Search This Blog

Wednesday, February 9, 2022

FDA’s agenda in limbo as Biden’s nominee stalls in Senate

 President Joe Biden’s pick to lead the Food and Drug Administration has stalled in the narrowly divided Senate, an unexpected setback that could delay decisions on electronic cigarettes and a raft of other high-profile health issues pending at the agency.

Biden nominated Dr. Robert Califf for the job in November after a 10-month search that critics complained left a leadership vacuum at the powerful regulatory agency, which has played a central role in the COVID-19 response effort.

Califf, a cardiologist who was an FDA commissioner under President Barack Obama, was viewed as a safe choice who could easily clear the Senate, given his 2016 confirmation by an overwhelming vote, 89-4.

But his latest Senate bid has been snared by political controversies on both the left and right that threaten to sink his nomination and leave the FDA in limbo for months — possibly even until a new Congress convenes next year.

No vote has been set on Califf’s nomination as Senate Democrats, the White House and other administration officials make a full-court press to lock up the votes needed to pass the 50-50 chamber. Former FDA officials warn that failure to move on Califf’s nomination will make it even harder to find and confirm future nominees.

“If he can’t get confirmed it bodes poorly for almost anyone else who could be nominated,” said Dr. Stephen Ostroff, who twice served as acting FDA commissioner. “What you’re seeing here is a lot of extraneous issues inserting themselves into the confirmation process and the same thing would happen to virtually anyone else nominated.”

Five Senate Democrats are opposing Califf due to his consulting work for drugmakers and the FDA’s track record of overseeing addictive painkillers that contributed to the U.S. opioid epidemic. That group includes Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, both from Republican-controlled states ravaged by the epidemic.

With Sen. Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico absent and recovering from a stroke, Democrats need the support of six Republicans to confirm Califf.

The Biden administration remains “incredibly confident” that Califf will be confirmed, according to a White House official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the effort.

Califf will have held one-on-one meetings with 49 senators by the end of this week, according to the official, an extremely aggressive outreach effort for an FDA nominee. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra and top White House aides are also lobbying senators on his behalf.

The White House long assumed enough Republicans would support Califf to easily overcome any Democratic defections, given his strong support from the pharmaceutical lobby. Indeed, Califf seemed to be cruising toward confirmation after a cordial hearing before the Senate’s health committee in December, which included friendly exchanges with most of its Republican members.

But two days after his appearance the FDA eased longstanding restrictions on abortion pills that allowed women to order them through the mail. Although Califf had no role in that decision, dozens of anti-abortion groups lobbied Republicans to vote against him based on earlier changes impacting the medications while he was at the FDA.

The influential Susan B. Anthony List warned that any Republican senators supporting Califf would lost their ‘A+’ rating from the anti-abortion group, which has raised tens of millions to support its preferred candidates.

Currently only a tiny handful of Republicans are publicly backing Califf, including Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina, who represents Califf’s home state and is retiring this year, and Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, one of the only remaining pro-choice Republicans in Congress.

A permanent FDA chief can’t come soon enough for the beleaguered agency, which has been straining for months under an intense pandemic workload even as several scientific disputes have battered its reputation.

FDA advocates worry the increasing politicization of the nomination process will leave the FDA further adrift without clear direction.

“It is troubling to see Dr. Califf judged on issues that are a very small part of the FDA’s responsibilities,” said Steven Grossman of the Alliance for a Stronger FDA, which represents industry, patient and consumer groups that interact with the agency. “This narrow focus increases the likelihood there will be more and longer periods when FDA is without permanent leadership.”

The White House is unlikely to send another FDA nominee to Capitol Hill if Califf can’t clinch 50 votes, noted Grossman, a former HHS and Senate staffer.

In that scenario, the current acting FDA chief, Dr. Janet Woodcock, could continue leading the agency for months to come — potentially into next year. She can serve as acting commissioner as long as Califf’s nomination is pending, followed by another 210 days after it is withdrawn or expires, under federal law.

