1 / 88

FDA’s Antiviral Drugs Advisory Committee Meeting

FDA’s Antiviral Drugs Advisory Committee Meeting. BARACLUDE TM (entecavir / BMS 200475). 11 March 2005. Introduction. Elliott Sigal, MD, PhD. Global Impact of Hepatitis B. 15–40% develop cirrhosis, liver failure or hepatocellular carcinoma. 2 billion with past / present HBV infection.

odeda
Download Presentation

FDA’s Antiviral Drugs Advisory Committee Meeting

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. FDA’s Antiviral DrugsAdvisory Committee Meeting BARACLUDETM(entecavir / BMS 200475) 11 March 2005

  2. Introduction Elliott Sigal, MD, PhD

  3. Global Impact of Hepatitis B 15–40% develop cirrhosis, liver failureor hepatocellular carcinoma 2 billion with past / present HBV infection 350–400 million with chronic hepatitis B World Population 6 billion Worldwide: ~1 million / year die from HBV-associated liver disease United States: Chronically infected ~1.25 million; ~5000 / year die

  4. Background Richard Colonno, PhD

  5. Proposed Indication • Entecavir is indicated for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B infection in adults with evidence of active liver inflammation • Usual dose:0.5 mg tablet once daily • Lamivudine-refractory:1.0 mg tablet once daily

  6. BMS Presentation • Introduction Elliott Sigal, MD, PhD • Chief Scientific Officer & President, Pharmaceutical Research Institute • Background Richard Colonno, PhDVice President, Infectious Diseases Drug Discovery • Nonclinical Safety Lois Lehman-McKeeman, PhD • Distinguished Research Fellow, Discovery Toxicology • Clinical Efficacy / Evren Atillasoy, MD • Clinical SafetyDirector, US Medical Affairs • Viral Resistance Richard Colonno, PhDVice President, Infectious Diseases Drug Discovery • Pharmacovigilance Donna Morgan Murray, PhDand SummaryExecutive Director, Global Regulatory Sciences

  7. Consultants Available to the Committee • Hepatology • Health Policy • Hepatology • Toxicology/ • Pathology • Biostatistics • Toxicology/ • Pathology • Adrian Di Bisceglie, MD • Saint Louis University School of Medicine • Samuel A. Bozzette, MD, PhD • University of California, San Diego • Jules L. Dienstag, MD • Massachusetts General Hospital • James Swenberg, DVM, PhD • University of North Carolina • LJ Wei, PhD • Harvard University • Gary M. Williams, MD, DABT • New York Medical College

  8. Impact of Viral Replication on Disease Progression: Taiwan Cohort Study Results • The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and liver cirrhosis is correlated with level of viral replication • Persistent elevation of viral load over time has the greatest impact on HCC risk • Viral load predicts risk of future HCC independent of HBeAg status and serum ALT level • This risk increases with increasing viral load EASL April 2005

  9. Pathophysiologic Cascade of Chronic Hepatitis B Infection: Significance of HBV Replication HBV Replication (Measured by Serum HBV DNA) Liver Inflammation ALT Elevation DiseaseProgression Liver Failure Liver Cancer Transplant Death Worsening histology Necroinflammation Fibrosis Cirrhosis

  10. Placebo (n = 215) ITT population Lamivudine (n = 436) Placebo 18% Percentage withDisease Progression p = 0.001 Lamivudine 8% Time to Disease Progression (months) Liaw et al: LVD Treatment PreventsDisease Progression vs Placebo Liaw et al.N Engl J Med 2004;351:1521-31.

  11. Liaw et al: Incidence of Disease Progression by LVDR Substitutions Number (%) Lamivudine Wild Type (N = 221) LVDR(YMDD) (N = 209) Placebo (N = 214) 11 (5) 23 (11) 38 (18) Adapted from Liaw et al.N Engl J Med 2004;351:1521-31.

