FDA Shifting Accelerated Approval Approach: Attorneys

Share

Attorneys Joshua Oyster and Rebecca Williams (Ropes & Gray) say recent FDA actions “potentially signal a broader shift in FDA’s approach to accelerated approval drugs.” Writing in an online post, they note the agency plans to hold workshops this year to discuss the role of surrogate efficacy endpoints, their ability to predict overall survival (OS), and the information necessary to make a risk/benefit determination for novel oncology drugs.

Explaining the agency’s 3/24 draft guidance on clinical trial considerations to support accelerated approval of oncology therapeutics, Oyster and Williams write that FDA expresses its preference for randomized clinical trials and also emphasizes endpoint selection, echoing recent agency concerns about the ability of surrogate endpoints to predict oncology drug clinical benefit.

They cite a recent article written by several FDA officials, including some from the Oncology Center of Excellence, that highlighted concerns about the ability of objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) to serve as surrogate endpoints for OS. “While the article acknowledges that ORR and PFS continue to have utility in drug development,” the attorneys write, “there may be discordance between these earlier endpoints and OS due to, among other things, significant toxicity issues or inadequate exploration of dose optimization in earlier trials. The article emphasizes that the results and maturity of OS data may impact a sponsor’s ability to seek accelerated approval. Moreover, any detrimental effect on OS may cause FDA to reassess the risk/benefit profile of the product. The authors conclude that ‘when [risk/benefit is] unfavorable, both parties should honor the regulatory prenuptial agreement of drug approval and seek expedited withdrawal of the indication.’”

Read more