But that’s far from ideal. Acting commissioners serve mainly as caretakers and generally cannot set new goals or priorities for the agency.

The FDA has a slate of high-stakes decisions ahead that were expected be made with input from the incoming commissioner. Those choices include whether to ban e-cigarettes linked to the spike in underage vaping by millions of teenagers.

“The more controversial the decisions, the more difficult they become when you’re in an acting position,” Ostroff said.

The realization that vaping restrictions and other Democratic priorities may be in limbo could help push Califf over the finish line, observers note.

Last week Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., announced her support for Califf after he agreed to not work for any pharmaceutical company for at least four years after leaving the FDA. Califf has recently served as a board director or adviser to more than a half-dozen drug and biotech companies, according to his ethics disclosure form.

https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-joe-biden-science-business-health-bf45df150b1d6edafb43531852830dc7

Transcript : Viking Therapeutics, Inc., Q4 2021 Earnings Call, Feb 09, 2022

 https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/VIKING-THERAPEUTICS-INC-17937582/news/Transcript-Viking-Therapeutics-Inc-Q4-2021-Earnings-Call-Feb-09-2022-37833997/

U.S. FDA panel to discuss lung cancer drug tested only in China

 A panel of expert advisers to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration will meet on Thursday to discuss whether a lung cancer therapy that has been studied only in China should be approved in the United States, and whether trial results are applicable to the U.S. population.

The drug, sintilimab, from Chinese cancer drug developer Innovent Biologics Inc and U.S. drugmaker Eli Lilly and Co, has been developed and commercialized under a global agreement.

Lilly and Innovent currently sell the drug, marketed as Tyvyt in China, where it was approved for relapsed or resistant to treatment classic Hodgkin's lymphoma after at least two lines of chemotherapy.

Jiangsu-based Innovent's marketing application was accepted for review by the FDA in May.

In a late-stage study, Innovent said https://www.fda.gov/media/156022/download the drug in combination with Lilly's Alimta and platinum chemotherapy met the main goal of progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced or recurrent nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer - the most lucrative cancer market.

PFS - the time it takes for the cancer to begin to worsen - was almost 9 months for sintilimab versus 5 months among those who received a placebo.

In a briefing document published on Tuesday ahead of the meeting, FDA staff reviewers said the patient population in the single country trial does not reflect the diversity of the American population.

The comments highlight the challenge facing drugmakers https://www.reuters.com/article/china-health-clinicaltrials-idUSL1N2AC1BR including Britain-based AstraZeneca Plc, Swiss drugmaker Roche Holding and U.S. biotech Amgen Inc that have made big investments in the hopes of benefiting from cheaper trial costs in China.

The FDA reviewers said multi-national clinical trials are the preferred international standard for drug development and allow for an evaluation of consistency of treatment effects in many geographies.

Innovent in its briefing document said https://www.fda.gov/media/156022/download the drug has demonstrated a positive benefit-risk profile, adding that clinical practice standards are similar between China and the United States.

Lilly, which has the exclusive license for the drug outside China, said last week it believes the study data are applicable to the U.S. population.

Richard Pazdur, director of the FDA's Oncology Center of Excellence, expressed concerns about an increasing number of cancer drugs based solely or predominantly on clinical data from China in an essay published last week in Lancet Oncology.

The trial raises questions regarding the data from a single foreign country to support U.S. approval and if the data can be generalized to the American population, Pazdur wrote in the article titled, "Importing oncology trials from China: a bridge over troubled waters?"

Jefferies equity analysts said the committee is likely to recommend that additional clinical trials be required to demonstrate the drug's applicability in U.S. patients and to suggest the agency defers a regulatory decision.

https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/INNOVENT-BIOLOGICS-INC-49476402/news/U-S-FDA-panel-to-discuss-lung-cancer-drug-tested-only-in-China-37834835/

Wuxi Biologics Shares Fall Further on Uncertain Outlook

 Wuxi Biologics (Cayman) Inc. shares fell further on Thursday amid uncertainty about its inclusion on a U.S. "unverified list," even as analysts suggest the company's medium-term potential for earnings growth and stock-price gains remains high.

