Winning the RACE: Expanding pediatric cancer drug approvals.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Shulman DS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6588494 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Winning the RACE: Expanding pediatric cancer drug approvals.
Shulman David S DS DuBois Steven G SG
Pediatric blood & cancer 20190311 8
Similar Datasets
Project description:Enzymes are often excellent drug targets. Yet drug pressure on an enzyme target often fosters the rise of cells with resistance-conferring mutations, some of which may compromise fitness and others that compensate to restore fitness. This review presents, first, a structural analysis of a diverse group of wild-type and mutant enzyme targets and, second, an in-depth analysis of five diverse targets to elucidate a broader perspective of the effects of resistance-conferring mutations on protein or organismal fitness. The structural analysis reveals that resistance-conferring mutations may introduce steric hindrance or eliminate critical interactions, as expected, but that they may also have indirect effects such as altering protein dynamics and enzyme kinetics. The structure-based development of the latest generation of inhibitors targeting HIV reverse transcriptase, P. falciparum and S. aureus dihydrofolate reductase, neuraminidase, and epithelial growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase, is highlighted to emphasize lessons that may be applied to future drug discovery to overcome mutation-induced resistance. Successful next-generation drugs tend to be more flexible and exploit a greater number of interactions mimicking those of the substrate with conserved residues.
| S-EPMC3649075 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceRepresentative racial/ethnic participation in research, especially in clinical trials that establish standards of care, is necessary to minimize disparities in outcomes and to uphold societal equity in health care.ObjectiveTo evaluate the frequency of race reporting and proportional race representation in trials supporting US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oncology drug approvals.Design, setting, and participantsDatabase study of all reported trials supporting FDA oncology drug approvals granted between July 2008 and June 2018. Primary reports of trials were obtained from PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov. Food and Drug Administration approvals were identified using the FDA archives. The US population-based cancer estimates by race were calculated using National Cancer Institute-Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results and US Census databases.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes were the proportion of trials reporting race and the proportion of patients by race participating in trials. Secondary outcomes included race subgroup analyses reporting and gaps between race proportion in trials and the US population. Descriptive statistics, Fisher exact, and χ2 tests were used to analyze the data. Proportions and odds ratios (OR) with 95% CIs were reported.ResultsAmong 230 trials with a total of 112 293 participants, 145 (63.0%) reported on at least 1 race, 18 (7.8%) documented the 4 major races in the United States (white, Asian, black, and Hispanic), and 58 (25.2%) reported race subgroup analyses. Reporting on white, Asian, black, and Hispanic races was included in 144 (62.6%), 110 (47.8%), 88 (38.2%), and 23 (10.0%) trials, respectively. Between July 2008 and June 2013 vs July 2013 and June 2018, the number of trials reporting race (45 [56.6%] vs 100 [67.1%]; OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.93-2.87; P = .09) and race subgroup analysis (13 [16.1%] vs 45 [30.2%]; OR, 2.26, 95% CI, 1.16-4.67; P = .03) changed minimally and varied across races. Whites, Asians, blacks, and Hispanics represented 76.3%, 18.3%, 3.1% and 6.1% of trial participants, respectively, and the proportion for each race enrolled over time changed nominally (blacks, 3.6% vs 2.9% and Hispanics, 5.3% vs 6.7%) from July 2008 to June 2013 vs July 2013 to June 2018. Compared with their proportion of US cancer incidence, blacks (22% of expected) and Hispanics (44% of expected) were underrepresented compared with whites (98% of expected) and Asians (438% of expected).Conclusions and relevanceRace and race subgroup analysis reporting occurs infrequently, and black and Hispanic races are consistently underrepresented compared with their burden of cancer incidence in landmark trials that led to FDA oncology drug approvals. Enhanced minority engagement is needed in trials to ensure the validity of results and reliable benefits to all.
| S-EPMC6696743 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMedical devices can be useful in a variety of diseases, but few devices have been specifically approved for use in children. The 2007 Pediatric Medical Device Safety and Improvement Act was passed to stimulate pediatric device development. The current state of trial evidence underpinning the approval of pediatric devices remains poorly described.MethodsWe identified all high-risk (ie, class III) devices approved through the premarket approval or humanitarian device exemption pathways for therapeutic use in children between 2008 and 2011. We collected key information on clinical trial design (randomization, blinding, controls, and types of end points) as well as age distribution of trial participants. We also identified US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-mandated postmarketing trials.ResultsTwenty-two devices were approved for use in children via the premarket approval pathway and 3 via the humanitarian device exemption pathway. Twenty-two (88%) qualified as pediatric despite minimum approval ages of ≥18 years (the FDA Center for Devices and Radiologic Health considers patients 18-21 years old as pediatric). Most devices were approved on the basis of nonrandomized (59%), open-label (68%) studies with surrogate effectiveness end points (86%). Overall, 21 (84%) devices were not studied in any patients <18 years of age. Postmarketing studies were mandated by the FDA for 19 (76%) devices, although only 3 (18%) required enrollment of pediatric patients.ConclusionsMost high-risk pediatric devices are approved on the basis of trials in patients ≥18 years old, with few pediatric patients exposed to the devices before market availability. Few postmarketing studies require additional study in pediatric patients.
