FDA Approval Summary: Ivosidenib in Combination with Azacitidine for Treatment of Patients with Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia with an IDH1 Mutation

On May 25, 2022, FDA approved a supplemental application for ivosidenib (Tibsovo; Servier) extending the indication in patients with newly diagnosed IDH1-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in older adults or those with comorbidities to include the combination with azacitidine. The efficacy of ivosidenib in combination with azacitidine was evaluated in Study AG120-C-009, a phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized (1:1), controlled study of ivosidenib or matched placebo in combination with azacitidine in adults with previously untreated AML with an IDH1 mutation who were 75 years or older or had comorbidities that precluded use of intensive induction chemotherapy. Efficacy was established on the basis of improved event-free survival and overall survival on the ivosidenib + azacitidine arm [HR, 0.35; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.17-0.72; P = 0.0038, and HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.27-0.73; P = 0.0010], respectively. Furthermore, the rate and duration of complete remission (CR) were improved with ivosidenib versus placebo [CR 47% versus 15%, two-sided P < 0.0001; median duration of CR not estimable (NE; 95% CI, 13.0-NE) months versus 11.2 (95% CI, 3.2-NE) months. The safety profile of ivosidenib in combination with azacitidine was consistent with that of ivosidenib monotherapy, with important adverse reactions including differentiation syndrome (15%) and QT interval prolongation (20%).

Highlights of FDA Oncology Approvals in 2023: Bispecific T-cell Engagers, Pediatric Indications, and Inclusive Drug Development

SUMMARY

Cancer drug development remained robust in 2023. Highlights of U.S. drug approvals this year include new immunotherapies and targeted drug development in adult and pediatric patients as well as patients with rare diseases.

Considerations for Drug Development in Myelodysplastic Syndromes

Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) have historically been challenging diseases for drug development due to their biology, preclinical modeling, and the affected patient population. In April 2022, the FDA convened a panel of regulators and academic experts in MDS to discuss approaches to improve MDS drug development. The panel reviewed challenges in MDS clinical trial design and endpoints and outlined considerations for future trial design in MDS to facilitate drug development to meaningfully meet patient needs. Challenges for defining clinical benefit in patients with MDS include cumbersome response criteria, standardized transfusion thresholds, and application and validation of patient reported outcome instruments. Clinical trials should reflect the biology of disease evolution, the advanced age of patients with MDS, and how patients are treated in real-world settings to maximize the likelihood of identifying active drugs. In patients with lower-risk disease, response criteria for anemic patients should be based on baseline transfusion dependency, improvement in symptoms, and quality of life. For higher-risk patients with MDS, trials should include guidance to prevent dose reductions or delays that could limit efficacy, specify minimal durations of treatment (in the absence of toxicity or progression), and have endpoints focused on overall survival and durable responses. MDS trials should be designed from the outset to allow the practicable application of new therapies in this high-needs population, with drugs that can be administered and tolerated in community settings, and with endpoints that meaningfully improve patients' lives over existing therapies.

Comparative Expedited Regulatory Programs of U.S Food & Drug Administration and Project Orbis Partners

Project Orbis was initiated in May 2019 by the Oncology Center of Excellence to facilitate faster patient access to innovative cancer therapies by providing a framework for concurrent submissions and review of oncology products among international partners. Since its inception, Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), Canada's Health Canada (HC), Singapore's Health Sciences Authority (HSA), Switzerland's Swissmedic (SMC), Brazil's National Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA), United Kingdom's Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), and most recently Israel's Ministry of Health (IMoH) Medical Technologies, Health Information, Innovation and Research (MTIIR) Directorate, have joined Project Orbis. While each country has its own expedited review pathways to bring promising therapies to patients, there are some similarities and differences in pathways and timelines. FDA's fast-track designation and MHRA's marketing authorization under exceptional circumstances (MAEC) allow non-clinical and limited clinical evidence to support approval under these programs. HC's Extraordinary Use New Drug (EUND) pathway allows granting exceptional use authorization with limited clinical evidence. ANVISA, HSA, MTIIR, and TGA do not have standard pathways that allow non-clinical evidence and limited clinical evidence. While there is no definite regulatory pathway for HSA, the current framework for approval does allow flexibility in the type of data (non-clinical or clinical) required to demonstrate the benefit-risk profile of a product. HSA may register a product if the agency is satisfied that the overall benefit outweighs the risk. All Project Orbis Partner (POP) countries have similar programs to the FDA accelerated approval program except ANVISA. Although HSA and MTIIR do not have defined pathways for accelerated approval programs, there are opportunities to request accelerated approval per these agencies. All POP countries have pathways like the FDA priority review except MHRA. Priority review timelines for new drugs range from 120 to 264 calendar days (cd). Standard review timelines for new drugs range from 180 to 365 cd.