The company was recently 7.4% lower at 57.05 Hong Kong dollars (US$7.32), taking losses to 28% this week after the U.S. Commerce Department said it was unable to verify end-use information of two Wuxi Biologics units. Inclusion on the department's list can restrict companies' access to U.S. exports.

Daiwa Capital on Thursday downgraded the stock to outperform from buy while cutting its target price to HK$75.00 from HK$167.00, as it thinks the inclusion could cloud the biotechnology company's growth outlook. The investment bank reckons the U.S. decision will have little impact on Wuxi Biologics' daily operations but says the company still faces the risk of being put on other watch lists amid U.S. and China tensions.

Nomura said this week that it is maintaining its buy call and HK$149.92 target price on "highly visible revenue and earnings growth" through 2024, adding that it believes Wuxi Biologics' ability to manage risks from suppliers will help it overcome overhang from inclusion on the list in the short term. In the long term, however, "we are uncertain about the impact and need to see how the policy unfolds in the future, since the current geopolitical tensions are not likely to end soon," it said.

U.S. bank Jefferies also kept a buy rating and HK$200.00 target price, saying the stock's 23% decline on Tuesday was a "golden opportunity" for investors to accumulate shares. "We believe Wuxi Biologics has the ability and will fix this," Jefferies said in a research note. "We are still highly confident" in the company, it said, recommending "accumulation over the next few days."

It added that Wuxi Biologics' appeal process to be removed from the list could be as quick as two months.

Wuxi Biologics said this week that the inclusion of two of its units on the list would have "very minimal impact" to its imports and wouldn't affect business or its services to its global partners. It added that the Commerce Department's end-use checks had been halted for two years due to the pandemic, and said that it welcomed inspections to ensure removal from the list.

White House breaks with governors, urges Americans to keep masks on

 While Democratic governors have begun to join their Republican counterparts in lifting mask mandates across the US, the White House held back from endorsing that decision on Wednesday, instead urging Americans to keep following guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and mask up indoors.

Press secretary Jen Psaki was repeatedly asked during her regular briefing about what Americans should do in states where mandates are being lifted while the CDC still recommends mask-wearing in areas of “substantial” or “high” transmission – which is currently the case in 99.4 percent of counties in America. 

“If you are a parent, a teacher, a student living in a state where [masking] is no longer recommended, should you still follow the CDC guidelines?” one reporter asked. 

“Yes,” Psaki simply said. 

“So even if the state is not requiring that you wear masks in the schools?” the reporter clarified.

“This is where we would advise any American to follow the CDC guidelines,” Psaki responded.

Democratic Govs. Kathy Hochul of New YorkPhil Murphy of New Jersey and Ned Lamont of Connecticut are among state executives who have recently announced they will be lifting or modifying mask requirements.  

“Can you blame Americans for being confused and frustrated and having no idea who they should be listening to right now?” one reporter asked Psaki.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and other Democrat governors have announced the easing of mask mandates.
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and other Democrat governors have announced the easing of mask mandates.
James Messerschmidt
Gov. Ned Lamont of Connecticut
Gov. Ned Lamont of Connecticut
AP
Gov. Phil Murphy of New Jersey
Gov. Phil Murphy of New Jersey
REUTERS

“Well, our guidance is consistently – has consistently been this: When you are in a high transmission area, which is everywhere in the country, you should wear a mask in indoor settings, including schools,” Psaki said.

“Does the CDC run the risk of becoming irrelevant in the minds of many Americans, given that their states are moving along without them?” the same reporter followed up.

“I don’t think the federal experts on health and medical advice should be irrelevant to Americans at a time where we’re still facing a pandemic,” the press secretary insisted. 

When pressed about whether the administration is concerned the lifting of mandates could lead to a COVID-19 outbreak in schools, Psaki again urged people to follow CDC guidance. 

