Transcript Slide 1
New Medicines: too early/too late? Thomas Lönngren EMEA Sweden, 3 July 2009 The drug regulator’s walk on the tightrope Protect public health … … against negative consequences from unsafe or ineffective medicines When in doubt, be negative, “we need more information” … against negative consequences from failing to meet unmet medical need Worry about falsepositive decision Worry about falsenegative decision “Type-1 error” What are the consequences? When in doubt, be positive, “it might be a patient's only hope” Are the (dis-) no penalty for error” incentives balanced “Type-2 right to influence being What are the regulators’ negative! consequences? behaviour? or put another way….. 3 4 Benefit Risk Evaluation Definition: Risk benefit evaluation • The process by which the benefits and risks of a medicine are assessed and balanced, and to ensure that the adverse consequences of a medicine do not exceed the benefits within the population treated 5 Benefit-Risk balance is key Risks Benefits 6 Type of Approval • Normal – Comprehensive data to assess risk-benefit balance • Exceptional circumstances – Comprehensive data can normally never be provided because • Indication too rare • Contrary to medical ethics • State of scientific knowledge • Conditional Approval (NEW) – Comprehensive clinical data not yet available but… • benefit-risk balance positive, … 7 – “early approval” Conditional Approval (New) • • • Scope – Orphan drugs, emergency threats, serious and lifethreatening diseases Requirements – Positive benefit-risk balance – It is likely that comprehensive data can be provided – Unmet medical needs will be fulfilled – Immediate availability outweigh risks Authorisation – valid for 1 year (renewable) Keypoint: level of certainty reduced but benefit risk is still judged positive 8 Benefit Risk Balance • Different perspectives: – – – – Company - public health Regulator - public health Doctor - individual’s health Patient - individual’s health 9 Benefit Risk Balance • The target diseases is key to the balance: – – – – – Self limiting – common cold Chronic progressive - diabetes Intermittent – multiple sclerosis Morbidity - suffering Mortality - death 10 Benefit Risk Balance • Population being treated: – – Young vs. old Ethnic differences 11 Benefit Risk Balance • Purpose of intervention: – – – Prevention - vaccines Treatment – cancer txs Diagnosis – contrast media 12 Benefit Risk – a Continuous Process Phase III MAA Phase II Marketing Phase I Renewal Drug discovery Reclassification …. where the outcome may differ…. 13 Benefit Risk – Ever Changing – New data – New alternatives – New disease 14 From one-off licensing… Warning, DHPC MA Level of understanding of benefitrisk Withdrawal backlash PhV, other sources PhV Drug Development Phase Time → 15 Example Evolution of Remicade (EU): Efficacy 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 13 Aug Initial Marketing Authorisatio n 17 May Change: Restriction of the Crohn’s disease indication (USR) 8 June Change: Treatment of MTX naïve patients with early RA (II-45) 28 Feb Extension of Indication: Ulcerative Colitis (II-65) 30 May Extension of Indication: Paediatric Crohn’s disease (II-75) 4 July Change: Use alone of in combination with MTX in Psoriatic Arthritis (II-73) 30 Oct Change: Patients who did not respond to therapy regardless of HLA-B27 status in Ankylosing Spondylitis (II-95) 8 April Change: Update on colectomy, hospitalisations and surgeries in patients with Ulcerative Colitis (II-107) 27 June Extension of Indication: Adult Rheumatoid Arthritis (II-01) 29 Jan Change: Reduction in rate of progression of joint damage in RA (II-04) 15 May Extension of Indication: Ankylosing spondylitis (II-24) 20 Oct Change: Long term treatment in CD (II-32) 24 Sept Extension of Indication: Psoriatic Arthritis (II-46) 29 Sept Extension of Indication: Plaque Psoriasis (II-61) 1 Sept Extension of Indication: From 3rd to 2nd line in Crohn’s disease (II-69) 30 Nov Change: Improvement of physical function and reduction of rate of progression of structural damage in Psoriatic Arthritis (II-100) 16 Example Evolution of Remicade (EU): Safety - 1 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Severe Infections TB education CHF DDL General DHPC DHPC Hepatotoxicity German “death scare” TB DHPC PSUR interstitial pneumonitis/fibrosis Serum sickness, pericardial effusion Malignancies TB/infections Alert card CD: 2nd to 3rd line therapy PSUR 9 Heart failure FDA panel lymphoma PSUR 6 & 7 vasculitis DHPC Lymphoma SP commitment to PSUR 5 myelitis, CD and RA Registry anaemia, hepato cellular damage PSUR 3 pancytopenia Alcoholic hepatitis listeriosis (study stopped) Dinv Letter haematologcal AE Dinv Letter Transaminases PSUR 8 agranulocytosis pancreatitis 17 Example Evolution of Remicade (EU): Safety - 2 