P.M. Tulkens,1 P. Arvis,2 F. Kruesmann,3

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Journal Club Alcohol and Health: Current Evidence January–February 2007.
Advertisements

Guidance for Industry Establishing Pregnancy Registries Pregnancy Registry Working Group Pregnancy Labeling Taskforce March, 2000 Evelyn M. Rodriguez M.D.,
Postmarketing Risk Assessment of Drug Products Division of Drug Risk Evaluation Office of Drug Safety Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
Clinical causality assessment I. Ralph Edwards R.H.B Meyboom.
Comparison of Nilotinib and Imatinib in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Chronic Phase (CML-CP): ENESTnd Beyond One Year Larson.
H. Lundbeck A/S21-Sep-151 Pharmacovigilance during clinical development SAE reporting, ASUR and PSUR IFF Seminar, 21. February 2007.
PHARMACOVIGILANCE AND CLINICAL TRIALS DIVISION 20 August 2015 Victoria Falls Protecting Your Right to Quality Medicines and Medical Devices.
Study design P.Olliaro Nov04. Study designs: observational vs. experimental studies What happened?  Case-control study What’s happening?  Cross-sectional.
Investigational Drugs in the hospital. + What is Investigational Drug? Investigational or experimental drugs are new drugs that have not yet been approved.
Efficacy and safety of moxifloxacin in patients with secondary peritonitis Post-hoc pooled analysis of 4 prospective multi-centre phase III RCTs in adult.
CLAIMS STRUCTURE FOR SLE Jeffrey Siegel, M.D. Arthritis Advisory Committee September 29, 2003.
Integrated Analyses of Safety Data needed! Marie Louise Valentin, MD Director of Corporate Drug Safety.
Joint Meeting of Anti-Infective Drugs & Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committees December 14-15, 2006 Ketek  (telithromycin) Regulatory History.
Critical Appraisal Did the study address a clearly focused question? Did the study address a clearly focused question? Was the assignment of patients.
EXPERIMENTAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
APRIL AYERS JEFF GIBBERMAN MELISSA HSU EL-KAMARYA SS, SHARDELLA MD, ABDEL-HAMID M, ET AL. A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL TO ASSESS THE SAFETY AND EFFICACY.
OFEV ® (nintedanib) safety Safety data INPULSIS ® -1 & -2 These slides are provided by Boehringer Ingelheim for medical to medical education only. Last.
1 Study Design Issues and Considerations in HUS Trials Yan Wang, Ph.D. Statistical Reviewer Division of Biometrics IV OB/OTS/CDER/FDA April 12, 2007.
1 A review of the safety of Moxifloxacin Hydrochloride Leonard Sacks MD Medical officer/DSPIDP.
The Dilemma of Diclofenac Injection for the Iranian Health System Authors: Shalviri G, Cheraghali M, Gholami K, Kamali E, Daryabari N Institution: Ministry.
Signal identification and development I.Ralph Edwards.
Postmarketing Pharmacovigilance Practice at FDA Lanh Green, Pharm.D., M.P.H. Office of Surveillance and Epidemiology June 21, 2006.
Comments on FDA Concept Paper Sidney N. Kahn, MD, PhD President Pharmacovigilance & Risk Management, Inc. Risk Assessment of Observational.
Article Title Resident Name, MD SVCH6/13/2016 Journal Club.
The process of drug development. Drug development 0,8 – 1 mld. USD.
Use of Azithromycin and Death from Cardiovascular Causes Whitney Shirley University of Georgia Pharm.D. Candidate 2014.
Moxifloxacin Development in TB Dr. Martin Springsklee VP, Therapeutic Area Head, Clinical Development Anti-Infectives Bayer HealthCare AG GATB Annual Stakeholder.
Omadacycline in Acute Skin and Skin Structure Infections Study (OASIS) A Phase 3 Randomized, Double-Blind, Multi-Center Study to Compare the Safety and.
Adverse Event (AE) Coding Data mining and cleaning Medical literature screening and report writing Cleaning juggled Drug- AE data and converting to machine.
The Efficacy of Dabigatran versus Warfarin for Stroke Prevention in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Systematic Review Karim Bouferrache Pacific University.
Results from the International, Randomized Phase 3 Study of Ibrutinib versus Chlorambucil in Patients 65 Years and Older with Treatment-Naïve CLL/SLL (RESONATE-2TM)1.
Event-Level Narrative
Nuplazid™ - Pimavanserin
The Stages of a Clinical Trial
Detection & monitoring of ADR
The SPRINT Research Group
Statistical Considerations for Safety Assessment in Cancer Immunotherapy Trials Andrew Lloyd Biometrics Manager PSI Conference May 2017.
Eucrisa™ - Crisaborole
Meta-Analysis of a Possible Signal of Increased Mortality Associated with Cefepime Use Peter W. Kim, Yu-te Wu, Charles Cooper, George Rochester, Thamban.
P 166 Introduction Description of the analyzed population
Gilles Moreau1, Michel Boutsen2, Paul M. Tulkens3
The Information Professional’s Role in Product Safety
CLINICAL PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT
EudraVigilance.
8. Causality assessment:
Improving Adverse Drug Reaction Information in Product Labels
18th European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ECCMID) Barcelona, Spain, April 2008 Oral presentation O249 – Sunday April.
Within Trial Decisions: Unblinding and Termination
Clinical Trials Medical Interventions
3. Key definitions Multi-partner training package on active TB drug safety monitoring and management (aDSM) July 2016.
For a copy of this poster:
Mateos MV et al. Proc ASH 2013;Abstract 403.
Pharmacovigilance in clinical trials
Clinical Drug Development
9. Introduction to signal detection
Polypharmacy In Adults: Small Test of Change
Clinical Trials.
Pharmacovigilance (PV)
Barrios C et al. SABCS 2009;Abstract 46.
Jane Armitage on behalf of the HPS2-THRIVE Collaborative Group
Clinical Pharmacokinetics
Long-term Data: INPULSIS®-ON
Patient details Health number: this may be a national identifier (preferred), hospital, clinic, or program number Name: full name is preferable as an accurate.
Issues in TB Drug Development: A Regulatory Perspective
Evidence Based Practice
Model Enhanced Classification of Serious Adverse Events
Prescription-only vs. over-the-counter medicines
Methotrexate and azathioprine in severe atopic dermatitis: A 5-year follow up study of a randomised controlled trial L.A.A. Gerbens, S.A.S Hamann, M.W.D.
Gregory Levin, FDA/CDER/OTS/OB/DBIII
Late-Breaking Data on LDL-C Reduction
Presentation transcript:

P.M. Tulkens,1 P. Arvis,2 F. Kruesmann,3 Communicating Comprehensive Safety Data Gained from Clinical Trials to the Scientific Community: Opportunities and Difficulties from an Example with Moxifloxacin P.M. Tulkens,1 P. Arvis,2 F. Kruesmann,3 1 Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain Drug Research Institute, Brussels, Belgium 2 Bayer Santé SAS, Loos, France 3 Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany 2 Nov 2012 12th ISoP, Cancun, Mexico

The problem (in general terms) Comprehensive safety data assembled from clinical trials (phase I trough 4) and from pharmacovigilance are communicated to Regulatory Authorities These rarely appear in detail in publicly available literature (that often focuses mainly on efficacy) Yet, even if rare, the corresponding adverse effects are included in the labeling and, as such, must be taken into account by clinicians This creates disconnection between labeling and daily clinical perception uneasiness amongst clinicians (who may feel they are shown only the tips of potentially important safety issues). 2 Nov 2012 12th ISoP, Cancun, Mexico

The specific situation of moxifloxacin Moxifloxacin (MXF) is approved in up to 123 countries for major indications (e.g., community-acquired pneumonia [CAP], acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis [AECB], pelvic inflammatory disease [PID], skin and skin structure infections [SSSI] and complicated intra-abdominal infections [cIAI]) 140 million prescriptions have been issued for MXF worldwide MXF is included as an effective alternative in many guidelines Beyond known class effects of fluroquinolones, moxifloxacin has been suspected to cause cardiac toxicity (known 6-10 msec QTc prolongation) hepatotoxicity (based on rare reports and signals from PSURs). In 2008, EMA imposed a labelling change: ‘due to safety concerns (hepatic, cardiac [in women and elderly patients], and intestinal problems), moxifloxacin should only be used when other antibiotics cannot be used or have stopped working' 2 Nov 2012 12th ISoP, Cancun, Mexico

