plan to capitalize on now with a long-awaited plan to bust up the high-price market in lung cancer and other cancers that have created a market worth tens of billions of dollars.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

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

So what hap­pened with No­var­tis' gene ther­a­py group? Here's your an­swer

Over the last couple of days it’s become clear that the gene therapy division at Novartis has quietly undergone a major reorganization. We learned on Monday that Dave Lennon, who had pursued a high-profile role as president of the unit with 1,500 people, had left the pharma giant to take over as CEO of a startup.

Like a lot of the majors, Novartis is an open highway for head hunters, or anyone looking to staff a startup. So that was news but not completely unexpected.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

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

Who are the women su­per­charg­ing bio­phar­ma R&D? Nom­i­nate them for this year's spe­cial re­port

The biotech industry has faced repeated calls to diversify its workforce — and in the last year, those calls got a lot louder. Though women account for just under half of all biotech employees around the world, they occupy very few places in C-suites, and even fewer make it to the helm.

Some companies are listening, according to a recent BIO survey which showed that this year’s companies were 2.5 times more likely to have a diversity and inclusion program compared to last year’s sample. But we still have a long way to go. Women represent just 31% of biotech executives, BIO reported. And those numbers are even more stark for women of color.

David Meek, new Mirati CEO (Marlene Awaad/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Fresh off Fer­Gene's melt­down, David Meek takes over at Mi­rati with lead KRAS drug rac­ing to an ap­proval

In the insular world of biotech, a spectacular failure can sometimes stay on any executive’s record for a long time. But for David Meek, the man at the helm of FerGene’s recent implosion, two questionable exits made way for what could be an excellent rebound.

Meek, most recently FerGene’s CEO and a past head at Ipsen, has become CEO at Mirati Therapeutics, taking the reins from founding CEO Charles Baum, who will step over into the role of president and head of R&D, according to a release.

Vicente Anido (University of West Virginia via YouTube)

Aerie fires CEO af­ter lead pro­gram flop, com­ments about pri­ma­ry end­points be­ing 'not re­quired'

Aerie Pharmaceuticals CEO Vicente Anido has left the company less than a week after trying to chart a Phase III study in the wake of a serious Phase IIb flop.

Anido’s last day at Aerie was Friday, the biotech announced in a news release Tuesday morning, and Benjamin McGraw is taking his place in an interim role. The now former CEO was terminated without cause, according to an SEC filing.

The board has started looking for a full-time chief to take his place.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 117,900+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

When ef­fi­ca­cy is bor­der­line: FDA needs to get more con­sis­tent on close-call drug ap­provals, agency-fund­ed re­search finds

In the exceedingly rare instances in which clinical efficacy is the only barrier to a new drug’s approval, new FDA-funded research from FDA and Stanford found that the agency does not have a consistent standard for defining “substantial evidence” when flexible criteria are used for an approval.

The research comes as the FDA is at a crossroads with its expedited-review pathways. The accelerated approval pathway is under fire as the agency recently signed off on a controversial new Alzheimer’s drug, with little precedent to explain its decision. Meanwhile, top officials like Rick Pazdur have called for a major push to simplify and clarify all of the various expedited pathways, which have grown to be must-haves for sponsors of nearly every newly approved drug.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 117,900+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Lat­est news: It’s a no on uni­ver­sal boost­ers; Pa­tient death stuns gene ther­a­py field; In­side Tril­li­um’s $2.3B turn­around; and more

Welcome back to Endpoints Weekly, your review of the week’s top biopharma headlines. Want this in your inbox every Saturday morning? Current Endpoints readers can visit their reader profile to add Endpoints Weekly. New to Endpoints? Sign up here.

Next week is shaping up to be a busy one, as our editor-in-chief John Carroll and managing editor Kyle Blankenship lead back-to-back discussions with a great group of experts to discuss the weekend news and trends. John will be spending 30 minutes with Jake Van Naarden, the CEO of Lilly Oncology, and Kyle has a brilliant panel lined up: Harvard’s Cigall Kadoch, Susan Galbraith, the new head of cancer R&D at AstraZeneca, Roy Baynes at Merck, and James Christensen at Mirati. Don’t miss out on the action — sign up here.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 117,900+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Jay Bradner (Jeff Rumans for Endpoints News)

Div­ing deep­er in­to in­her­it­ed reti­nal dis­or­ders, No­var­tis gob­bles up an­oth­er bite-sized op­to­ge­net­ics biotech

Right about a year ago, a Novartis team led by Jay Bradner and Cynthia Grosskreutz at NIBR swooped in to scoop up a Cambridge, MA-based opthalmology gene therapy company called Vedere. Their focus was on a specific market niche: inherited retinal dystrophies that include a wide range of genetic retinal disorders marked by the loss of photoreceptor cells and progressive vision loss.

But that was just the first deal that whet their appetite.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 117,900+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.