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Pneumonia Opportunistic infections & Pneumocystis jiroveci Pneumonia Reactivation of HBV (update), new onset psoriasis and pustular (palmar/plantar) psoriasis Peripheral demyelinating diseases Hepatosplenic T-cell lymphoma in patients with ulcerative colitis Delayed hypersensitivity Hepatotoxicity Malignancies in COPD patients Hepatosplenic T-cell lymphoma in Tuberculosis (update) paediatric/young adult & skin and toxic CD patients epidermal necrolysis, SJS and erythema Malignancies (Update) multiforme Infusion reactions, Intersticial lung antibodies & infections disease in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (no indication) Tuberculosis (update, Invasive fungal including infections (update) extrapulmunary disease 18 Example RAPTIVA B/R: the starting point… – Authorised in EU in September 2004 to treat adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis who have failed to respond or cannot take other systemic treatments (2nd line therapy). – BENEFITS – efficacy in a ‘high-need’ group of patients, i.e. those with moderate to severe disease that do not have treatment alternatives – SAFETY – most frequent side effects: flu-like symptoms – limited data available for long-term therapy CONCLUSIONS: BENEFITS outweigh RISKS (in this restricted group of patients) 19 Example RAPTIVA B/R: the post-authorisation September 2008 – January 2009 – Three cases of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopaty (PML) identified – PML: • Rare brain infection caused by a virus • Virus commonly found in the general population but only leads to PML if the immune system has been weakened • Usually leads to severe disability or death – Raptiva no longer only therapeutic option for these high-need patients other products had meanwhile been approved for use in moderate to severe psoriasis 20 Example RAPTIVA B/R: the post-authorisation January 2009 – BENEFITS • (Modest) efficacy in the treatment of high-need patients in a condition that is disabling and causes social an psychological problems for patients • BUT the condition is very rarely life-threatening • AND other therapies are now available – RISKS • PML cases (three confirmed, one suspected) • Other serious side effects such as infections (meningitis, sepsis, tuberculosis) • INCLUDING some with a fatal outcome 21 Example RAPTIVA B/R: the post-authorisation January 2009 – BENEFITS vs RISKS? How to change B/R? • Difficult to identify patients at risk of PML • Not possible to identify restricted population for whom benefits outweigh the risk of PML Further restrictions to PI unlikely to reduce risk! BENEFITS NO LONGER OUTWEIGH RISKS SUSPENSION OF MA MA subsequently withdrawn (at request of MAH) in June 2009 22 Strengthening the system • Better science – Biomarkers to personalized medicines • Examples… 23 PROTECT Pharmacoepidemiological Research on Outcomes of Therapeutics by a European Consortium … improving the methodology of safety monitoring How to improve benefit risk assessment • • • • • Enhance methodology of Benefit-Risk assessment Goals: – Qualitative Quantitative – Implicit criteria Explicit criteria – Incorporate patients’ valuations of beneficial/adverse outcomes Actions: To revise/structure the current benefit-risk assessment section of the CHMP assessment report To further research the methodology of benefit risk assessment 25 Risk Management Plan Risk Management: a set of pharmacovigilance activities and interventions designed to identify, characterise, prevent or minimise risks relating to medicinal products, including the assessment of the effectiveness of those interventions Proactive: Sponsor submits “EU Risk Management Plan” at time of MAA, updated 26 throughout the lifecycle of the product Focus on adverse reaction reporting and Eudravigilance • Eudravigilance = web based data-processing network and management system for electronic exchange, management and scientific evaluation of individual case safety reports (ICSR) • Current Eudravigilance functionality: – The Industry and all EU Member States and are electronically reporting to Eudravigilance – All Member States can analyse the data to conduct safety monitoring (pharmacovigilance) – Compliance with data protection legislation (notified to the DPS in August 2008) – Pooled data – detects ADRs earlier, detects rare ADRs, compare ADRs based on how medicines used: better protect health – More than 2 million case reports and 30,000 new reports per month 27 Post-Authorisation Safety Studies • Capacity building – ENCePP • European network for centers in pharmaepidemiology and pharmacovigelance 28 Conclusions • Regulating medicines: – Difficult judgements – We have many regulatory and scientific tools to help – We are investing to strengthen – Benefit risk balance is key 29