| S-EPMC4531281 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceAlthough several cancer drugs receive US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval each month, it is unclear how many of these cancer drugs transform the treatment landscape significantly by tumor group. Specifically, it remains unclear how many of these newly approved cancer drugs displace the existing standard-of-care therapies for their indication vs being added to existing therapies.ObjectiveTo examine how many cancer drugs displace the standard-of-care therapies vs being added to existing therapy or filling breaks in systemic treatments in the metastatic setting, adjuvant setting, or maintenance setting.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective cross-sectional study using landmark trials leading to FDA approval of cancer drugs between May 1, 2016, and May 31, 2021. The study evaluated all FDA approvals for cancer drugs between May 1, 2016, and May 31, 2021, using the FDA Oncology (Cancer)/Hematologic Malignancies Approval Notifications website. All clinical trials leading to FDA approval of cancer drugs during this period were examined.Main outcomes and measuresA drug was determined to have displaced the prior standard-of-care therapy by evaluating the comparator arm (or lack thereof) in the clinical trial leading to the drug's approval and also by reviewing National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines. Cancer drug approvals were categorized as first-line displacing if a drug was approved for use in the first-line setting and displaced the prior standard-of-care drug for an indication, first-line drug alternatives/new if a drug was approved for use in the first-line setting but did not displace the standard of care at the time of approval or was a new drug that was first of its class for an approved indication, add on if a drug was approved in combination with a previously approved therapy for a disease or if a drug was approved for use in the adjuvant or maintenance settings, and later line if a drug was approved for use in the second-, third-, or later-line settings.ResultsBetween May 1, 2016, and May 31, 2021, there were 207 FDA cancer drug approvals in oncology and malignant hematology. Of these 207 approvals, 28 drugs (14%) were first-line displacing therapies. A total of 32 drugs (15%) were first-line drug alternatives/new drugs. A total of 61 drugs (29%) were add-on therapies. Finally, 86 drugs (42%) were approved as later-line therapies.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, most cancer drug approvals between 2016 and 2021 were in the later-line settings as opposed to displacing the current standard-of-care therapy for the approved indication. These later-line drugs may benefit patients with few alternatives but add to the cost of care because competition in the drug markets is a key factor in leading to lower drug prices.
| S-EPMC8924721 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Regulatory authorities must balance ensuring evidence of efficacy and safety of new drugs. Various regulatory pathways, such as the accelerated approval program in the United States (US), allow authorities to quickly approve drugs for severely ill patients by granting market authorization based on surrogate end points and pending confirmatory trials. In this cross-sectional study, we considered 23 indications of cancer drugs that received accelerated approval by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) but were subsequently withdrawn as of April 2023. Our investigation extended to assessing the regulatory status of these accelerated approvals in the European Union (EU) and Japan, examining relevant regulatory documents and identifying factors contributing to the withdrawal in the United States. Comparing regions, we found that for 52% (12/23) and 30% (7/23) of withdrawn accelerated approvals in the United States, sponsors had also sought marketing authorization from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and Japan's Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA), respectively. As of the April 30, 2023 study cutoff date, 83% (10/12) of drug-indication pairs remained approved by the EMA, while the PMDA retained 100% (7/7). For these indications, the time from FDA withdrawal until the study cutoff date ranged from 0.23 years to 11.45 years for EMA approvals (median: 1.28 years) and 1.10 years to 11.45 years for PMDA approvals (median: 3.22 years). These findings highlight substantial regulatory discrepancies concerning cancer drugs with unconfirmed benefits. Addressing these discrepancies may involve requiring pharmaceutical companies to confirm clinical benefits using more robust end points and fostering international harmonization in regulators' assessment.
| S-EPMC11236735 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is the most common form of acute leukemia in adults, with an incidence that increases with age, and a generally poor prognosis. The disease is clinically and genetically heterogeneous, and recent advances have improved our understanding of the cytogenetic abnormalities and molecular mutations, aiding in prognostication and risk stratification. Until recently, however, therapeutic options were mostly limited to cytotoxic chemotherapy. Since 2017, there has been an explosion of newly approved treatment options both nationally and internationally, with the majority of new drugs targeting specific gene mutations and/or pivotal cell survival pathways. In this review article, we will discuss these new agents approved for the treatment of AML within the last 2 years, and will outline the mechanistic features and clinical trials that led to their approvals.