  12. Chronic HBV: Improved Oral Antiviral Therapy • Effective • Safe and well tolerated • Potent • Has low rates of resistance • Maintain future treatment options • Does not select for LVD or ADV resistance

  13. O N NH NH2 CH2 N N OH OH Entecavir • Cyclopentyl guanosine analog • Potent Selective inhibitorof HBV replication • No significant activity against HIV • Poor substrate for humanpolymerases • No inhibition of humanmitochondrial (gamma) polymerase • Inhibits all 3 HBV polymerase functions:Priming, DNA-dependent synthesis, Reverse transcription • Phosporylation: Intracellular ETV-TP T ½ ~ 15 hrs

  14. Comparative EC50 for HBV In Cell Culture WT: ETV EC50 = 4 nM (> 300-fold more potent)

  15. Woodchuck Model • Predictive model of HBV antivirals in humans • Efficacy • Toxicity • Progression to HCC • ETV is a potent inhibitor of WHBV polymerase • Long-term treatment (ETV 0.5 mg/kg): 14 or 36 months • Sustained virologic suppression up to 8 logsfor 1 to 3 years WHBV – Woodchuck Hepatitis B Virus

  16. Woodchuck Studies: Survival N = 56 N =50 N =6 N =5 * ‡ Animals Survivingto Age 4 (%) * ‡ ControlUninfected ControlInfected ETV14 mo. ETV36 mo. Treatment * Combined p = 0.0002 ‡ Historical control. Tennant, et al. Viral Hepatitis and Liver Disease 1988: 462-464 R. Colonno, et al. Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2001;184:1236-45

  17. Nonclinical Safety Lois Lehman-McKeeman, PhD

  18. Rodent Carcinogenicity Studies: Overview • Lifetime studies in rats and mice to identify hazard • Study Design • 50-60 animals / sex / group • Dose up to maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) • Safety margin over human exposure • Tumor Evaluation • Standard histopathologic assessment • Spontaneous tumors observed

  19. Rodent Carcinogenicity Studies:Statistical Evaluation • Compare tumor incidences in treated vs control animals • Peto-Pike trend test • Adjusts for time and cause of death • Statistical significance based on incidence < 0.005 for a common tumor < 0.025 for a rare tumor • Determine dose level that results in no significant trend FDA Guidance, 2001

  20. Rodent Carcinogenicity: Results for ETV • Tumors concluded to be relevant for the evaluation of human safety after review with FDA CAC • Tissues showing preneoplastic changes • Mice: lung adenomas and carcinomas • Tissues not showing preneoplastic changes • Male Mice: liver carcinomas • Female Mice: Vascular tumors • Male rats: Gliomas • Female rats: Gliomas, liver adenomas,skin fibromas

  21. Key Carcinogenicity Findings: Mouse Lung • Dosage, mg/kg 0 0.004 0.04 0.4 4 • Exposure: 0.5 mg (M, F) 0 2, 2 5, 2 24, 19 75, 70 • Exposure: 1 mg (M, F) 0 1,1 3, 3 14, 11 42, 40 • MALES % Tumor Incidence • Lung Adenoma 7 13 19* 28* 33* • Lung Carcinoma5 7 7 12 25* • FEMALES • Lung Adenoma 13 8 7 27 25* • Lung Carcinoma 7 5 3 8 27* * p < 0.005

  22. Lung Tumors in Mice • Preneoplastic effects observed in mouse lung: • Increased macrophages • Proliferation of Type II pneumocytes • Sustained proliferation of Type II pneumocytesis causally-related to tumor development • Macrophages required • ETV is chemotactic • No preneoplastic changes observed in rats, dogs, monkeys • Entecavir is not chemotactic for human monocytes

  23. Key Carcinogenicity Findings in Mice • Dosage, mg/kg 0 0.004 0.04 0.4 4 • Exposure: 0.5 mg (M, F) 0 2, 2 5, 2 24, 19 75, 70 • Exposure: 1 mg (M, F) 0 1,1 3, 3 14, 11 42, 40 • MALES % Tumor Incidence • Liver Carcinoma 1 2 5 3 13* • FEMALES • Hemangiomas19 22 20 18 43* * p < 0.005

