CS-1 Update on the Safety of Erythropoietin Products in Patients With Cancer Peter Bowers, MD Senior Director Clinical Team Leader Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee
Advertisements

Biomarker Analyses in CLEOPATRA: A Phase III, Placebo-Controlled Study of Pertuzumab in HER2- Positive, First-Line Metastatic Breast Cancer (MBC) Baselga.
Synopsis of FDA Colorectal Cancer Endpoints Workshop Michael J. O’Connell, MD Director, Allegheny Cancer Center Associate Chairman, NSABP Pittsburgh, PA.
Neel Bhalala (2009) Sofia Medical University. Background  Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents are man-made versions of a natural protein known as erythropoietin.
Case Studies of the Use of Meta- Analyses of Drug Safety Questions in the Regulatory Setting Jesse A. Berlin, ScD Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research.
Facon T et al. Proc ASH 2013;Abstract 2.
Which difference should we target? Alberto Sobrero Ospedale San Martino IRCCS Genova, Italy.
Epoetin Alfa & Increased Mortality Maria Shin, Pharm.D. Pharmacy Resident (PGY-1) Kingsbrook Jewish Medical Center Clinical Instructor of Pharmacy Practice.
CI-1 Update on the Safety of Erythropoietin Products in Patients With Cancer May 4, 2004 Robert DeLap, MD, PhD Vice President, Global Regulatory Affairs.
CR-1 Concluding Remarks and Risk/Benefit Summary Mace L. Rothenberg, MD Professor of Medicine Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center.
CS-1 Results of the Phase 3 Clinical Trials of Abraxane vs. Taxol in Metastatic Breast Cancer William J. Gradishar, MD, FACP Professor of Medicine Northwestern.
Sequential vs. concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced non-small cell carcinoma.
ODAC SCHERING-PLOUGH RESEARCH INSTITUTE 1 Temozolomide Oncology Drug Advisory Committee March 13, 2003 Craig L. Tendler, M.D. Vice President, Oncology.
CD-1 Update on the Safety of Erythropoietin Products in Patients With Cancer Martine George, MD Vice President, Therapeutic Area Head Hematology and Oncology.
Evidence Based Medication Use in the NICU: Erythropoietin Dan Ellsbury MD Director, Continuous Quality Improvement Pediatrix Medical Group.
NDA ZD1839 for Treatment of NSCLC FDA Review Division of Oncology Drug Products.
1 SNDA Gemzar plus Carboplatin Treatment of Late Relapsing Ovarian Cancer.
Drug - Device Combination Issues : Oncology Perspective Ramzi Dagher, M.D. DODP/CDER/FDA.
1 ENTEREG ® (Alvimopan) Special Safety Section Marjorie Dannis, M.D. Division of Gastroenterology Products Office of Drug Evaluation III CDER, FDA The.
Phase III Trial of Pazopanib in Locally Advanced and/or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Sternberg CN et al. ASCO 2009; Abstract (Oral Presentation)
NHL13: A Multicenter, Randomized Phase III Study of Rituximab as Maintenance Treatment versus Observation Alone in Patients with Aggressive B ‐ Cell Lymphoma.
1Bachelot T et al. Proc SABCS 2010;Abstract S1-6.
CheckMate 025: A randomized, open-label, phase III study of nivolumab versus everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma Padmanee Sharma, Bernard Escudier,
Lenalidomide Maintenance Therapy in Multiple Myeloma: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials Singh PP et al. Proc ASH 2013;Abstract 407.
CE-1 IRESSA ® Clinical Efficacy Ronald B. Natale, MD Director Cedars Sinai Comprehensive Cancer Center Ronald B. Natale, MD Director Cedars Sinai Comprehensive.
A phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of lenvatinib (E7080) in patients with 131I-refractory differentiated thyroid.
NDA SE-011 Docetaxel FDA Review. FDA Review Team Biostatistics –Clara Chu, PhD. –Gang Chen, PhD. Biopharmaceutics –Safaa Ibrahim PhD –Atiq Rahman,
Final Analysis of Overall Survival for the Phase III CONFIRM Trial: Fulvestrant 500 mg versus 250 mg Di Leo A et al. Proc SABCS 2012;Abstract S1-4.
MABEL – a large multinational study of cetuximab plus irinotecan in metastatic colorectal cancer progressing on irinotecan H Wilke, R Glynne-Jones, J Thaler,
Improved Survival in Patients with First Relapsed or Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) Treated with Vosaroxin plus Cytarabine versus Placebo plus.
