1 / 51

NDA 20-498 / S012 CASODEX (bicalutamide) 150 mg

NDA 20-498 / S012 CASODEX (bicalutamide) 150 mg. FDA Review Division of Reproductive and Urologic Drug Products (DRUDP). Outline of FDA Presentation. Background and Review Issues Dan Shames, M.D., Director, DRUDP Review of Clinical Trial Data Scott Monroe, M.D., Medical Team Leader, DRUDP

ivana-jordan
Download Presentation

NDA 20-498 / S012 CASODEX (bicalutamide) 150 mg

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. NDA 20-498 / S012CASODEX (bicalutamide) 150 mg FDA Review Division of Reproductive and Urologic Drug Products (DRUDP)

  2. Outline of FDA Presentation • Background and Review Issues • Dan Shames, M.D., Director, DRUDP • Review of Clinical Trial Data • Scott Monroe, M.D., Medical Team Leader, DRUDP • Summary of Review Issues and Introduction of Questions • Dan Shames, M.D.

  3. Background • Importance of current supplement on the public health • Importance of adequate staging in the treatment of prostate cancer • History of Casodex 150mg development

  4. Public Health Importance • Would be first approved drug for non-metastatic prostate cancer • Target population of hundreds of thousands • Therapy not warranted in a proportion of patients • Variable natural history of prostate cancer • Side effects possible without drug benefit • Drug could be used for years or decades

  5. Prediction of Prognoses of Prostate Cancer Subpopulations • Definition of Prostate Cancer Subpopulation • Clinical/path stage • Gleason Score • measure of differentiation • Gleason score assigned by improper methodology in non US studies • PSA • Partin, D’Amico, etc. • Gleason adds to precision of staging and prognosis

  6. History of CASODEX 150 Trials 306 & 307 • Randomized, parallel studies in “Advanced” carcinoma of prostate (1992) • M0 = T3/T4 , PSA = 5 x ULN (N=490) • M1 = bone mets (N=960) • Casodex 150 vs. castration (medical or surgical) • Intent of study • to show survival non-inferiority of Casodex compared to castration • to show QOL advantage of Casodex compared to castration

  7. Trials 306 & 307 • DSMB stopped the trials for M1 patients • Casodex compared to castration • decreased survival • increased progression • in both trials • Trials continued with M0 patients only • Trial 306 (N=128) • Trial 307 (N=352)

  8. Trials 306 & 307 (NDA 20-498 / S006) • Submitted 2/25/00 • “To compare in a combined analysis, the selected dose of Casodex 150mg with medical or surgical castration in terms of survival, time to progression and time to treatment failure, QOL and tolerability in patients with untreated, locally advanced prostate cancer (T3-4, Nx, Mo)”

  9. Results of Trials 306 & 307Hazard Ratios for Mortality (M0) • At 56% overall mortality, median of 6.3 yrs follow-up • Trial 306 (N=128) • HR (Casodex/Castration) = 0.64 (0.39, 1.03) • Trial 307 (N=352) • HR (Casodex/Castration) = 1.25 (0.92, 1.71) • Combined Analysis • HR (Casodex/Castration) = 1.05 (0.81, 1.36) • Casodex failed to meet pre specified 1.25 to signify equivalence (Casodex could be no more than 25% worse than castration)

  10. Concerns Regarding Results of Trials 306 & 307 • In M1 patients, Casodex inferior to castration (stopped by DSMB) • In M0 patients, Casodex had disparate results • data from larger trial indicated decreased survival and increase progression compared to castration

  11. Additional Information Regarding Long Term Use of Antiandrogens • Ann Int Med, April 2000, Seidenfeld et al • Issue of paradoxical antiandrogen stimulation • occurs with all anti androgens • receptor gene mutation?