Project Confirm: Accelerated Drug Approvals for Chronic Myeloid Leukemia

The FDA has an accelerated approval program for drugs that have been identified as promising treatments for serious conditions when the available data suggest that the benefits outweigh the foreseeable risks. All of the currently available treatment options for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) initially went through the accelerated approval program. Here, a group of academic CML experts, patient panelists, and members from the FDA convened to discuss the utility of the accelerated approval program as it pertains to CML, and the utility of this program in future drug development in this disease. The results of that discussion are summarized here.

The Impact of Improved Treatments on Survival of Adult US Leukemia Patients: 1990 - 2018

INTRODUCTION

Molecularly targeted therapies such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are effective treatments for BCR-ABL-bearing leukemias. We evaluated the impact of TKIs on historical chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) mortality trends compared to acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and chronic lymphoblastic leukemia (CLL).

METHODS

Since mortality trends reflect combined effects of leukemia incidence and survival, we also evaluated the contribution of incidence and survival trends to mortality trends by subtypes. We used data from 13 US SEER registries (1992-2017) among US adults. We utilized histology codes to identify cases of CML, ALL, and CLL and death certificate data to calculate mortality. We used Joinpoint to characterize incidence (1992-2017) and mortality (1992-2018) trends by subtype and diagnosis year.

RESULTS

For CML, mortality rates started declining in 1998 at an average rate of 12% annually. Imatinib was approved by the FDA for treating CML and ALL in 2001, leading to clear benefits for CML patients. Five-year CML survival increased dramatically over time, especially between 1996-2011, 2.3% per year on average. ALL incidence increased 1.5% annually from 1992-2017. ALL mortality decreased 0.6% annually during 1992-2012 and then stopped declining. CLL incidence fluctuated during 1992-2017 while mortality decreased 1.1% annually during 1992-2011 and at a faster rate of 3.6% per year from 2011. Five-year survival increased 0.7% per year on average during 1992-2016.

CONCLUSIONS

Survival benefit from TKIs and other novel therapies for treating leukemia subtypes has been demonstrated in clinical trials.

IMPACT

Our study highlights the impact of molecularly targeted therapies at the population level.

FDA analysis of ineligibility for acute myeloid leukemia clinical trials by race and ethnicity

BACKGROUND

Patients of certain racial and ethnic groups have been underrepresented in clinical trials for treatment of malignancy. One potential barrier to participation is entry requirements that lead to patients in various racial and ethnic groups not meeting eligibility criteria for studies (ie, "screen failure"). The objective of this study was to analyze the rates and reasons for trial ineligibility by race and ethnicity in trials of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 2016 and 2019.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Multicenter, global clinical trials submitted to the FDA to support AML drugs and biologics. We examined the rate of ineligibility among participants screened for studies of AML therapies submitted to the FDA from 2016 to 2019. Data were extracted from 13 trials used in approval evaluations, including race, screen status, and reason for ineligibility.

RESULTS

Overall, patients in historically underrepresented racial and ethnic groups were less likely to meet entry criteria for studies compared to White patients, with 26.7% of White patients, 29.4% of Black patients, and 35.9% of Asian patients not meeting entry criteria. Lack of relevant disease mutation was the reason for ineligibility more frequently among Black and Asian patients. The findings were limited by the small number of underrepresented patients screened for participation.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that entry requirements for studies may put underrepresented patients at a disadvantage, leading to less eligible patients and thus lower participation in clinical trials.