  24. phosphorylation ETV ETV-TP GDP dGTP dGDP High Dose Rodent Tumors:Possible Mode of Action • ETV-induces dNTP pool perturbations: • Imbalance alters fidelity of DNA replication and repair • Increased tumor development

  25. Key Carcinogenicity Findings in Rats Dosage, Males 0 0.003 0.02 0.2 1.4 Dosage, Females 0 0.01 0.06 0.4 2.6 Exposure: 0.5 mg (M, F) 0 <1, <1 <1, 1 8, 8 62, 43 Exposure: 1 mg (M, F) 0 <1, <1 <1, <1 5, 4 35, 24 MALES % Tumor Incidence Brain Glioma 0 2 2 3 7** FEMALES Brain Glioma 0 0 2 0 5** Liver Adenoma 1 3 5 2 13* Skin Fibroma 0 0 2 3**5** * p < 0.005; ** p < 0.025

  26. Human Risk Assessment Lifetime studies in rats and mice identify carcinogenic hazard • Human cancer risk assessment • Other relevant data • Dose-response relationships • Exposure multiples • Assessment for ETV • Mouse lung tumors may be species specific • ETV-induced changes in dNTP pools may contribute to non-linear dose response

  27. Clinical Efficacy Evren Atillasoy, MD

  28. Entecavir Clinical Program • Broad experience: • Patterns of HBV disease • Global • NDA: ~ 1500 ETV-treated patients • Comparison versus active control (LVD)

  29. Clinical Experience Special Populations N = 139 Phase 2 N = 757 Phase 3 N = 1633 901 Rollover ETV + LVD ETV 049 5 YearPost-Treatment Observation Safety Update

  30. Dose Response –Mean Reduction in HBV DNA, log10 c/mL Nucleoside-Naive Patients LVD-Refractory Patients Weeks ETV 0.01(N = 52) ETV 0.1(N = 34) ETV 0.1(N = 47) ETV 0.5(N = 47) ETV 0.5(N = 43) LVD 100(N = 40) ETV 1.0(N = 42) LVD 100(N = 45) Studies 005 and 014

  31. ClinicalEfficacy • Naïve eAg+ (022) • Naïve eAg- (027) • LVD-refractory eAg+ (026)

  32. Phase III Study Design • ETV 0.5 mg (N = 354) Responders • LVD 100 mg (N = 355) Partial Responders • ETV 0.5 mg (N = 325) • LVD 100 mg (N = 313) • ETV 1.0 mg (N = 141) Non-Responders • LVD 100 mg (N = 145) Baseline (Liver Biopsy) Week 48 (Liver Biopsy) Week 52 (Patient Management Decision)

  33. Key Inclusion Criteria • Liver biopsy • Documented HBsAg+ for ≥24 weeks • Compensated liver diseae • ALT 1.3 − 10 x ULN • HBV DNA by bDNA eAg+: ≥ 3 MEq/mL (3 x 106 c/mL) eAg- : ≥ 0.7 MEq/mL (7 x 105 c/mL) • HIV, HCV and HDV seronegative • Creatinine ≤ 1.5 mg/dL Studies 022, 027 and 026

  34. Baseline Patient Demographics • Naïve eAg+ • N = 709 • Naïve eAg- • N = 638 • LVD-Ref eAg+ • N = 286 • Age, mean (years) • 35 • 44 • 39 • Male • 75% • 76% • 76% • White • 40% • 58% • 62% • Asian • 57% • 39% • 37% • Region SA – South AmericaNA – North America Studies 022, 027 and 026