Final Efficacy Results from OAM4558g, a Randomized Phase II Study Evaluating MetMAb or Placebo in Combination with Erlotinib in Advanced NSCLC Spigel DR.
AVADO TRIAL David Miles Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Middlesex, United Kingdom A randomized, double-blind study of bevacizumab in combination with docetaxel.
A Phase 3 Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Lenalidomide Combined with Melphalan and Prednisone Followed by Continuous Lenalidomide Maintenance.
Kang Y et al. Proc ASCO 2010;Abstract LBA4007.
CV-1 Trial 709 The ISEL Study (IRESSA ® Survival Evaluation in Lung Cancer) Summary of Data as of December 16, 2004 Kevin Carroll, MSc Summary of Data.
Gemcitabine With or Without Cisplatin in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Biliary Tract Cancer (ABC): Results of a Multicentre, Randomized Phase III.
1 CONFIDENTIAL – DO NOT DISTRIBUTE ARIES mCRC: Effectiveness and Safety of 1st- and 2nd-line Bevacizumab Treatment in Elderly Patients Mark Kozloff, MD.
A Phase 2 Study with a Daily Regimen of the Oral mTOR Inhibitor RAD001 (Everolimus) in Patients with Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Cancer Amato RJ et.
Continued Overall Survival Benefit After 5 Years’ Follow-Up with Bortezomib-Melphalan-Prednisone (VMP) versus Melphalan-Prednisone (MP) in Patients with.
S1207: Phase III Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial Evaluating the Use of Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy +/- One Year of Everolimus in Patients.
Lenalidomide Maintenance After Stem-Cell Transplantation for Multiple Myeloma: Follow-Up Analysis of the IFM Trial Attal M et al. Proc ASH 2013;Abstract.
Agency Review of sNDA SE-006 DOXIL for Ovarian Cancer Division of Oncology Drug Products Office of Drug Evaluation 1 Center for Drug Evaluation.
Moskowitz CH et al. Proc ASH 2014;Abstract 673.
1 Backup Slides. 2 Physiology of Anemia 3 J&J Breast Cancer (EPO-ANE-3010) Design Features –Excludes patients who ever had hormonal Rx or who are on.
SNDA # GLIADEL® WAFER (Polifeprosan 20 with Carmustine Implant) APPLICANT: GUILFORD PHARMACEUTICALS ODAC: December 6, 2001 Medical Reviewer: Alla.
CON - 1 Conclusions C David R. Parkinson Vice President, Global Head, Clinical Research and Development Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.
Zometa for Prostate Cancer Bone Metastases Protocol 039 Amna Ibrahim, M.D. Oncology Drug Products FDA.
Medical Technology and Practice Patterns Institute 4733 Bethesda Ave., Suite #510 Bethesda, MD Phone: Fax: Comparison of.
Results of a Phase 2, Multicenter, Single-Arm Study of Eribulin Mesylate as First-Line Therapy for Locally Recurrent or Metastatic HER2-Negative Breast.
CCO Independent Conference Coverage*: The 2015 Annual Meeting of the CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, December 8-12, 2015 San Antonio, Texas.
Anemia in CKD The TREAT Trial Reference Pfeiffer MA. A trial of Darbepoetin alpha in type II diabetes and chronic kidney disease. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:2019–2032.
SNDA ETHYOL FOR RADIATION INDUCED XEROSTOMIA.
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.
CCO Independent Conference Coverage
Alessandra Gennari, MD PhD
Attal M et al. Proc ASH 2010;Abstract 310.
Rosell R et al. Proc ASCO 2011;Abstract 7503.
Randomized, Open-Label Phase 1/2 Study of Pomalidomide Alone or in Combination with Low-Dose Dexamethasone in Patients with Relapsed and Refractory Multiple.
Slide set on: McCarthy PL, Owzar K, Hofmeister CC, et al
Vahdat L et al. Proc SABCS 2012;Abstract P
ASCO Recap Palak Desai, MD.
Local Consolidative Therapy in Oligometastatic NSCLC With No Progression on First-line Systemic Treatment CCO Independent Conference Coverage* of the 2016.
S1207: Phase III randomized, placebo-controlled trial adding 1 year of everolimus to adjuvant endocrine therapy for patients with high-risk, HR+, HER2-
Swain SM et al. Proc SABCS 2012;Abstract P
Kantarjian H et al. Cancer 2009;[Epub ahead of print].
Baselga J et al. SABCS 2009;Abstract 45.
Domenica 03 giugno Highlight a cura di Filippo de Marinis
Martin M et al. Proc SABCS 2012;Abstract S1-7.
1 Verstovsek S et al. Proc ASH 2012;Abstract Cervantes F et al.
Presentation transcript:

CS-1 Update on the Safety of Erythropoietin Products in Patients With Cancer Peter Bowers, MD Senior Director Clinical Team Leader Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development Peter Bowers, MD Senior Director Clinical Team Leader Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development

CS-2 Today’s Agenda Evaluation of Studies Dr. Peter Bowers –Supportive Anemia Care –Beyond Correction of Anemia Future Clinical Data Dr. Martine George ConclusionsDr. Martine George Evaluation of Studies Dr. Peter Bowers –Supportive Anemia Care –Beyond Correction of Anemia Future Clinical Data Dr. Martine George ConclusionsDr. Martine George

CS-3 Supportive Anemia Care Studies Analysis Combined analysis from all completed, randomized, double-blind trials of anemic patients (n = 1,976; 10 trials) –Mortality hazard ratios –Tumor response and disease progression where data available (5 of 10 studies) –Thrombotic vascular event (TVE) frequency Considerations for this analysis –Variations in design and patient heterogeneity –Studies primarily evaluated transfusion reduction over 12 to 24 weeks Combined analysis from all completed, randomized, double-blind trials of anemic patients (n = 1,976; 10 trials) –Mortality hazard ratios –Tumor response and disease progression where data available (5 of 10 studies) –Thrombotic vascular event (TVE) frequency Considerations for this analysis –Variations in design and patient heterogeneity –Studies primarily evaluated transfusion reduction over 12 to 24 weeks

CS-4 Supportive Anemia Care Studies No Survival Effect Seen in Combined Analysis Tumor type/study Hazard ratio Mixed (non-chemo)0.89 Mixed (non-cisplatin)1.08 Mixed (cisplatin)0.86 CLL (J89-040)1.68 CLL (P-174)0.42 Ovarian (EPO-INT-1)1.58 MM (EPO-INT-2)0.15 Mixed (EPO-INT-3)1.56 Mixed (EPO-INT-10)0.81 Mixed (PR )1.17 OVERALL0.99 Mortality, n/N (%) PlaceboEpoetin alfa 13/59 (22.0) 13/65 (20) 9/76 (12) 10/81 (12) 9/65 (14) 8/67 (12) 6/79 (8)16/142 (11) 1/12 (8) 1/33 (3) 2/80 (3) 6/164 (4) 7/76 (9) 1/69 (1) 3/65 (5) 9/135 (7) 22/124 (18)41/251 (16) 26/165 (16)31/168 (19) (0.76, 1.28) Favors Epoetin alfa Favors placebo HR (95% CI) log scale Test for heterogeneity, P =.66

CS-5 Supportive Anemia Care Studies—Similar Tumor Response/Disease Progression Response Disease progression Patients, % Tumor type/studyNPlaceboEpoetin alfa Ovarian (EPO-INT-1)246CR/PR7268 Disease progression1516 MM (EPO-INT-2)145CR/PR2629 Disease progression2122 Mixed (EPO-INT-3)201CR/PR5448 Disease progression20 Mixed (EPO-INT-10)375CR/PR3245 Disease progression3324 Mixed (PR )344CR/PR1916 Disease progression——

CS-6 Supportive Anemia Care Studies Conclusion: Favorable Benefit/Risk Profile Established benefits include transfusion reduction and reduction in debilitating symptoms of anemia No adverse survival signal or indication of adverse impact on tumor response or disease progression Established benefits include transfusion reduction and reduction in debilitating symptoms of anemia No adverse survival signal or indication of adverse impact on tumor response or disease progression

CS-7 Today’s Agenda Evaluation of Studies Dr. Peter Bowers –Supportive Anemia Care –Beyond Correction of Anemia  Preclinical Background  EPO-INT-76  Other Studies Future Clinical Data Dr. Martine George Conclusions Evaluation of Studies Dr. Peter Bowers –Supportive Anemia Care –Beyond Correction of Anemia  Preclinical Background  EPO-INT-76  Other Studies Future Clinical Data Dr. Martine George Conclusions

CS-8 Studies Beyond the Correction of Anemia— Preclinical Experience and Rationale Tumor cell lines (> 25) did not proliferate in presence of EPO including lines EPO-R+ Systemic administration did not increase tumor volume in several in vivo models Erythropoietin products with chemotherapy or radiotherapy delay tumor growth in vivo Despite extensive investigations, inconsistent reports of proliferation seen with EPO concentrations 5- to 100-fold greater than achieved clinically Tumor cell lines (> 25) did not proliferate in presence of EPO including lines EPO-R+ Systemic administration did not increase tumor volume in several in vivo models Erythropoietin products with chemotherapy or radiotherapy delay tumor growth in vivo Despite extensive investigations, inconsistent reports of proliferation seen with EPO concentrations 5- to 100-fold greater than achieved clinically 16

