FDA Pediatric Oncology Subcommittee Meeting “Company Perspective”

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Role of the Statistician and the Bioinformatics Scientist in Cancer Clinical Trials Larry Rubinstein, PhD Biometric Research Branch, NCI International.

Advertisements

MIGSYS Ian Evans, Genetics Max Musicant, SOM Grant Patterson, EPH Jia Kang, Med Informatics Colin Shaw, Nursing YBPS Case Competition November 20, 2009.

Accelerated Approval Update 2005 Ramzi Dagher, MD DDOP/OODP/CDER/FDA.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH Working with FDA: Biological Products and Clinical Development Critical Path.

Protein Therapeutics: a summary and pharmacological classification

Large Phase 1 Studies with Expansion Cohorts: Clinical, Ethical, Regulatory and Patient Perspectives Accelerating Anticancer Agent Development and Validation.

Cancer Clinical Trials:

+ Drug Development and Review Process. + Objectives Learn the processes involved in drug discovery and development Define the phases involved in FDA drug.

Cancer Nanotechnology: New Opportunities for Targeted Therapies FDA Public Meeting October 10, 2006 Piotr Grodzinski, Ph.D. Director, Nanotechnology for.

SUCCESS FACTORS IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL MARKETPLACE

Oncology Pediatric Initiatives Richard Pazdur, MD Director, Division of Oncology Drug Products.

Academic Clinical Trial Do’s & Don’ts for Partnering with Pharma CCAF San Diego, CA April 14, 2014 J. Eric Bubbers, Ph.D.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH Working with FDA: Biological Products and Clinical Development IND Case Studies.

July 2015 PRABHAVATHI FERNANDES, PhD Founder, President and CEO How the PATH Act Can Rejuvenate Antibiotic R & D.

Candlelighters Childhood Cancer Foundation FDA ODAC Subcommittee October 17, 2002.

Anbazhagan R. Classification of Small Cell Lung Cancer and Pulmonary Carcinoid by Gene Expression Profiles. Cancer research. 1999; 59:5119 –5122.

Dimère alpha-beta tubuline.

Stakeholders and Ethics Organizational Stakeholders Stakeholders: people who have an interest, claim, or stake in an organization  Inside stakeholders.

NCI Review of the Clinical Trials Process 6 th Annual National Forum on Biomedical Imaging in Oncology James H. Doroshow M.D. April 7, 2005 Bethesda, Maryland.

ODAC SCHERING-PLOUGH RESEARCH INSTITUTE 1 Temozolomide Oncology Drug Advisory Committee March 13, 2003 Craig L. Tendler, M.D. Vice President, Oncology.

1 Safety Pharmacology for Oncology Pharmaceuticals at CDER John K. Leighton Associate Director for Pharmacology CDER/OND/OODP.

Up-Front Phase II Windows in Children with Cancer Victor M. Santana, M.D.

0 Version: 2/14/08 Challenges for Abuse Liability Testing from Drug Development to FDA Approval Review of FDA/Industry Dialogue Session on Abuse Liability.

From the Lab to Market Unit 3.04 Understanding Biotechnology research & Development.

Nonclinical Perspective on Initiating Phase 1 Studies for Small Molecular Weight Compounds John K. Leighton, PH.D., DABT Supervisory Pharmacologist Division.

Biomedical Research Objective 2 Biomedical Research Methods.

Investigational Drugs in the hospital. + What is Investigational Drug? Investigational or experimental drugs are new drugs that have not yet been approved.

How can we work together? Partnering with Industry: An Investigator’s Perspective Robert L. Coleman, MD M. D. Anderson Cancer Center.

The Practical Art of Endpoint Selection: Industry Perspectives A View from the Pharma Industry of the FDA Guidance on PROs Glenn A. Phillips, Ph.D. Director.

Update From FDA: Office of the Commissioner and Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Janet Woodcock, M.D. Acting Deputy Commissioner for Operations.

How do we become socialized. Socialization. Socialization: takes place during your entire life. It is the process through which an individual acquires.

Drug - Device Combination Issues : Oncology Perspective Ramzi Dagher, M.D. DODP/CDER/FDA.

A Third-Party Model for Expanded Access Programs 1. We can deliver large EAPs, far in advance of FDA approval. 2. We can do it in today’s regulatory environment.

Predictive Models of Cancer Xenograft Models Of Childhood Solid Tumors Solid Malignancies Group St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital.