The approach Objective: examine and compare the safety profile of MXF vs that of the comparators (COMP; all selected as reference therapies), providing unbiased information for comparable clinical situations Method: in-depth analysis of the manufacturer’s clinical trial database for all actively controlled Phase II–IV clinical trials (except one exploratory study) all approved routes of administration and all main indications including patients at risk (hepatic, renal cardiac, age, diabetes, low BMI, …) recording all treatment emergent adverse events (AEs), adverse drug reactions (ADRs), serious adverse events (SAEs), serious adverse drug reactions (SADRs), premature discontinuations due to AEs, premature discontinuations due to ADRs, AEs with fatal outcome, and ADRs with fatal outcome. coding according to the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) detection of rare events using Standard MedDRA Queries (SMQs) and customized Bayer Medra queries) descriptive statistics (crude rates), with calculation of relative risk estimates (95% confidence intervals [Mantel–Haenszel analysis stratified by study with constant continuity correction term of 0.1). 2 Nov 2012 12th ISoP, Cancun, Mexico

Results (1) Population: MXF: 14 981 vs. COMP: 15 023) Double blind:  75% IV and IV/PO (sequential): 29% no meaningful difference between MXF and COMP for age, sex, BMI, race, indications, and pre-existing risk factors (renal or hepatic impairment, diabetes mellitus, cardiac disorders, low BMI). distribution mirroring the different main indications (with corresponding risk factors) 2 Nov 2012 12th ISoP, Cancun, Mexico

Results (2) – global comparisons 2 Nov 2012 12th ISoP, Cancun, Mexico

Results (3) - global comparisons AE, ADR and SADR were mainly "gastrointestinal disorders" and "changes observed during investigations" such as asymptomatic QT prolongation). Incidence rates of hepatic disorders, tendon disorders, surrogates of QT prolongation, serious cutaneous reactions and Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhoea were similar with moxifloxacin and comparators. 2 Nov 2012 12th ISoP, Cancun, Mexico

Results (4): patients at risk 2 Nov 2012 12th ISoP, Cancun, Mexico

Results (5): patients at risk PO sequential IV 2 Nov 2012 12th ISoP, Cancun, Mexico

Results (5): patients at risk PO sequential IV 2 Nov 2012 12th ISoP, Cancun, Mexico

Results (6): drug comparisons 2 Nov 2012 12th ISoP, Cancun, Mexico

Results (7): drug comparisons 2 Nov 2012 12th ISoP, Cancun, Mexico

Results (8): drug comparisons 2 Nov 2012 12th ISoP, Cancun, Mexico

Conclusions (for moxifloxacin) The overall safety profile of moxifloxacin was found similar to that of comparators from clinical trials More specifically, and with regard to recent questions: Hepatic events reactions were very low and not superior in a statistically significant manner to comparators even if considering patients with hepatic disorders While QTc prolongation were observed, no increase clinical adverse effects were seen even in patients with prexisting cardiac disorders vs. the comparator(s) Specific toxicities (tendonitis, e.g.) remained exceedingly rare with no difference between moxifloxacin and the fluroquinolone comparator Skin events were extremely are and less frequent than with -lactams Full details are available from Tulkens et al. Moxifloxacin safety: an analysis of 14 years of clinical data. Drugs R D. 2012 Jun 1;12(2):71-100 (open access). 2 Nov 2012 12th ISoP, Cancun, Mexico

Pros and Cons of this approach Unbiased (randomized) comparison of treatments with similar indications and target populations (all clinically-valid comparators) Estimation of the true incidence of relatively rare effects (equal balance of patients for known and unknown factors) Detailed assessment of the detected side-effects and documented causality Cons Populations analyzed potentially not representing the true final populations in which the drug is used Patients with known contra-indications excluded by study design Number of patients too low to detect very rare effects Labor intensive process that can only be undertaken late in drug development and commercialization This approach may be useful for providing clinicians and regulators with a global analysis of actual risk factors for comparable drugs in comparable indications 2 Nov 2012 12th ISoP, Cancun, Mexico