CS-9 Studies Beyond Correction of Anemia EPO-INT-76 (Metastatic Breast Cancer) Key design elements—large trial, simple design –EPREX ® QW or placebo continued for 12 mo regardless of chemotherapy changes or disease progression –Initiate at ≤ 13 g/dL, target hemoglobin 12 to 14 g/dL –Primary endpoint 12-mo survival Design limitations –Objective measures of tumor response and disease progression not specified (timing/method) Study drug treatment discontinued at recommendation of DSMB, 88% completed or withdrawn Key design elements—large trial, simple design –EPREX ® QW or placebo continued for 12 mo regardless of chemotherapy changes or disease progression –Initiate at ≤ 13 g/dL, target hemoglobin 12 to 14 g/dL –Primary endpoint 12-mo survival Design limitations –Objective measures of tumor response and disease progression not specified (timing/method) Study drug treatment discontinued at recommendation of DSMB, 88% completed or withdrawn

CS-10 Summary of Survival Over Time EPO-INT At-risk pts Placebo Epoetin Time, mo 25 Vertical line represents end of double-blind phase at 12 mo. †Based on Kaplan-Meier estimate. 12-mo mortality N n (%) † Censored P value Placebo (24) Epoetin alfa (30)81 12-mo hazard ratio (95% CI) 1.37 (1.07, 1.74)

CS-11 Studies Beyond Correction of Anemia Factors Considered in Analyses EPO-INT-76 Extensive analysis to understand differences Additional data collection from source documents –Retrospective blinded chart review –Some imbalances noted but did not explain difference Analyses provide hypotheses that might explain survival difference Extensive analysis to understand differences Additional data collection from source documents –Retrospective blinded chart review –Some imbalances noted but did not explain difference Analyses provide hypotheses that might explain survival difference

CS-12 Studies Beyond Correction of Anemia Investigator-attributed Causes of Deaths EPO-INT-76 Patients, n Placebo n = 470 Epoetin alfa n = 469 Difference EPO-placebo Died within 4 mo, n (%)16 (3)41 (9)25 Investigator attributed Disease progression Thrombotic vascular event Chemotherapy toxicity Missing/other Retrospective chart review Disease progression Thrombotic vascular event Chemotherapy toxicity Missing/other Table 6 BD Intent-to-treat population.

CS-13 Studies Beyond Correction of Anemia Time to Disease Progression EPO-INT At-risk pts Placebo Epoetin Time, mo 25 N CR/PR, %Hazard ratio (95% CI) Placebo (.82, 1.14) Epoetin alfa Intent-to-treat population P =.71

CS-14 Studies Beyond Correction of Anemia Conclusions EPO-INT-76 Survival disadvantage observed in treatment group Reasons for outcome not well understood, despite extensive investigation and analysis of data –Investigators attributed a greater number of deaths to disease progression in the epoetin alfa arm, yet, reported TTP and CR/PR are similar Other possible explanations for outcome merit consideration –Excess mortality due to TVEs Survival disadvantage observed in treatment group Reasons for outcome not well understood, despite extensive investigation and analysis of data –Investigators attributed a greater number of deaths to disease progression in the epoetin alfa arm, yet, reported TTP and CR/PR are similar Other possible explanations for outcome merit consideration –Excess mortality due to TVEs

CS-15 Today’s Agenda Evaluation of Studies Dr. Peter Bowers –Supportive Anemia Care –Beyond Correction of Anemia  Preclinical Background  EPO-INT-76  Other Studies Future Clinical Data Dr. Martine George ConclusionsDr. Martine George Evaluation of Studies Dr. Peter Bowers –Supportive Anemia Care –Beyond Correction of Anemia  Preclinical Background  EPO-INT-76  Other Studies Future Clinical Data Dr. Martine George ConclusionsDr. Martine George

CS-16 Studies Beyond Correction of Anemia— Summary of Design Features Cancer therapy Hemoglobin, g/dL Tumor type (study)InitiateTarget Completed or in follow-up MBC (EPO-INT-76)CT SCLC (N93-004)CT H&N (EPO-GBR-7)RT Cervical (AGO/NOGGO)CT+RT Discontinued SCLC (EPO-CAN-15)CT+RT † NSCLC (EPO-CAN-20)±CT H&N (RTOG-99-03)RT (+CT) Cervical (GOG-0191)CT+RT12 13 Gastric, rectal (PR )CT+RT †Pre-amendment.