  35. Baseline HBV Characteristics • Naïve eAg+ • N = 709 • Naïve eAg- • N = 638 • LVD-Ref eAg+ • N = 286 • 9.7 • 7.6 • 9.4 • HBV DNA by PCR, • mean (log10 copies/mL) • ALT, mean (U/L) • 143 • 142 • 128 • HBV subtype Studies 022, 027 and 026

  36. Baseline Histology Scores Studies 022, 027 and 026

  37. Patient Disposition Number of Patients (96%) (90%) (96%) (95%) (94%) (87%) a Percent based on treated patients Studies 022, 027 and 026

  38. Liver Biopsy Assessment • Single pathologist (Zachary Goodman, MD - AFIP) • Blinded to treatment assignment • Blinded to temporal sequenceof biopsy pairs Studies 022, 027 and 026

  39. Primary Endpoint at Week 48 • Histologic Improvement at Week 48,relative to baseline • ≥ 2-point reduction in Knodell necroinflammatoryscore with no worsening in Knodell fibrosis • Evaluable Baseline Histology Cohort • Baseline Knodell necroinflammatory score ≥ 2 • 89% of treated patients • Missing / inadequate Week 48 biopsy =no improvement Studies 022, 027 and 026

  40. Primary Endpoint in Naïve Patients: Histologic Improvement at Week 48 • Naïve eAg+ • Naïve eAg- Difference Estimate (95% CI)p-value Studies 022 and 027

  41. ETV LVD Co-Primary Endpoints at Week 48in LVD-Refractory Patients Histologic Improvement HBV DNA by bDNA (< 0.7 MEq/mL) and ALT (< 1.25 x ULN) Percent Diff. Est. (97.5% CI): 27.3 (13.6, 40.9) 50.5 (40.4, 60.6) p < 0.0001 p < 0.0001 Study 026

  42. ETV LVD Secondary Histology Endpoint:Ishak Fibrosis – Improvement at Week 48 Naïve eAg+ Naïve eAg- LVD-Ref eAg+ Improved Percent No change 46 40 41 34 44 42 Worsened Improvement: p = 0.41 p = 0.65 p < 0.01 Studies 022, 027 and 026

  43. Non-Histology Secondary Endpoints at Week 48 • Virologic: • Mean HBV DNA reduction from baseline by PCR • HBV DNA < 400 copies/mL by PCR • Biochemical: • Normalization of ALT (≤ 1 x ULN) • Serologic: • HBe Seroconversion (eAg+ patients) Studies 022, 027 and 026

  44. HBV DNA < 400 copies/mL Through Week 48 –Naïve Studies Naïve eAg+ Naïve eAg- ETV (N = 354) LVD (N = 355) ETV (N = 325) LVD (N = 313) 91 73 69 Percent 38 p < 0.0001 p < 0.0001 Weeks Studies 022 and 027

  45. HBV DNA < 400 copies/mL Through Week 48 – LVD-Refractory Study ETV (N = 141) LVD (N = 145) 21 Percent p < 0.0001 1 Weeks Study 026

  46. ETV LVD HBV DNA Mean Reduction at Week 48 Naïve eAg+ Naïve eAg- LVD-Ref eAg+ log10 copies/mL p < 0.0001 p < 0.0001 p < 0.0001 Studies 022, 027 and 026

  47. ETV LVD ALT ≤ 1 x ULN at Week 48 Naïve eAg+ Naïve eAg- LVD-Ref eAg+ Percent p = 0.02 p < 0.05 p < 0.0001 Studies 022, 027 and 026

  48. ETV LVD HBe Seroconversion at Week 48 Naïve eAg+ LVD-Ref eAg+ Percent p = 0.33 p = 0.06 Studies 022 and 026

  49. Summary of Week 48 Efficacy Naïve eAg+ Naïve eAg- LVD-Ref eAg+ Histologic Improvement HBV DNA < 400 copies/mL ALT ≤ 1 x ULN HBe Seroconversion LVD Better ETV Better ETV - LVD: Difference Estimate and CI Studies 022, 027 and 026

  50. Clinical Safety

More Related