Use of Single-Arm Trials for US Food and Drug Administration Drug Approval in Oncology, 2002-2021

Importance

Single-arm trials have allowed for transformative therapies to be made available to patients expeditiously. However, using single-arm trials to support drug approval presents several challenges that must be carefully considered.

Observations

Between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration granted 176 new malignant hematology and oncology indications based on single-arm trials, including 116 accelerated approvals (AAs) and 60 traditional approvals. Overall, 87 approvals (49%) were for new molecular entities or original biologics and 89 (51%) were supplemental indications. Response rate (RR) was the most common end point used to support approval in these single-arm trials (173 of 176 [98%]). Of the 116 AAs based on single-arm trials, 45 (38%) fulfilled their postmarketing requirement to verify clinical benefit, 61 (52%) are pending verification of benefit, and 10 (9%) were withdrawn from the market as of December 31, 2021. Most (56 of 61 [92%]) AAs based on single-arm trials pending verification of benefit occurred during the previous 5 years and have ongoing confirmatory trials as of December 2021.

Conclusions and Relevance

Single-arm trials have been a common development strategy to support regulatory approval as early-stage expansion cohorts with promising durable RRs have become more prevalent. In the appropriate context, single-arm trials using durable RRs can allow patients expedited access to novel therapies and will continue to serve a role in advancing drug development in oncology. However, single-arm trials have a smaller noncomparative safety data set, inability to use time-to-event end points, and other limitations that require careful consideration within the context of the disease and available therapies. The randomized clinical trial remains the preferred approach in clinical investigation.

FDA Approval Summary: Decitabine and Cedazuridine Tablets for Myelodysplastic Syndromes

On July 7, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration approved Inqovi (Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co.), an oral fixed-dose combination tablet comprising 35 mg decitabine, a hypomethylating agent, and 100 mg cedazuridine, a cytidine deaminase inhibitor (abbreviated DEC-C) for treatment of adult patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). Evidence of effectiveness of DEC-C was established in phase III ASTX727-02 (N = 133) in adults with MDS. The study involved a two-sequence crossover comparing DEC-C and intravenous (IV) decitabine 20 mg/m2 once daily for the first 5 days of each 28-day cycle in the first 2 cycles. From cycle 3 onward, patients received DEC-C. Five-day cumulative area under the curve (5-d AUC) of decitabine for DEC-C was similar to that of IV decitabine, with geometric mean ratio 0.99 (90% confidence interval: 0.93-1.06). Clinical benefit was supported by study ASTX727-02 and the similarly designed phase II study ASTX727-01-B (n = 80), with complete remission (CR) of 21% and 18% and median duration of CR 7.5 and 8.7 months, respectively. Adverse reactions were consistent with IV decitabine. Postmarketing assessments were issued to address the effect of cedazuridine on QT prolongation, food effect, moderate and severe hepatic impairment, and severe renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics and safety of DEC-C.

FDA Approval Summary: Oral Azacitidine for Continued Treatment of Adults with Acute Myeloid Leukemia Unable to Complete Intensive Curative Therapy

On September 1, 2020, the FDA granted approval for oral azacitidine (Onureg, CC-486) for continued treatment of adult patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who achieved complete remission (CR) or complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi) following intensive induction chemotherapy and who are not able to complete intensive curative therapy. Approval was based on improvement in overall survival using CC-486 300 mg daily in a 2 weeks on/2 weeks off schedule in comparison with placebo (HR, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.86; P = 0.0009) in the randomized trial CC-486-AML-001 (QUAZAR) in adults ≥ 55 years old with AML in CR/CRi who did not complete standard intensive induction and postremission therapy. Of note, the study was not designed to test CC-486 as maintenance after standard postremission therapy or as an alternative to standard postremission therapy. Gastrointestinal toxicities, fatigue, and pneumonia were more common in patients treated with CC-486 compared with placebo. Additional studies are needed to establish safe dosing for patients with hepatic impairment. The pharmacokinetic parameters, recommended dose, and recommended schedule of CC-486 differ substantially from those of other azacitidine formulations; therefore, inappropriate substitutions between formulations pose a considerable risk for harm.

