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. 

Author

Zachary Brennan

managing editor, RAPS

UP­DAT­ED: A small, ob­scure biotech just won big with their IPO. In this mar­ket. Are you kid­ding me?

How could a small, largely unknown biotech that emerged from stealth mode just months ago with early-stage cancer programs jump onto Wall Street in the middle of a Category 6 financial hurricane and sail through with a $165 million IPO?

And what does that mean for the rest of the industry waiting to see just how much damage global lockdowns will wreak on clinical development?

The biotech is a company called Zentalis. The crew there nabbed an $85 million crossover round late last year — notably waiting 5 years before waving the numbers around to attract attention, according to my read of a FierceBiotech story. Perceptive joined in, but the syndicate was not in general the kind of marquee affair that gets tongues wagging.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

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

Gilead CEO Daniel O'Day attends a meeting with the President and other biopharma leaders at the White House on March 2, 2020 (AP Photo)

Ramp­ing up glob­al pro­duc­tion of remde­sivir, Gilead CEO Dan O’Day de­tails plans to dis­trib­ute 1.5M dos­es to fight Covid-19 — for free

Gilead is still some days away from turning the card on its first round of data on remdesivir’s ability to fight severe cases of Covid-19, but the big biotech is ramping up an emergency supply of a million courses of therapy as it starts free distribution of the drug to tens of thousands of patients under their compassionate use and expanded access program as well as clinical trials.

In his latest open letter posted over the weekend, Gilead CEO Dan O’Day outlined how the company has been successful in cutting production time on remdesivir while repurposing some of their own facilities and turning to contract manufacturers to build a near-term supply of 1.5 million doses. They are still working on efficacy and dosing, but that supply could cover 140,000 courses of treatment. That supply, he added, would be more widely available following a potential approval.

Bob Nelsen at the Milken Institute Global Conference on April 29, 2019 in Beverly Hills, California. (Photo by Michael Kovac/Getty Images)

ARCH chief Bob Nelsen has $1.5B to prove 2 sim­ple points: ‘We’re in the most in­no­v­a­tive time ever’ and in­vestors are stay­ing

ARCH co-founder and managing director Bob Nelsen has a well known yen for the home run swing, betting big on potentially transformative meds and tech and the biotech teams he helps bring together. He thrives and bleeds on the cutting edge. And now Nelsen and the ARCH group have debuted 2 big funds to prove that this is the time for the best of biotech to shine — deadly pandemic be damned.

Two new funds, ARCH Venture Fund X and ARCH Venture Fund X Overage, gathered a combined $1.46 billion. And that’s a record. ARCH Venture Fund IX and ARCH Venture Fund IX Overage closed in 2016 with a combined $1.1 billion. ARCH Venture Fund VIII and ARCH Venture Fund VIII Overage closed in 2014 with a combined $560 million.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Have a new drug that promis­es to fight Covid-19? The FDA promis­es fast ac­tion but some de­vel­op­ers aren't hap­py

After providing an emergency approval to use malaria drugs against coronavirus with little actual evidence of their efficacy or safety in that setting, the FDA has already proven that it has set aside the gold standard when it comes to the pandemic. And now regulators have spelled out a new approach to speeding development that promises immediate responses in no uncertain terms — promising a program offering the ultimate high-speed pathway to Covid-19 drug approvals.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Once fu­ri­ous over No­var­tis’ da­ta ma­nip­u­la­tion scan­dal, the FDA now says it’s noth­ing they need to take ac­tion on

Back in the BP era — Before Pandemic — the FDA ripped Novartis for its decision to keep the agency in the dark about manipulated data used in its application for Zolgensma while its marketing application for the gene therapy was under review.

Civil and criminal sanctions were being discussed, the agency noted in a rare broadside at one of the world’s largest pharma companies. Notable lawmakers cheered the angry regulators on, urging the FDA to make an example of Novartis, which fielded Zolgensma at $2.1 million — the current record for a one-off therapy.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Covid-19 roundup: GSK, Am­gen tai­lor R&D work to fit the coro­n­avirus age; Doud­na's ge­nomics crew launch­es di­ag­nos­tic lab

You can add Amgen and GSK to the list of deep-pocket drug R&D players who are tailoring their pipeline work to fit a new age of coronavirus.

Following in the footsteps of a lineup of big players like Eli Lilly — which has suspended patient recruitment for drug studies — Amgen and GSK have opted to take a more tailored approach. Amgen is intent on circling the wagons around key studies that are already fully enrolled, and GSK has the red light on new studies while the pandemic plays out.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

In a stun­ning set­back, Amarin los­es big patent fight over Vas­cepa IP. And its high-fly­ing stock crash­es to earth

Amarin’s shares $AMRN were blitzed Monday evening, losing billions in value as reports spread that the company had lost its high-profile effort to keep its Vascepa patents protected from generic drugmakers.

Amarin had been fighting to keep key patents under lock and key — and away from generic rivals — for another 10 years, but District Court Judge Miranda Du in Las Vegas ruled against the biotech. She ruled that:
(A)ll the Asserted Claims are invalid as obvious under 35 U.S.C.§ 103. Thus, the Court finds in favor of Defendants on Plaintiff’s remaining infringementclaim, and in their favor on their counterclaims asserting the invalidity of the AssertedClaims under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Aaron Royston, venBio

In­vest­ing in the time of coro­n­avirus: the good, the bad and the hope­ful, as biotech VC firms close funds worth $3B

Apart from disrupting biopharma R&D and regulatory timelines, the coronavirus pandemic has inevitably ravaged financial markets and eroded investor risk appetite. Investing in the time of coronavirus feels reckless, but if biotech venture funds are any indication, the time is ripe.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,400+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Drug dis­cov­ery in the age of coro­n­avirus

Developing new drugs is incredibly hard. That’s why, despite superhuman efforts from the industry, we’re still looking at 12-18 months minimum before we can realistically hope for a vaccine for Covid-19, and probably months before there’s a proven viable drug treatment.

But our increasing ability to begin to industrialize the drug discovery and development process through an engineering approach means that we have more hope for speeding up this process than ever before — and not just to defeat coronavirus, but to benefit the development of all new medicines in the future.