CS-17 Studies Beyond Correction of Anemia— Analysis of Mortality Outcomes Mortality, n/N (%) Tumor type (study)ControlEpoetin alfa Completed or in follow-up MBC (EPO-INT-76)115/470 (24)148/469 (30) † SCLC (N93-004)101/115 (88)100/109 (92) H&N (EPO-GBR-7) 50/149 (34) 52/151 (34) Cervical (AGO/NOGGO) 23/116 (20) 16/113 (14) Discontinued SCLC (EPO-CAN-15) 10/53 (19) 21/53 (40) NSCLC (EPO-CAN-20) 20/31 (65) 25/31 (81) H&N (RTOG-99-03) 12/68 (18) 17/67 (25) Cervical (GOG-0191) 9/55 (16) 8/58 (14) Gastric, rectal (PR ) 1/31 (3) 0/28 (0) †Based on Kaplan-Meier estimates.

CS-18 Studies Beyond Correction of Anemia No Evidence of Tumor Proliferation/Response Tumor type (study)NEndpointControl vs EPO Completed or in follow-up MBC (EPO-INT-76)939CR+PR, %46 vs 45 SCLC (N93-004)224CR+PR, %67 vs 72 H&N (EPO-GBR-7)1092-yr local DFS, %85 vs 93 Cervical (AGO/NOGGO)229DFS (126 wk), %73 vs 83 Discontinued SCLC (EPO-CAN-15)106Median TTP (days)419 vs 467 NSCLC (EPO-CAN-20)62—— H&N (RTOG-99-03)1171-yr local PFS, %65 vs 60 Cervical (GOG-0191)113Progression free, %82 vs 83 Gastric, rectal (PR )60——

CS-19 Studies Beyond the Correction of Anemia Clinically Relevant TVEs Patients with TVEs, n/N (%) Difference, % EPO-control Tumor type (study)ControlEpoetin alfa SCLC (EPO-CAN-15) 2/52 (4) 16/52 (31)27 Gastric, rectal (PR ) 2/31 (6) 6/28 (21)15 Cervical (GOG-0191) 5/55 (9) 10/58 (17) 8 SCLC (N93-004)11/115 (10)12/109 (11) 1 MBC (EPO-INT-76)25/456 (5)36/448 (8) 3 H&N (EPO-GBR-7) 2/149 (1) 4/133 (3) 2 NSCLC (EPO-CAN-20)2/31 (6) 1/31 (3)–3 Cervical (AGO/NOGGO) 3/122 (2) 2/119 (2)0 H&N (RTOG-99-03) 0/68 (0) 1/67 (1) 1

CS-20 Supportive Anemia Care - Clinically Relevant TVEs Consistent With Known Risks Overall odds ratio (95% CI): 1.55 (0.96, 2.50) Patients with TVEs, n/N (%) Difference, % EPO-placebo Tumor type (study)PlaceboEpoetin alfa Mixed (cisplatin) 8/65 (12) 6/67 (9)–3 MM (EPO-INT-2) 1/76 (1) 5/69 (7) 6 CLL (J89-040) 2/79 (3) 9/142 (6) 3 Mixed (EPO-INT-3) 1/65 (2) 8/135 (6) 4 Mixed (EPO-INT-10)5/124 (4)14/251 (6) 2 Mixed (PR )6/165 (4) 9/168 (5) 1 Mixed (non-cisplatin) 3/76 (4) 2/81 (2)–2 Ovarian (EPO-INT-1) 1/80 (1) 3/164 (2) 1 Mixed (non-chemo) 0/59 (0) 1/65 (2) 2 CLL (P-174) 0/12 (0) 0/33 (0) 0

CS-21 Evaluation of Safety Conclusions In supportive anemia care, data and extensive clinical experience support favorable benefit/risk profile –No signal of tumor proliferation In investigational studies beyond correction of anemia, adverse outcomes have been seen –Signal in overall survival in some studies –Lack of clear signal regarding tumor proliferation –Increased incidence of TVEs in studies of epoetin alfa beyond correction of anemia Additional data being collected, new trial under discussion In supportive anemia care, data and extensive clinical experience support favorable benefit/risk profile –No signal of tumor proliferation In investigational studies beyond correction of anemia, adverse outcomes have been seen –Signal in overall survival in some studies –Lack of clear signal regarding tumor proliferation –Increased incidence of TVEs in studies of epoetin alfa beyond correction of anemia Additional data being collected, new trial under discussion