Response Rate, Event-Free Survival, and Overall Survival in Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia: US Food and Drug Administration Trial-Level and Patient-Level Analyses

PURPOSE

To explore trial-level and patient-level associations between response (complete remission [CR] and CR + CR with incomplete hematologic [CRi] or platelet [CRp] recovery), event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS) in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) trials of intensive chemotherapy.

METHODS

We identified data from eight randomized, active-controlled trials of intensive chemotherapy submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration for treatment of newly diagnosed AML (N = 4,482). Associations between trial-level odds ratios (ORs) for CR and CR + CRi or CRp, and hazard ratios (HRs) for EFS and OS were analyzed using weighted linear regression models. We performed patient-level responder analyses to compare OS by response using pooled data from all studies.

RESULTS

In trial-level analyses, association between HR for OS and OR for CR was moderate (R² = 0.49; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.86), as was the association with OR for CR + CRi or CRp (R² = 0.48; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.99). For OS versus EFS, a strong association was observed (R² = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.98) when EFS definitions were harmonized across trials using raw data. In the patient-level responder analyses, patients who achieved CR had better OS compared with CRi or CRp responders (0.73; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.84) and nonresponders (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.37).

CONCLUSION

On a trial level, there is a moderate association between OS and CR rate. A strong association between EFS and OS was observed. However, CIs were wide, and results became moderate using alternative definitions for EFS. Patient-level analyses showed CR responders have better OS compared with CRi or CRp responders and nonresponders. A therapy in newly diagnosed AML with benefit in EFS or substantial benefit in CR rate would be likely to have an OS effect.

FDA Approval Summary: Revised Indication and Dosing Regimen for Ponatinib Based on the Results of the OPTIC Trial

On December 18, 2020, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a supplemental application for ponatinib extending the indication in patients with chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CP-CML) to patients with resistance or intolerance of at least 2 prior kinase inhibitors. Ponatinib was initially approved in December 2012 but was briefly voluntarily withdrawn due to serious safety concerns including the risk of arterial occlusive events (AOE). It returned to the market in December 2013 with an indication limited to patients with T315I mutation or for whom no other tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy was indicated with revised warnings and precautions. A post-marketing requirement was issued to identify the optimal safe and effective dose for CP-CML. Thus, the OPTIC trial was performed, which randomized patients to 1 of 3 doses, 45 mg, 30 mg, or 15 mg, with a dose reduction to 15 mg on achievement of MR2 (BCR-ABLIS ≤1%). Patients enrolled were treated with at least 2 prior TKIs or had a T315I mutation. Patients with a history of clinically significant, uncontrolled, or active cardiovascular disease were excluded. Efficacy was established on an interim analysis based on the rate of MR2 at 12 months in the modified intent-to-treat population of 261 patients, with 88, 86, and 87 patients in the 45, 30, and 15 mg cohorts, respectively. With a median follow-up of 28 months, the rate of achievement of MR2 at 12 months was 42%, 28%, and 24% in the respective cohorts. The safety profile was consistent with that observed in prior evaluations of ponatinib with notable adverse reactions including pancreatitis, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, liver dysfunction, and AOE. Of patients treated at the 45/15 mg dose, AOEs were seen in 13%, with a higher rate being observed in patients age 65 or older compared to younger patients. A readjudication of AOEs seen on the prior pivotal phase 2 study resulted in a rate of 26%. Overall, the results supported a modification of the recommended dose for patients with CP-CML to 45 mg until the achievement of MR2 followed by a reduction to 15 mg. The expansion of the indication to patients with exposure to 2 prior TKIs was approved given data showing that ponatinib could be successfully used for the treatment of this population with appropriate monitoring and screening for risk factors.