Metals in Medicine Consortium Sydney Cancer Centre.

Single Patient Use of Investigational Anticancer Agents: An Industry Perspective Gerard T. Kennealey, MD Vice President, Clinical Research, Oncology AstraZeneca.

OBVIOUS DIFFERENCES Other medical conditions in adults - effects of [subclinical] organ dysfunction on drug disposition Better tolerance in children.

Preclinical Guidelines: Development of Radioprotective/Mitigative Agents Departments of Dermatology & Radiation Oncology University of Rochester Medical.

FDA Case Studies Pediatric Oncology Subcommittee March 4, 2003.

Developing medicines for the future and why it is challenging Angela Milne.

History of Pediatric Labeling

2005 Design Outsourcing Study. Design Outsourcing Study 2  Web survey:  Fieldwork dates  December 15 th - December 31 st, 2005  303 usable responses.

Mentor Training Brunel University Primary Partnership PGCert Primary May 2014.

Generic Industry’s Perspective on the New GMP Initiative May 21, 2003 Generic Pharmaceutical Association Kenneth Lavin, M.Sc. Director, Regulatory Compliance.

Initiating phase 1 clinical trials in pediatric oncology National Cancer Institute Perspective Barry Anderson, MD, PhD Pediatric Section Cancer Therapy.

1 Imaging Community Critical Need #1: Standardized and Harmonized Multisite Imaging George Q. Mills, MD, MBA Vice President, Medical & Regulatory Relations.

Enrollment and Monitoring Procedures for NCI Supported Clinical Trials Barry Anderson, MD, PhD Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program National Cancer Institute.

Rationale for Developing New Drugs 25% of children with cancer will not survive 5 years25% of children with cancer will not survive 5 years The acute toxicity.

Introduction to the Meeting Introduction to the Meeting Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Sciences Clinical Pharmacology Subcommittee November 17-18,

Integrating Pharmacogenomic Questions Into GCIG Ovarian Cancer Clinical Trials Lori Minasian, MD Chief, Community Oncology and Prevention Trials Research.

Inception Report: 21st March, 2012

C-1 Pegfilgrastim (Neulasta  ) Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee Pediatric Subcommittee October 20, 2005 Amgen Inc.

CTEP Visiting Physician Externship Coordinator: Igor Espinoza-Delgado, M.D. NCI CTEP Investigational Drug Branch

Initiatives Drive Pediatric Drug Development January 30, 2002.

NCI Initiatives to Develop Non-Clinical Models for Pediatric Oncology Malcolm A. Smith, MD, PhD 17 March 2004.

1 Impediments to Early Initiation of Pediatric Studies in a Clinical Oncology Drug Development Program A Large Pharmaceutical Company Perspective  Corporate.

Agency Review of sNDA SE-006 DOXIL for Ovarian Cancer Division of Oncology Drug Products Office of Drug Evaluation 1 Center for Drug Evaluation.

Application of the 1998 Pediatric Rule to Oncology Steven Hirschfeld, MD PhD CDR U.S. Public Health Service Medical Officer Division of Oncology Drug Products.

Overcoming challenges in pediatric oncology product development: Regulatory oversight of multi-national clinical studies Ursula Kern, Advisory Committees.

Frontier Pharma Innovative Licensing Opportunities in Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma 2015 Published on : August No. Pages : 115.

1 Trends in drug development programs in the era of Personalized Medicine Gunnar Saeter, M.D., Ph.D. Head, Institute for Cancer Research Oslo University.

Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis Presented By: Michael Difilippantonio, Ph.D. October 1, 2015.

Industry Perspective: Expanded Access Programs

Broadening Eligibility Criteria to Make Clinical Trials More Representative Joint Recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and Friends.

The Effect of Intra-Articular Steroids on Cartilage in Knee Osteoarthritis.

Phase I Drug Development: Early Indications of Antitumor Activity for Sarcoma Patients and Opportunities for Progress Anthony Tolcher Director of Clinical.

Statement on Concerta and Methylphenidate for the June 30, 2005 Pediatric Advisory Committee The FDA has identified two possible safety concerns with.

A New Approach to Clinical Trials

Objective 2 Biomedical Research Methods

Presentation transcript:

FDA Pediatric Oncology Subcommittee Meeting “Company Perspective”

Key Questions to Address (Company Perspective) Question #1-When in the development of a new oncolytic should pediatric studies be undertaken? Question #2-What factors influence the decision whether or not pediatric studies are undertaken? Question #3-Should pediatric studies be performed only by cooperative groups?