  12. Review Issues for NDA 20-498 / S012 • Efficacy Concerns • Duration of trials too short to demonstrate enduring benefit • Invalid Gleason Scores • trials 24, 25 Gleason score assigned by improper methodology • inconsistencies of clinical stage/outcomes and pathology between US and Non US trials • Data proposed to support efficacy in US patients based on retrospective subgroup analyses

  13. Review Issues for NDA 20-498 / S012 • Safety Concerns • High discontinuation rates for adverse events • High incidence of gynecomastia/breast pain • Irreversible gynecomastia • Liver toxicity

  14. Review Issues for NDA 20-498 / S012 • Other issues • possible survival decrement with longer follow up • paradoxical antiandrogen stimulation • QOL/Sexual • three trials with heterogeneous populations, and different treatments • Non-US trials reflect different practice patterns • imprecision of bone scan readings

  15. FDA Review of Efficacy and Safety • NDA 20-498/s012 • Sponsor’s current indications for CASODEX 150 mg • adjuvant therapy to radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy of curative intent in patients with locally advanced non-metastatic prostate cancer who have a high risk for disease recurrence or • immediate treatment of localized non-metastatic prostate cancer in patients for whom therapy of curative intent is not indicated • Medical Reviewer: Scott Monroe MD

  16. Overview of Clinical Program for “Early Prostate Cancer” Trial 23 Trial 24 Trial 25 N=3603 N=1218 N=3292 N=8113 Casodex Ptsn=4052 Placebo Ptsn=4061 Withdrawn fromTreatmentn=1845 Treatment ongoing or completedn=2207 Withdrawn from Treatmentn=1706 Treatment ongoing or completedn=2355

  17. Topics for Review and Presentation • Presentation limited to • Significant Clinical Review Issues • Differences between Sponsor and Division regarding • Study endpoints and data analyses • Interpretation of clinical findings • Findings of concern to the Division

  18. Disease Characteristics at Baseline

  19. Discordance between Gleason Scores and Disease Progression • Prostatectomy Patients

  20. Discordance between Gleason Scores and Disease Progression • Radiotherapy Patients

  21. Primary Endpoints and Analysis • Sponsor’s primary analysis and endpoints • Time to disease progression • local or distant progression of disease confirmed by bone scan,x-ray, CT scan, MRI, ultrasonography, or biopsy • death due to any cause in absence of progression • FDA preferred analysis and endpoints • Proportion of patients with progression within 2 yrs post randomization • positive bone scan • death due to any cause in absence of progression

  22. Primary Endpoints and Analysis • Rationale for FDA preferred endpoints and analysis • Blinding not maintained because of gynecomastia and decrease in PSA in Casodex treated patients • Specific criteria for local disease progression not provided in protocols • No central, blinded review of events classified as progression • All protocols mandated a bone scan at 2 yrs post randomization

  23. Disease Progression or Death (FDA Requested Analysis)

  24. Original Indication (submitted with NDA)for Treatment with Casodex 150 mg • “Immediate hormonal therapy or adjuvant therapy to treatment of curative intent inpatients with non-metastatic prostate cancer” Clinical Stage of Prostate Ca M0 M0 Adjuvant TxImmediate Tx T1 T2 T3 T4 • Sponsor was asked to identify population treated by prostatectomy or radiotherapy in US who would benefit from adjuvant treatment • Sponsor performed post hoc exploratory analyses that resulted in first of two changes to the proposed indication

  25. Sponsor’s First Revision to Proposed Indications for Treatment with Casodex 150 mg • First revision of Indication (submitted May 2002) • Adjuvant therapy to radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy of curative intent in patients with locally advanced non-metastatic prostate cancer who have a high risk for disease recurrence or • Immediate treatment of non-metastatic prostate cancer in patients for whom therapy of curative intent is not indicated

  26. Disease Progression in “High Risk” Patients (T3/T4 and Detectable PSA Post-prostatectomy)

  27. Disease Progression in “High Risk” Patients (T3/T4 and Pre-radiation PSA >10 ng/mL

  28. Sponsor’s Revised Definition of High Risk for Disease Recurrence in Adjuvant Patients • Sponsor’s original definition of high risk for recurrence • locally advanced (T3/T4) and one of the following • detectable postsurgical PSA or • preradiationPSA >10 ng/mL • Sponsor’s revised definition of high risk for recurrence • locally advanced (T3/T4) and one of the following • detectable postsurgical PSA, orpresurgical PSA >10 ng/mL, or Gleason score  7or • preradiationPSA >4 ng/mL