Project 2025: Proposals for the Continued Success of Drug Development in Acute Myeloid Leukemia

The Food and Drug Administration Oncology Center of Excellence initiated Project 2025 to develop five-year goals in specific areas of oncology drug development. This meeting, in October 2020, brought together a panel of regulators and academic experts in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) to discuss opportunities to maximize the success that has recently occurred in AML drug development. The panel discussed challenges and opportunities in clinical trial design and novel endpoints, and outlined key considerations for drug development to facilitate continued growth in the field.

FDA Approval Summary: Nivolumab with Ipilimumab and Chemotherapy for Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer, A Collaborative Project Orbis Review

On May 26, 2020, the FDA approved nivolumab with ipilimumab and two cycles of platinum-doublet chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic or recurrent non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with no EGFR or anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) genomic tumor aberrations. The approval was based on results from Study CA2099LA (CheckMate 9LA), an open-label trial in which 719 patients with NSCLC were randomized to receive nivolumab with ipilimumab and two cycles of chemotherapy (n = 361) or four cycles of platinum-doublet chemotherapy (n = 358). Overall survival (OS) was improved for patients who received nivolumab with ipilimumab and chemotherapy, with a median OS of 14.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 13.2-16.2] compared with 10.7 months (95% CI, 9.5-12.5) for patients who received chemotherapy (HR, 0.69; 96.71% CI, 0.55-0.87; P = 0.0006). Progression-free survival and overall response rate per blinded independent central review were also statistically significant. This was the first NSCLC application reviewed under FDA's Project Orbis, in collaboration with Singapore's Health Sciences Authority, Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration, and Health Canada. The benefit-risk analysis supports FDA's approval of nivolumab with ipilimumab and chemotherapy.

Subgroup Analyses in Oncology Trials: Regulatory Considerations and Case Examples

Subgroup analyses are assessments of treatment effects based on certain patient characteristics out of the total study population and are important for interpretation of pivotal oncology trials. However, appropriate use of subgroup analyses results for regulatory decision-making and product labeling is challenging. Typically, drugs approved by the FDA are indicated for use in the total patient population studied; however, there are examples of restriction to a subgroup of patients despite positive study results in the entire study population and also extension of an indication to the entire study population despite positive results appearing primarily in one or more subgroups. In this article, we summarize key issues related to subgroup analyses in the benefit-risk assessment of cancer drugs and provide case examples to illustrate approaches that the FDA Oncology Center of Excellence has taken when considering the appropriate patient population for cancer drug approval. In general, if a subgroup is of interest, the subgroup analysis should be hypothesis-driven and have adequate sample size to demonstrate evidence of a treatment effect. In addition to statistical efficacy considerations, the decision on what subgroups to include in labeling relies on the pathophysiology of the disease, mechanistic justification, safety data, and external information available. The oncology drug review takes the totality of the data into consideration during the decision-making process to ensure the indication granted and product labeling appropriately reflect the scientific evidence to support patient population for whom the drug is safe and effective.

Project Orbis: Global Collaborative Review Program

In 2019, the FDA Oncology Center of Excellence launched Project Orbis, a global collaborative review program to facilitate faster patient access to innovative cancer therapies across multiple countries. Project Orbis aims for concurrent submission, review, and regulatory action for high-impact clinically significant marketing applications among the participating partner countries. Current Project Orbis partners (POP) include the regulatory health authorities (RHA) of Australia, Brazil, Canada, Singapore, and Switzerland. Project Orbis leverages the existing scientific and regulatory partnerships between the various RHA under mutual confidentiality agreements. While FDA serves as the primary coordinator for application selection and review, each country remains fully independent on their final regulatory decision. In the first year of Project Orbis (June 2019 to June 2020), a total of 60 oncology marketing applications were received, representing 16 unique projects, and resulting in 38 approvals. New molecular entities, also known as new active substances, comprised 28% of the received marketing applications. The median time gap between FDA and Orbis submission dates was 0.6 months with a range of -0.8 to 9.0 months. Across the program, the median time-to-approval was similar between FDA (4.2 months, range 0.9-6.9, N = 18) and the POP (4.4 months, range 1.7-6.8, N = 20). Participating countries have signified a strong commitment for continuation and growth of the program. Project Orbis expansion considerations include the addition of more countries and management of more complex applications.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration: Initial Experience with the Real-Time Oncology Review Program