“Our focus continues to be to recommend everyone follow CDC guidance, right? And we know that wearing masks effectively reduces transmission, as much as people are understandably tired of wearing masks,” she said.

In the past, the White House has publicly criticized states and their governors, such as Republican Ron DeSantis in Florida, for ignoring the CDC guidance. 

Last July, DeSantis attempted to bar schools from implementing mask mandates and allow parents to make the ultimate decision about whether their kids should wear face coverings, an effort that was ultimately successful after an appeals court ruling

“Why are we not hearing the same messaging, criticizing states that are, you know, making these moves like we heard previously, with, for instance, Ron DeSantis?” Fox News correspondent Jacqui Heinrich asked on Wednesday. 

The White House has previously criticized the governors like Florida's Gov. Ron DeSantis for going against CDC guidelines on masks.
The White House has previously criticized the governors like Florida’s Gov. Ron DeSantis for going against CDC guidelines on masks.
AP Photo/Marta Lavandier

“Well, I would say there is a distinct difference between standing in the way, which Ron DeSantis did – or Gov. DeSantis, given his full title – of teachers, school administrators and others taking steps to protect the students in their school communities,” Psaki responded. “There’s a difference between standing in the way of it, threatening to pull back funding, and allowing for local school districts to make choices, which is what a number of these states are doing.” 

While urging Americans to follow CDC guidelines, Psaki repeatedly emphasized that the White House will continue to rely on federal health officials, despite some public health experts urging otherwise.

“There are a range of health and medical experts who advise the President and make determinations about how the CDC guidance will be changed, but that is what we rely on,” she said.

https://nypost.com/2022/02/09/white-house-breaks-with-governors-urges-americans-to-keep-masks-on/

Pivotal Phase 3 Data for KEYTRUDA in High-Risk Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

  Merck & Co. (NYSE: MRK), known as MSD outside the United States and Canada, today announced the publication of results from the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-522 trial in the Feb. 10, 2022 edition of the New England Journal of Medicine. Results showed that neoadjuvant KEYTRUDA, Merck’s anti-PD-1 therapy, in combination with chemotherapy followed by adjuvant KEYTRUDA as monotherapy (the KEYTRUDA regimen), significantly prolonged event-free survival (EFS) compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by adjuvant placebo (the chemotherapy-placebo regimen) in patients with high-risk early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).

As previously reported, after a median follow-up of 39 months, the KEYTRUDA regimen reduced the risk of events or death by 37% (HR=0.63 [95% CI, 0.48-0.82]; p<0.001) versus the chemotherapy-placebo regimen. A total of 15.7% (n= 123/784) of patients who received the KEYTRUDA regimen had an EFS event compared to 23.8% (n= 93/390) of patients who received the chemotherapy-placebo regimen. The estimated three-year EFS rates were 84.5% (95% CI, 81.7-86.9) in the KEYTRUDA group compared with 76.8% (95% CI, 72.2-80.7) in the chemotherapy-placebo group. Event-free survival was defined as the time from randomization to the first occurrence of either disease progression that precluded definitive surgery, a local/distant recurrence, a second primary malignancy, or death from any cause. The safety profile of the KEYTRUDA regimen was consistent with the known profiles of each regimen, and no new safety concerns were identified. Additional detailed efficacy and safety data are also featured in the publication.

KEYTRUDA in combination with chemotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment and then continued as a single agent as adjuvant treatment after surgery is approved in the U.S. for the treatment of patients with high-risk early-stage TNBC. Additional global regulatory submissions are ongoing.