  29. Disease Progression in “High and Low Risk” Adjuvant-Treated Patients (Revised Definition)

  30. Disease Progression in “High Risk” Prostatectomy Patients (Revised Definition of “High Risk”)

  31. Current (2nd) Revision to Proposed Indication for Casodex 150 mg • Adjuvant usage (unchanged) • Adjuvant therapy to radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy of curative intent in patients with locally advanced non-metastatic prostate cancer who have a high risk for disease recurrence or • Immediate or monotherapy usage (modified) • Immediate treatment oflocalized(T1/T2) non-metastatic prostate cancer in patients for whom therapy of curative intent is not indicated

  32. Disease Progression in Immediate Therapy (Monotherapy) T1/T2 (Localized Disease) Patients

  33. Disease Characteristics of Patients in Immediate Treatment (Monotherapy) Group

  34. Discordance between Local and Central Bone Scan Readings

  35. Number (%) of Deaths (Prostate Cancer-Related or Other Causes

  36. Summary of Unresolved Efficacy Issues • Maturity of studies • Only 15.6% and 9.3% of pts had disease progression by Sponsor or FDA preferred analyses, respectively, across Trials 24 and 25 • Long-term benefit of treatment unclear in absence of survival and meaningful quality of life data • Inability to identify those prostate cancer pts in US who would derive benefit from adjuvant therapy • Post hoc subset analyses by Sponsor were inconclusive or nonsupportive • Lack of valid Gleason scores in non-US trials • What is the risk/benefit ratio for immediate therapy (monotherapy) in patients with localized disease

  37. Disposition of Patients

  38. Adverse Events with Incidence >5% and More Frequent in Casodex Patients

  39. Time to First Occurrence of Gynecomastia (All Trials)

  40. Incidence of and Withdrawals due to Gynecomastia or Breast Pain (All Trials)

  41. Persistence of Gynecomastia or Breast Pain Posttreatmentin Casodex Patients

  42. Maintenance of Sexual Function Relative to Baseline (Trial 25)

  43. Clinically Relevant Changes in ALT, AST, and Bilirubin Values (Combined Data)

  44. Summary of Significant Safety Findings in NDA 20-498/012 • A high percentage of patients reported antiandrogenic- or estrogenic-related adverse events • 86% Casodex patients vs. 12% placebo patients reported gynecomastia or breast pain • 16% Casodex patients vs. <1% placebo patients withdrew because of gynecomastia or breast pain • Gynecomastia persisted post-treatment in 50% patients • Life-threatening or fatal hepatotoxicity - rare and similar in both groups • Clinically significant rises in ALT/AST and withdrawals due to hepatic AEs 2-3 fold greater in Casodex treated patients

  45. Summary of Not Approvable Letter • Division wanted submission of more mature trial data • Does progression advantage persist? • R/O survival disadvantage compared to placebo • Perform Gleason scores on Trials 24 & 25 • Choose well defined successful subgroup and perform well controlled prospective trial

  46. Review Issues for NDA 20-498 / S012 • Efficacy Concerns • Duration of trials too short to demonstrate enduring benefit • Invalid Gleason Scores • trials 24, 25 Gleason score assigned by improper methodology • inconsistencies of clinical stage/outcomes and pathology between US and Non US trials • Data proposed to support efficacy in US patients based on retrospective subgroup analyses

  47. Review Issues for NDA 20-498 / S012 • Safety Concerns • High discontinuation rates for adverse events • High incidence of gynecomastia/breast pain • Irreversible gynecomastia • Liver toxicity

  48. Review Issues for NDA 20-498 / S012 • Other issues • possible survival decrement with longer follow up • paradoxical antiandrogen stimulation • QOL/Sexual • three trials with heterogeneous populations, and different treatments • Non-US trials reflect different practice patterns • imprecision of bone scan readings

More Related