The FDA Oncology Center of Excellence commenced the Real-Time Oncology Review (RTOR) pilot project in February 2018 to facilitate earlier submission of topline results and datasets to support an earlier start to the FDA application review. RTOR was initially begun to support supplemental drug applications to add new indications, dosing regimens, or other clinical information to the prescribing information, but was later expanded to include original new drug applications and biological license applications for new molecular entities (NME). From February 2018 to April 2020, RTOR was used to support the submission and review of drug approvals for 20 oncology applications (11 for solid tumor and nine for hematologic malignancy indications). Two were NME drug approvals and 18 were supplemental approvals. All of the applications received priority review and nine (45%) applications had received breakthrough therapy designation status. FDA received the RTOR submissions a median of 5.7 weeks (range 1.7-16.2 weeks) prior to the full application submission. The median time from application submission to FDA approval was 3.3 months (range 0.4-5.9 months). RTOR was also integrated with other review programs including the Assessment Aid and Project Orbis programs. Innovative regulatory processes are critical to expedite the rigorous review of impactful products across the FDA.

Differentiation Syndrome with Ivosidenib and Enasidenib Treatment in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory IDH-Mutated AML: A U.S. Food and Drug Administration Systematic Analysis

PURPOSE

Differentiation syndrome (DS) is a serious adverse reaction of isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) inhibitors ivosidenib and enasidenib in patients with (IDH)1- and IDH2-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML), respectively.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

During FDA review of marketing applications for ivosidenib and enasidenib, data from pivotal trials were queried to identify cases of DS in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML. One hundred seventy-nine patients with R/R AML received ivosidenib and 214 received enasidenib. Adverse events, labs, and vital signs in the first 90 days of treatment were screened per diagnostic criteria, and narratives were reviewed to adjudicate DS cases.

RESULTS

We identified 72 of 179 (40%) potential cases for ivosidenib and 86 of 214 (40%) for enasidenib; 34 of 179 (19%) and 41 of 214 (19%) were adjudicated as DS. Leukocytosis was present in 79% and 61% of cases, respectively. Median (range) time to onset was 20 (1-78) and 19 (1-86) days. Grade ≥ 3 adverse reactions occurred in 68% and 66%; 6% and 5% were fatal. Univariate analyses suggested baseline bone marrow blasts ≥ 48% and peripheral blood blasts ≥ 25% and 15% for ivosidenib and enasidenib, respectively, were associated with increased risk of DS. Complete remission (CR) + CR with partial hematologic recovery rates were lower in patients with versus without DS [ivosidenib 18% (95% confidence interval, 7%-35%) vs. 36% (28%-45%); enasidenib 18% (7%-33%) vs. 25% (18%-32%)].

CONCLUSIONS

DS is a common and potentially fatal adverse reaction of IDH inhibitors, and use of standardized diagnostic criteria may aid in earlier diagnosis and treatment.See related commentary by Zeidner, p. 4174.

FDA Approval Summary: Brentuximab Vedotin in First-Line Treatment of Peripheral T-Cell Lymphoma

This article summarizes the clinical review and basis of approval of brentuximab vedotin in combination with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone as a first‐line regimen for patients with CD30‐expressing peripheral T‐cell lymphoma.

In November 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved brentuximab vedotin (BV) for the treatment of adult patients with previously untreated systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma or other CD30‐expressing peripheral T‐cell lymphomas (PTCL), including angioimmunoblastic T‐cell lymphoma and PTCL not otherwise specified, in combination with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (CHP). Approval was based on ECHELON‐2, a randomized, double‐blind, actively controlled trial that compared BV+CHP with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) in 452 patients with newly diagnosed, CD30‐expressing PTCL. Efficacy was based on independent review facility‐assessed progression‐free survival (PFS). The median PFS was 48.2 months with BV+CHP versus 20.8 months with CHOP, resulting in a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.54–0.93). The trial also demonstrated improvement in overall survival (HR 0.66; 95% CI: 0.46–0.95), complete response rate (68% vs. 56%), and overall response rate (83% vs. 72%) with BV+CHP. The most common adverse reactions (incidence ≥20%) observed ≥2% more with BV+CHP were nausea, diarrhea, fatigue or asthenia, mucositis, pyrexia, vomiting, and anemia. Peripheral neuropathy rates were similar (52% with BV+CHP, 55% with CHOP). Through the Real‐Time Oncology Review pilot program, which allows FDA early access to key data, FDA granted this approval less than 2 weeks after official submission of the application.

