Cardiovascular safety of drugs not intended for cardiovascular use: need for a new conceptual basis for assessment and approval

Recently, several drugs for non-cardiovascular diseases have ceased marketing because of cardiovascular risk, highlighting the importance of evaluating the cardiovascular safety of new drugs even if not intended for cardiovascular diseases. Assessing and ensuring acceptable cardiovascular safety of non-cardiovascular drugs is difficult; nonetheless, governmental regulatory agencies are likely to change the requirements for drug safety information. This article explores our recommendations for rethinking current regulatory policies, emphasizing the need for mandatory post-marketing surveillance registries and highlighting the exposures necessary to subserve the need for greater assessment of safety issue

Risk factors for heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and stage 4 chronic kidney disease treated with bardoxolone methyl

Background: A phase 3 randomized clinical trial was designed to test whether bardoxolone methyl, a nuclear factor erythroid-2–related factor 2 (Nrf2) activator, slows progression to end-stage renal disease in patients with stage 4 chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus. The trial was terminated because of an increase in heart failure in the bardoxolone methyl group; many of the events were clinically associated with fluid retention.<p></p> Methods and Results: We randomized 2,185 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and stage 4 chronic kidney disease (CKD) (estimated glomerular filtration rate 15 to <30 mL min−1 1.73 m−2) to once-daily bardoxolone methyl (20 mg) or placebo. We used classification and regression tree analysis to identify baseline factors predictive of heart failure or fluid overload events. Elevated baseline B-type natriuretic peptide and previous hospitalization for heart failure were identified as predictors of heart failure events; bardoxolone methyl increased the risk of heart failure by 60% in patients with these risk factors. For patients without these baseline characteristics, the risk for heart failure events among bardoxolone methyl– and placebo-treated patients was similar (2%). The same risk factors were also identified as predictors of fluid overload and appeared to be related to other serious adverse events.<p></p> Conclusions: Bardoxolone methyl contributed to events related to heart failure and/or fluid overload in a subpopulation of susceptible patients with an increased risk for heart failure at baseline. Careful selection of participants and vigilant monitoring of the study drug will be required in any future trials of bardoxolone methyl to mitigate the risk of heart failure and other serious adverse events.<p></p&gt

Experience collecting interim data on mortality: an example from the RALES study

INTRODUCTION: The Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study (RALES) randomized 822 patients to receive 25 mg spironolactone daily and 841 to receive placebo. The primary endpoint was death from all causes. Randomization began on March 24, 1995; recruitment was completed on December 31, 1996; follow-up was scheduled to continue through December 31, 1999. Evidence of a sizeable benefit on mortality emerged early in the RALES. The RALES data safety monitoring board (DSMB), which met semiannually throughout the trial, used a prespecified statistical guideline to recommend stopping for efficacy. At the DSMB's request, its meetings were preceded by an 'endpoint sweep', that is, a census of all participants to confirm their vital status. METHODS: We used computer simulation to evaluate the effect of the sweeps. RESULTS: The sweeps led to an estimated 5 to 8% increase in the number of reported deaths at the fourth and fifth interim analyses. The data crossed the statistical boundary at the fifth interim analysis. If investigators had reported all deaths within the protocol-required 24-h window, the DSMB might have recommended stopping after the fourth interim analysis. DISCUSSION: Although endpoint sweeps can cause practical problems at the clinical centers, sweeps are very useful if the intervals between patient visits or contact are long or if endpoints require adjudication by committee, reading center, or central laboratory. CONCLUSION: We recommend that trials with interim analyses institute active reporting of the primary endpoints and endpoint sweeps

Monitoring overall survival in pivotal trials in indolent cancers

Indolent cancers are characterized by long overall survival (OS) times. Therefore, powering a clinical trial to provide definitive assessment of the effects of an experimental intervention on OS in a reasonable timeframe is generally infeasible. Instead, the primary outcome in many pivotal trials is an intermediate clinical response such as progression-free survival (PFS). In several recently reported pivotal trials of interventions for indolent cancers that yielded promising results on an intermediate outcome, however, more mature data or post-approval trials showed concerning OS trends. These problematic results have prompted a keen interest in quantitative approaches for monitoring OS that can support regulatory decision-making related to the risk of an unacceptably large detrimental effect on OS. For example, the US Food and Drug Administration, the American Association for Cancer Research, and the American Statistical Association recently organized a one-day multi-stakeholder workshop entitled 'Overall Survival in Oncology Clinical Trials'. In this paper, we propose OS monitoring guidelines tailored for the setting of indolent cancers. Our pragmatic approach is modeled, in part, on the monitoring guidelines the FDA has used in cardiovascular safety trials conducted in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. We illustrate proposals through application to several examples informed by actual case studies.Comment: 13 pages, 5 table