“These data, which supported the FDA approval and updates to the NCCN guidelines, establish that KEYTRUDA plus chemotherapy as neoadjuvant therapy followed by adjuvant KEYTRUDA could change clinical practice for the treatment of patients with high-risk early-stage TNBC,” said Dr. Peter Schmid, lead, Centre for Experimental Cancer Medicine, Barts Cancer Institute in London, England. “KEYNOTE-522 is the first prospective randomized Phase 3 trial to show an improvement in event-free survival among patients with stage II and stage III TNBC.”

https://www.biospace.com/article/releases/pivotal-phase-3-data-for-keytruda-pembrolizumab-in-high-risk-early-stage-triple-negative-breast-cancer-tnbc-published-in-the-new-england-journal-of-medicine/

China-Developed Drugs for U.S. Market Could Face Steep Hill

 Pharmaceutical products developed in China could have a steep hill to climb to be approved for use within the United States, impacting the plans of several large companies who hoped to capitalize on clinical data accumulated in that country.

This morning, The Wall Street Journal reported that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is slowing down the process of potentially approving dozens of new medications that had initially been developed for the Chinese market. Regulators are expressing concern over the clinical studies that were used to approve the use of those medications in China. 

The concern seems to be that the federal agency does not believe that some of the data accrued in those studies are strong enough to support regulatory approval in the U.S.

Multiple companies, including Eli Lilly and Novartis, have been working with Chinese companies in hopes of bringing cancer drugs developed in that country to the U.S. market, potentially at lower price points than current drugs on the market here.

Novartis entered into a strategic relationship with BeiGene for multiple cancer drugs, including the checkpoint inhibitor, tislelizumab, as well as ociperlimab, a late-stage TiGIT inhibitor.

In 2020, Eli Lilly forged a deal valued at more than $1 billion with Innovent Biologics to bring an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody immuno-oncology medicine developed by the two companies for use in China to the U.S. and other western markets. The medication, TYVYT, was approved for use in China in 2019 for relapsed or refractory classic Hodgkin's lymphoma after at least two lines of systemic chemotherapy. That drug is now coming up for potential approval in the United States.

This week, an FDA advisory committee is expected to review data related to TYVYT ahead of the FDA decision. At issue is whether or not the clinical data accumulated for approval by China's regulatory agency is strong enough for the U.S. 

Richard Pazdur, director of the FDA's cancer-drugs division, told the Journal that there are concerns about the fact TYVYT was not assessed on U.S. patients during clinical trials. Pazdur expressed concern that the drugs developed within China are using "outdated study designs." Those older design models do not directly establish whether or not the drugs developed in China work as well as similar medications that have been approved for use in the U.S. 

"We have nothing against drugs being developed in China. Our issue is, are those results generalizable to the U.S. population?" Pazdur said.

When drugs are tested only or primarily in one country such as China, Pazdur stated that it is "difficult to assess whether the drug would have the same benefits and safety profile in the U.S. population." He added that there may be differences between countries in medical care and population that affect how a drug performs.

If the FDA determines that the results are not generalizable, then that could lead to significant delays in the approval of not only TYVYT but other drugs as well. It could lead to additional clinical trials that include U.S. patients before potential approval can be considered. 

Jacob Van Naarden, president of Lilly's oncology unit, told the Journal that there appeared to be a "change in tone" regarding the approval of the data sets in the U.S.

Beigene, which is partnered with Novartis, has seen success in the U.S. with a drug tested mainly in China. Brukinsa, a Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, was first approved in 2019 for the treatment of adults with mantle cell lymphoma. Last year, the drug received additional approvals for Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia and patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) marginal zone lymphoma (MZL).

There is also concern from U.S. regulators that some of the data from Chinese studies could have been falsified. Citing a 2016 analysis conducted by the British Medical Journal, the Wall Street Journal said the report found that approximately 80% of domestic drug applications reviewed at that time "contained fabricated, flawed or insufficient data from studies."

The additional scrutiny over these Chinese-developed products comes at a time of increased political tensions between the U.S. government and China. The Journal's report comes a day after the U.S. Department of Commerce placed China-based WuXi Biologics, along with more than two dozen other companies, on an "unverified list." As BioSpace reported, the U.S. Commerce Department was unable to verify the legitimacy and reliability of the company in its use of U.S. exports. 

https://www.biospace.com/article/fda-could-tighten-reviews-of-drugs-developed-in-china-now-aimed-at-the-u-s-market/