Implications for Practice.

This is the first U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval for treatment of patients with newly diagnosed peripheral T‐cell lymphomas (PTCL). Improvement in progression‐free and overall survival over cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone chemotherapy, which has been the standard of care for decades, is unprecedented. The new regimen represents a major advance for the frontline treatment of patients with CD30‐expressing PTCL.

FDA Approval Summary: Axicabtagene Ciloleucel for Relapsed or Refractory Large B-cell Lymphoma

In October 2017, the FDA granted regular approval to axicabtagene ciloleucel, a CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, for treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma after two or more lines of systemic therapy. Efficacy was based on complete remission (CR) rate and duration of response (DOR) in 101 adult patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (median 3 prior systemic regimens) treated on a single-arm trial. Patients received a single infusion of axicabtagene ciloleucel, preceded by lymphodepleting chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide and fludarabine. The objective response rate per independent review committee was 72% [95% confidence interval (CI), 62-81], with a CR rate of 51% (95% CI, 41-62). With a median follow-up of 7.9 months, the median DOR was not reached in patients achieving CR (95% CI, 8.1 months; not estimable, NE), whereas patients with partial remission had an estimated median DOR of 2.1 months (95% CI, 1.3-5.3). Among 108 patients evaluated for safety, serious adverse reactions occurred in 52%. Cytokine release syndrome and neurologic toxicities occurred in 94% and 87% of patients, respectively, leading to implementation of a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy.

FDA Approval Summary: Nivolumab for the Treatment of Relapsed or Progressive Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma

On May 17, 2016, after an expedited priority review, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted accelerated approval to nivolumab for the treatment of patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) that has relapsed or progressed after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and post-transplantation brentuximab vedotin (BV). Nivolumab in cHL had been granted breakthrough therapy designation. Accelerated approval was based on two single-arm, multicenter trials in adults with cHL. In 95 patients with relapsed or progressive cHL after autologous HSCT and post-transplantation BV, nivolumab, dosed at 3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks, produced a 65% (95% confidence interval: 55%-75%) objective response rate (58% partial remission, 7% complete remission). The estimated median duration of response was 8.7 months, with 4.6-month median follow-up for response duration. The median time to response was 2.1 (range: 0.7-5.7) months. Among 263 patients with cHL treated with nivolumab, 21% reported serious adverse reactions (ARs). The most common all-grade ARs (reported in ≥20%) were fatigue, upper respiratory tract infection, cough, pyrexia, diarrhea, elevated transaminases, and cytopenias. Infusion-related reaction and hypothyroidism or thyroiditis occurred in >10% of patients; other immune-mediated ARs, occurring in 1%-5%, included rash, pneumonitis, hepatitis, hyperthyroidism, and colitis. A new Warning and Precaution was issued for complications of allogeneic HSCT after nivolumab, including severe or hyperacute graft-versus-host disease, other immune-mediated ARs, and transplant-related mortality. Continued approval for the cHL indication may be contingent upon verification of clinical benefit in a randomized trial. The Oncologist 2017;22:585-591 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Based on response rate and duration in single-arm studies, nivolumab is a new treatment option for patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) that has relapsed or progressed despite autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and brentuximab vedotin. This was the first U.S. Food and Drug Administration marketing application for a programmed cell death 1 inhibitor in hematologic malignancies. The use of immune checkpoint blockade in cHL represents a new treatment paradigm. The safety of allogeneic HSCT after nivolumab requires further evaluation, as does the safety of nivolumab after allogeneic HSCT.