Experiences of the Data Monitoring Committee for the RECOVERY trial, a large-scale adaptive platform randomised trial of treatments for patients hospitalised with COVID-19

Abstract: Aim: To inform the oversight of future clinical trials during a pandemic, we summarise the experiences of the Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) for the Randomised Evaluation of COVID therapy trial (RECOVERY), a large-scale randomised adaptive platform clinical trial of treatments for hospitalised patients with COVID-19. Methods and findings: During the first 24 months of the trial (March 2020 to February 2022), the DMC oversaw accumulating data for 14 treatments in adults (plus 10 in children) involving > 45,000 randomised patients. Five trial aspects key for the DMC in performing its role were: a large committee of members, including some with extensive DMC experience and others who had broad clinical expertise; clear strategic planning, communication, and responsiveness by the trial principal investigators; data collection and analysis systems able to cope with phases of very rapid recruitment and link to electronic health records; an ability to work constructively with regulators (and other DMCs) to address emerging concerns without the need to release unblinded mortality results; and the use of videoconferencing systems that enabled national and international members to meet at short notice and from home during the pandemic when physical meetings were impossible. Challenges included that the first four treatments introduced were effectively ‘competing’ for patients (increasing pressure to make rapid decisions on each one); balancing the global health imperative to report on findings with the need to maintain confidentiality until the results were sufficiently certain to appropriately inform treatment decisions; and reliably assessing safety, especially for newer agents introduced after the initial wave and in the small numbers of pregnant women and children included. We present a series of case vignettes to illustrate some of the issues and the DMC decision-making related to hydroxychloroquine, dexamethasone, casirivimab + imdevimab, and tocilizumab. Conclusions: RECOVERY’s streamlined adaptive platform design, linked to hospital-level and population-level health data, enabled the rapid and reliable assessment of multiple treatments for hospitalised patients with COVID-19. The later introduction of factorial assessments increased the trial’s efficiency, without compromising the DMC’s ability to assess safety and efficacy. Requests for the release of unblinded primary outcome data to regulators at points when data were not mature required significant efforts in communication with the regulators by the DMC to avoid inappropriate early trial termination

Through the looking glass: understanding non-inferiority

Non-inferiority trials test whether a new product is not unacceptably worse than a product already in use. This paper introduces concepts related to non-inferiority, and discusses the regulatory views of both the European Medicines Agency and the United States Food and Drug Administration

Efficacy, Safety, and Durability of Voretigene Neparvovec-rzyl in RPE65 Mutation–Associated Inherited Retinal Dystrophy: Results of Phase 1 and 3 Trials

Purpose: To report the durability of voretigene neparvovec-rzyl (VN) adeno-associated viral vector–based gene therapy for RPE65 mutation–associated inherited retinal dystrophy (IRD), including results of a phase 1 follow-on study at year 4 and phase 3 study at year 2. Design: Open-label phase 1 follow-on clinical trial and open-label, randomized, controlled phase 3 clinical trial. Participants: Forty subjects who received 1.5×1011 vector genomes (vg) of VN per eye in at least 1 eye during the trials, including 11 phase 1 follow-on subjects and 29 phase 3 subjects (20 original intervention [OI] and 9 control/intervention [CI]). Methods: Subretinal injection of VN in the second eye of phase 1 follow-on subjects and in both eyes of phase 3 subjects. Main Outcome Measures: End points common to the phase 1 and phase 3 studies included change in performance on the Multi-Luminance Mobility Test (MLMT) within the illuminance range evaluated, full-field light sensitivity threshold (FST) testing, and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA). Safety end points included adverse event reporting, ophthalmic examination, physical examination, and laboratory testing. Results: Mean (standard deviation) MLMT lux score change was 2.4 (1.3) at 4 years compared with 2.6 (1.6) at 1 year after administration in phase 1 follow-on subjects (n = 8), 1.9 (1.1) at 2 years, and 1.9 (1.0) at 1 year post-administration in OI subjects (n = 20), and 2.1 (1.6) at 1 year post-administration in CI subjects (n = 9). All 3 groups maintained an average improvement in FST, reflecting more than a 2 log10(cd.s/m2) improvement in light sensitivity at 1 year and subsequent available follow-up visits. The safety profile was consistent with vitrectomy and the subretinal injection procedure, and no deleterious immune responses occurred. Conclusions: After VN gene augmentation therapy, there was a favorable benefit-to-risk profile with similar improvement demonstrated in navigational ability and light sensitivity among 3 groups of subjects with RPE65 mutation–associated IRD, a degenerative disease that progresses to complete blindness. The safety profile is consistent with the administration procedure. These data suggest that this effect, which is nearly maximal by 30 days after VN administration, is durable for 4 years, with observation ongoing