| S-EPMC6749668 | biostudies-literature
Project description:NUT midline carcinoma family member 1 (NUTM1) fusions were originally identified in poorly differentiated and clinically aggressive carcinomas typically located in the midline structures of children and young adults, and collectively known as NUT (midline) carcinomas. Next-generation sequencing later uncovered NUTM1 fusions in a variety of other pediatric and adult cancers of diverse location and type, including hematologic malignancies, cutaneous adnexal tumors, and sarcomas. A vast array of NUTM1 fusions with bromodomain containing 4 (BRD4) or bromodomain containing 3 (BRD3), which are characteristic of NUT carcinoma, and with several other fusion partners have been identified and associated with variable prognosis. These non-kinase fusions are thought to cause epigenetic reprogramming, thereby promoting proliferation, and hindering the differentiation of cancer cells. Many questions about both the function of the naïve NUTM1 protein, which is mostly restricted to the germ cells of the testis and is related to spermatogenesis and the oncogenic mechanisms of the various NUTM1 fusions in both adult and pediatric cancer, are still unanswered. Moreover, whether there is a relationship defined by the presence of NUTM1 fusions between conventional NUT carcinoma and other NUTM1-rearranged neoplasms remains to be elucidated. This review will focus on recent discoveries of NUTM1 fusions found in pediatric cancers, their prognostic impact, and emergence as novel oncogenic drivers.
| S-EPMC10432870 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To clarify the approval status of molecular targeted antineoplastic drugs in the United States (U.S.), the European Union (E.U.), and Japan (JP), we checked the status of pediatric indications according to the package insert of each drug. A total of 103 drugs were approved for adult patients in at least one of the three regions whereas only 19 drugs were approved for pediatric patients. Sixty-six of 103 drugs (64.1%) had adult indications in the U.S., the E.U., and JP, whereas only three drugs had pediatric indications in all three regions. Abnormalities in six genes (NRAS, ABL1, JAK2, KIT, ALK and BRAF) were common in childhood cancers as well as adult cancers, for which at least one approved drug could be a potentially actionable drug. Although there were 16 candidate drugs that had adult indications for these abnormalities, only three drugs (18.8%) had pediatric indications. We confirmed that there were few molecular targeted antineoplastic drugs with pediatric indications in the U.S., the E.U., and JP compared with the number of approved drugs for adults. Drugs targeting genomic abnormalities which were common in both adult and pediatric cancers were considered to be good candidates for expansion of their indication for pediatric patients.
| S-EPMC7555892 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Orphan Drug Act (ODA) of 1983 was enacted to provide financial incentives to drug sponsors to develop therapies for rare diseases. Although this act increased the number of orphan products approved, there are still a limited number of products available for the pediatric population because orphan drug products are exempt from the Pediatric Research Equity Act. The objectives of this study were (i) to evaluate the pediatric orphan drug studies submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the period of 2007-2018 and (ii) to examine whether orphan drug products were fully labeled with a pediatric indication in infants and neonates. Out of the 468 indications evaluated, 171 (37%) were FDA-labeled for use in the pediatric population. Labeling for the 12 to < 18 years age group was most common (98%). Fifty-two percent of FDA-labeled pediatric indications included the newborn to < 2 years of age group. In this newborn to < 2 years age group, the indication was labeled without pivotal clinical trials in 43% of the programs. Of the 60 new indications not labeled down to birth, 50% were found to have an age of onset and diagnosis that occurs earlier than the age approved for use of the product for that indication. In summary, although the ODA has been successful in improving pediatric access to medications for rare diseases, our analysis identified the incomplete labeling for pediatric patients under 2 years of age. Strategies to include the birth to < 2 years old group of pediatric patients in orphan drug development programs should be explored.
| S-EPMC8545222 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIt has been suggested that the results from fragile trials are less likely to translate into benefit in routine clinical practice.MethodsWe searched the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) archives to identify drug approvals for solid organ malignancies between 2010 and 2019. We calculated the Fragility Index (FI) supporting each approval, using methods to account for time-to-event. We compared FI and trial and approval characteristics using Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis test. Using logistic regression, we examined study characteristics associated with withdrawal of consent or lost to follow-up (WCLFU) exceeding the calculated FI.ResultsThe median FI among 125 included studies was 23 (range 1-322). The FI was ≤10 in 35 studies (28%), 11-20 in 21 (17%), and >20 in 69 (55%). The median FI/Nexp was 7.7% (range 0.1-51.7%). The median FI was significantly lower among approvals processed through the accelerated vs regular pathway (5.5 vs 25, p = 0.001), but there was no difference in median FI/Nexp. The WCLFU exceeded FI in 42% of studies. Overall survival endpoints were more likely to have a WCLFU exceeding FI (OR 3.16, p = 0.003). WCLFU exceeding FI was also associated with a lesser magnitude of effect (median HR 0.69 vs 0.55, p < 0.001). In a sensitivity analysis including only studies with 1:1 randomization, 51% of studies had WCLFU >FI.ConclusionThe median FI among all trials was 23, and WCLFU exceeded FI in 42%. Comparative trials in solid tumors supporting approval through the accelerated pathway are more fragile compared to trials approved through the regular pathway, an observation likely explained by a lower sample size in the experimental arm.
| S-EPMC8366090 | biostudies-literature