FDA approval: idelalisib monotherapy for the treatment of patients with follicular lymphoma and small lymphocytic lymphoma

On July 23, 2014, the FDA granted accelerated approval to idelalisib (Zydelig tablets; Gilead Sciences, Inc.) for the treatment of patients with relapsed follicular B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma or relapsed small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) who have received at least two prior systemic therapies. In a multicenter, single-arm trial, 123 patients with relapsed indolent non-Hodgkin lymphomas received idelalisib, 150 mg orally twice daily. In patients with follicular lymphoma, the overall response rate (ORR) was 54%, and the median duration of response (DOR) was not evaluable; median follow-up was 8.1 months. In patients with SLL, the ORR was 58% and the median DOR was 11.9 months. One-half of patients experienced a serious adverse reaction of pneumonia, pyrexia, sepsis, febrile neutropenia, diarrhea, or pneumonitis. Other common adverse reactions were abdominal pain, nausea, fatigue, cough, dyspnea, and rash. Common treatment-emergent laboratory abnormalities were elevations in alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, gamma-glutamyltransferase, absolute lymphocytes, and triglycerides. Continued approval may be contingent upon verification of clinical benefit in confirmatory trials.

Hematopoietic Fas deficiency does not affect experimental atherosclerotic lesion formation despite inducing a proatherogenic state

The Fas death receptor (CD95) is expressed on macrophages, smooth muscle cells, and T cells within atherosclerotic lesions. Given the dual roles of Fas in both apoptotic and nonapoptotic signaling, the aim of the present study was to test the effect of hematopoietic Fas deficiency on experimental atherosclerosis in low-density lipoprotein receptor-null mice (Ldlr(-/-)). Bone marrow from Fas(-/-) mice was used to reconstitute irradiated Ldlr(-/-) mice as a model for atherosclerosis. After 16 weeks on an 0.5% cholesterol diet, no differences were noted in brachiocephalic artery lesion size, cellularity, or vessel wall apoptosis. However, Ldlr(-/-) mice reconstituted with Fas(-/-) hematopoietic cells had elevated hyperlipidemia [80% increase, relative to wild-type (WT) controls; P < 0.001] and showed marked elevation of plasma levels of CXCL1/KC, CCL2/MCP-1, IL-6, IL-10, IL-12 subunit p70, and soluble Fas ligand (P < 0.01), as well as systemic microvascular inflammation. It was not possible to assess later stages of atherosclerosis because of increased mortality in Fas(-/-) bone marrow recipients. Our data indicate that hematopoietic Fas deficiency does not affect early atherosclerotic lesion development in Ldlr(-/-) mice.

Extracellular administration of BCL2 protein reduces apoptosis and improves survival in a murine model of sepsis

Background

Severe sepsis and septic shock are major causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. In experimental sepsis there is prominent apoptosis of various cell types, and genetic manipulation of death and survival pathways has been shown to modulate organ injury and survival.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We investigated the effect of extracellular administration of two anti-apoptotic members of the BCL2 (B-cell lymphoma 2) family of intracellular regulators of cell death in a murine model of sepsis induced by cecal ligation and puncture (CLP). We show that intraperitoneal injection of picomole range doses of recombinant human (rh) BCL2 or rhBCL2A1 protein markedly improved survival as assessed by surrogate markers of death. Treatment with rhBCL2 or rhBCL2A1 protein significantly reduced the number of apoptotic cells in the intestine and heart following CLP, and this was accompanied by increased expression of endogenous mouse BCL2 protein. Further, mice treated with rhBCL2A1 protein showed an increase in the total number of neutrophils in the peritoneum following CLP with reduced neutrophil apoptosis. Finally, although neither BCL2 nor BCL2A1 are a direct TLR2 ligand, TLR2-null mice were not protected by rhBCL2A1 protein, indicating that TLR2 signaling was required for the protective activity of extracellularly adminsitered BCL2A1 protein in vivo.

Conclusions/Significance

Treatment with rhBCL2A1 or rhBCL2 protein protects mice from sepsis by reducing apoptosis in multiple target tissues, demonstrating an unexpected, potent activity of extracellularly administered BCL2 BH4-domain proteins.