While last week’s marathon Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee meeting to consider accelerated approvals for cancer drugs that didn’t demonstrate effectiveness in confirmatory trials was a good step forward, oncologists need the FDA to do more to ensure drug labeling truly reflects the benefit of the product.
The FDA’s Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee voted 6-2 April 29 to recommend withdrawing accelerated approval for Merck & Co. Inc.’s Keytruda (pembrolizumab) as a third-line treatment for a subgroup of patients with recurrent locally advanced or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer. The vote was based on FDA assurances that, if it withdrew the approval, it would work with Merck to delay the withdrawal or set up an access program to ensure the estimated 1,000 patients who are beyond first-line treatment could still get Keytruda.
In the final part of its three-day meeting on accelerated approvals granted to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies, the FDA’s Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee (ODAC) voted unanimously to continue the accelerated approval for Merck & Co. Inc.’s Keytruda (pembrolizumab) as a therapy for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who have been previously treated with sorafenib (Nexavar, Bayer AG).
As part of a U.S. FDA evaluation of confirmatory trials for anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies, the agency’s Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee (ODAC) is being asked this week to consider whether three blockbuster biologics should continue to be available for certain cancer indications for which they received accelerated approval. At question is whether the data from the confirmatory trials for the Roche Group’s Tecentriq (atezolizumab), Merck & Co. Inc.’s Keytruda (pembrolizumab) and Bristol Myers Squibb Co.’s Opdivo (nivolumab) has proved sufficient benefit in particular indications and, if not, whether alternative or ongoing trials could do so.
Oncology drugs that have racked up a number of indications through accelerated approvals are losing some of those indications as the result of an FDA industrywide evaluation of confirmatory trials that didn’t back up the approvals.
PERTH, Australia – Although Australians pay less for their drugs than patients in many other countries, Australia is falling behind when it comes to reimbursement for newer, targeted therapies, according to a report launched by Medicines Australia that assessed the timelines for registration and reimbursement of new medicines in Australia compared to 10 other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries.
The latest global regulatory news, changes and updates affecting biopharma, including: Price not so NICE for routine use of Opdivo in melanoma; MHRA updates EAMS guidance; HHS plans retrospective regulatory review; USPTO sees spike in AI-related patent applications.
At its October meeting, the EMA’s Committee for Human Medicinal Products (CHMP) voted in favor of 11 new therapies, two of them for treating cancers and two for treating HIV-1. The European Commission will review the recommendations and make its decisions by the end of 2020.
Gastric cancers were the focus of the final plenary session of the European Society for Medical Oncology’s Virtual Congress 2020. Results from the Checkmate-649, ATTRACTION-4, and Keynote-590 studies showed that advanced gastroesophageal tumors can benefit from first-line treatment with PD-1 checkpoint blockers in addition to chemotherapy, staving off progression and death by a few months.
One of the highlights of the first presidential program at this year’s European Society for Medical Oncology 2020 Virtual Congress were results from the Checkmate 9ER study by Toni Choueiri, who is the director of the Lank Center for Genitourinary Oncology at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Checkmate 9ER tested the use of a combination of checkpoint blocker Opdivo (nivolumab, Bristol Myers Squibb Co.) and receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor Cabometyx (cabozantinib, Exelixis Inc.) as first-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma.