Use of 5-α-Reductase Inhibitors for Prostate Cancer Chemoprevention: American Society of Clinical Oncology/American Urological Association 2008 Clinical Practice Guideline

To develop an evidence-based guideline on the use of 5-α-reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) for prostate cancer chemoprevention

Safety and Reactogenicity of an MSP-1 Malaria Vaccine Candidate: A Randomized Phase Ib Dose-Escalation Trial in Kenyan Children

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to evaluate the safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of an investigational malaria vaccine. DESIGN: This was an age-stratified phase Ib, double-blind, randomized, controlled, dose-escalation trial. Children were recruited into one of three cohorts (dosage groups) and randomized in 2:1 fashion to receive either the test product or a comparator. SETTING: The study was conducted in a rural population in Kombewa Division, western Kenya. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects were 135 children, aged 12–47 mo. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects received 10, 25, or 50 μg of falciparum malaria protein 1 (FMP1) formulated in 100, 250, and 500 μL, respectively, of AS02A, or they received a comparator (Imovax® rabies vaccine). OUTCOME MEASURES: We performed safety and reactogenicity parameters and assessment of adverse events during solicited (7 d) and unsolicited (30 d) periods after each vaccination. Serious adverse events were monitored for 6 mo after the last vaccination. RESULTS: Both vaccines were safe and well tolerated. FMP1/AS02A recipients experienced significantly more pain and injection-site swelling with a dose-effect relationship. Systemic reactogenicity was low at all dose levels. Hemoglobin levels remained stable and similar across arms. Baseline geometric mean titers were comparable in all groups. Anti-FMP1 antibody titers increased in a dose-dependent manner in subjects receiving FMP1/AS02A; no increase in anti-FMP1 titers occurred in subjects who received the comparator. By study end, subjects who received either 25 or 50 μg of FMP1 had similar antibody levels, which remained significantly higher than that of those who received the comparator or 10 μg of FMP1. A longitudinal mixed effects model showed a statistically significant effect of dosage level on immune response (F(3,1047) = 10.78, or F(3, 995) = 11.22, p < 0.001); however, the comparison of 25 μg and 50 μg recipients indicated no significant difference (F(1,1047) = 0.05; p = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: The FMP1/AS02A vaccine was safe and immunogenic in malaria-exposed 12- to 47-mo-old children and the magnitude of immune response of the 25 and 50 μg doses was superior to that of the 10 μg dose

Blood Stage Malaria Vaccine Eliciting High Antigen-Specific Antibody Concentrations Confers No Protection to Young Children in Western Kenya

The antigen, falciparum malaria protein 1 (FMP1), represents the 42-kDa C-terminal fragment of merozoite surface protein-1 (MSP-1) of the 3D7 clone of P. falciparum. Formulated with AS02 (a proprietary Adjuvant System), it constitutes the FMP1/AS02 candidate malaria vaccine. We evaluated this vaccine's safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy in African children.A randomised, double-blind, Phase IIb, comparator-controlled trial.The trial was conducted in 13 field stations of one mile radii within Kombewa Division, Nyanza Province, Western Kenya, an area of holoendemic transmission of P. falciparum. We enrolled 400 children aged 12-47 months in general good health.Children were randomised in a 1ratio1 fashion to receive either FMP1/AS02 (50 microg) or Rabipur(R) rabies vaccine. Vaccinations were administered on a 0, 1, and 2 month schedule. The primary study endpoint was time to first clinical episode of P. falciparum malaria (temperature >/=37.5 degrees C with asexual parasitaemia of >/=50,000 parasites/microL of blood) occurring between 14 days and six months after a third dose. Case detection was both active and passive. Safety and immunogenicity were evaluated for eight months after first immunisations; vaccine efficacy (VE) was measured over a six-month period following third vaccinations.374 of 400 children received all three doses and completed six months of follow-up. FMP1/AS02 had a good safety profile and was well-tolerated but more reactogenic than the comparator. Geometric mean anti-MSP-1(42) antibody concentrations increased from1.3 microg/mL to 27.3 microg/mL in the FMP1/AS02 recipients, but were unchanged in controls. 97 children in the FMP1/AS02 group and 98 controls had a primary endpoint episode. Overall VE was 5.1% (95% CI: -26% to +28%; p-value = 0.7).FMP1/AS02 is not a promising candidate for further development as a monovalent malaria vaccine. Future MSP-1(42) vaccine development should focus on other formulations and antigen constructs.Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00223990