Key Questions to Address Question #1-When in the development of a new oncolytic should pediatric studies be undertaken? Question #2-What factors influence the decision whether or not pediatric studies are undertaken? Question #3-Should pediatric studies be performed only by cooperative groups?

Historically When Are Pediatric Studies Performed? DrugDate of Initial FDA Approval Date of 1 st Adult Study Date of 1 st Pediatric Study Difference in Years Between Studies Gemcitabine Ongoing10+ Paclitaxel Cladribine Irinotecan (US)1999 (US)6 Temozolomide Docetaxel Tretinoin Topotecan Imatinib2001 Ongoing1+

ASPHO Survey 1 (Interim Results) 1 Survey of 91 ASPHO Members-October 2002

Key Questions to Address Question #1-When in the development of a new oncolytic should pediatric studies be undertaken? Question #2-What factors influence the decision whether or not pediatric studies are undertaken? Question #3-Should pediatric studies be performed only by cooperative groups?

ASPHO SURVEY 1 -INFLUENTIAL FACTORS 2 1.Pediatric preclinical data 2.Drug with new mechanism or target 3.Positive data from adult phase I or II 4.Availability of drug for pediatric studies 5.Other factors 1 Survey of 91 ASPHO Members-October Rate from 1-7; One being least influential

“Most Influential-#7” #Responders choosing “7”

Key Questions to Address Question #1-When in the development of a new oncolytic should pediatric studies be undertaken? Question #2-What factors influence the decision whether or not pediatric studies are undertaken? Question #3-Should pharmaceutical companies conduct pediatric studies outside of cooperative groups?

ASPHO Survey 1 1 Survey of 91 ASPHO Members-October 2002

Comments- “No” Patient numbers too small-direct competition with COG studies Definitely “no”; “That would be a terrible mistake” Concerned about “conflict of interest” Cooperative group(s) are cornerstone of our success against pediatric cancer More convincing if studies are done within Cooperative group setting Cooperative group mechanism in concert with industry and the NCI, when necessary, should meet all industry and FDA requirements

Comments-“Yes” The Cooperative groups have a problem with congestion; Speed! Cooperative group is a monolith Any route necessary if it means getting phase I studies in children Resources and infrastructure Opportunity for smaller institution

“Company Prospective” Early Pediatric Studies Late Pediatric Studies Medical/Scientific Similar disease process Similar target expression (Novel mechanism) Regulatory Pediatric Rule Business Development FDAMA/BPCA CMC Formulation-oral Stability (Drug supply) Toxicology “Unaccepted” toxicities Unusual target organs Unmet Need Each new agent needs to be considered separately (there is no standard approach) Data Management Cooperative group

Summary- “Company Perspective” Strong shift towards  not if, but when, should pediatric studies be undertaken Most pediatric oncologist believe studies should be done early versus late –Company involvement is OK-But! –Perception that conducting studies outside cooperative groups could speed up the process? Companies are showing increased interest in developing new agents in children –FDAMA and Pediatric Rule Many factors influence decision to conduct studies in children –Industry views are similar to those of pediatric oncologist, but there are obvious differences

Questions-Discussion?

“Other Influential Factors” A company that is not overtly hostile towards pediatric studies (7) Favorable side-effect or toxicity profile (6) Unmet need (5) Ease of study (5) Foreign experience (4)

Recent/Ongoing Pediatric Phase I Studies ABT-751 (ST)Arsenic Trioxide (L)BMS (ST) Clofarex (L)Carbo/Irinotecan (ST)DX-8951f (ST) Fenretinide (ST)Doxorubicin Liposome (ST)Flavopiridol (ST) Gadolinium TexaphyrinCisplat/VP16/Bleo/Amifostine (GC)IT-Busulfan (BT) Iodine I131 MIBG (NB)Melphalan/Buthionine SulfoximineIrinotecan Oxaliplatin (ST)R115777PS-341 SCH (BT)Squalamine/Carbo (ST)SU5416 (BT) Temozolomide/O 6 BGThiotepa/Carbo/Topotecan (ST)Irinotecan/VCR (ST) XR 9576 (ST)STI571 (ST)Holmium Ho 166 IL-2Expanded CD8 Cells (NB)Rituximab  -Glucan MoAb 3F8 (NB)hu14.18/IL-2 (NB) MoAb Ch14.18/IL2 (NB)