Etanercept Immunex BLA 103795/5123 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Etanercept immunex bla 103795 5123 l.jpg
Download
1 / 66

Etanercept Immunex BLA 103795/5123. Arthritis Advisory Committee Bethesda, Maryland June 24, 2003. Review Committee. William Tauber, M.D. Chair, Clinical Chao Wang, PhD Biostatistics Karen Jones Project Manager Debra Bower Bioresearch Monitoring

Related searches for Etanercept Immunex BLA 103795/5123

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

Download Presentation

Etanercept Immunex BLA 103795/5123

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Etanercept immunex bla 103795 5123 l.jpg

EtanerceptImmunexBLA 103795/5123

Arthritis Advisory Committee

Bethesda, Maryland

June 24, 2003


Review committee l.jpg

Review Committee

  • William Tauber, M.D. Chair, Clinical

  • Chao Wang, PhD Biostatistics

  • Karen Jones Project Manager

  • Debra Bower Bioresearch Monitoring

  • Daniel Kearns Facility Review


Indications proposed in current bla l.jpg

Indications proposed in current BLA

  • Enbrel® is indicated for reducing signs and symptoms of ankylosing spondylitis


Rationale for etanercept in as i l.jpg

Rationale for Etanercept in AS: I

  • Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) is a chronic inflammatory rheumatic disease unknown etiology

  • Non-Steroidal Anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS) are FDA approved for treatment of signs and symptoms of Ankylosing Spondylitis

  • Disease Modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDS(RA)) used for Rheumatoid Arthritis are used in AS but are not FDA approved for use in AS.

  • Neither NSAIDS nor DMARDS (RA) have been demonstrated to affect the progression of disability with AS.


Rationale for etanercept in as ii l.jpg

Rationale for Etanercept in AS:II

  • Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) levels have been shown to be elevated in serum and synovial tissue of patients with AS.

  • Etanercept is licensed for the treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis, Juvenile Rheumatoid Arthritis, Psoriatic Arthritis.

  • AS may share pathogenic mechanisms with these other disorders.


Outline of discussion topics l.jpg

Outline of Discussion Topics

  • Methodology for assessment of short term therapeutic benefit in AS

  • Phase III trials to investigate the safety and efficacy of etanercept in patients with ankylosing spondylitis

  • Phase II proof-of-concept trial


Ankylosing spondylitis assessment of short term therapeutic benefit l.jpg

Ankylosing Spondylitis: Assessment of Short Term Therapeutic Benefit

  • Assessments in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS) Working Group

  • 5 domains most important in assessment of short term benefit in AS:

    • physical function

    • pain

    • spinal mobility

    • spinal stiffness and inflammation

    • patient’s global assessment.


Derivation of asas response criteria l.jpg

Derivation of ASAS Response Criteria

  • Analysis of 5 randomized trials of NSAIDS in AS enrolling 1030 patients  6 weeks treatment performed

  • 4 domains differentiated drug effect from placebo:

    • Combined into ASAS 20 response criteria

    • spinal mobility excluded because of lack of responsiveness


Phase 3 protocols assessment of response l.jpg

Phase 3 Protocols: Assessment of Response

  • Primary Endpoint at end of treatment

    -ASAS Response Criteria (ASAS 20) at 12/24 wks

    -An improvement of at least 20%/ 10units Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (0-100mm) in at least 3 of the following domains:

    o Patient Global Assessment

    o Average of total and nocturnal pain

    o BASFI average of 10 questions

    o BASDAI- average of last 2 questions

    -Absence of deterioration (20%/10units) in remaining domain


Secondary and other endpoints l.jpg

Secondary and Other Endpoints

  • Secondary Endpoints

    • ASAS 50/70 at 12/24 weeks*

    • Highest ASAS response achieved

    • Partial Remission

  • Other Outcome Endpoints

    • Individual components of ASAS Instrument

    • Acute Phase Reactants: ESR, CRP

    • Spinal Mobility Parameters

    • Peripheral tender/swollen joint count

    • Assessor Global Assessment


Phase ii and iii studies l.jpg

Phase II and III Studies

  • Phase II

    • 016.0626 Randomized, double blinded, single center

      • etanercept 25mg biw vs placebo, 16 weeks (N=40)

  • Phase III

    • 016.0037 Randomized, double blinded, multi-center

      • etanercept 25mg biw vs placebo, 24 weeks (N=277)

    • 47687 Randomized, double blinded, multi-center etanercept 25 mg biw vs placebo, 12 weeks (N=84)


Phase 3 protocols study population l.jpg

Phase 3 Protocols: Study Population

  • Inclusion

    - Men and Women 18-70 years of age

    -Diagnosis of Ankylosing Spondylitis- mod NY criteria

    -Active Disease at baseline using (VAS)

    VAS  30 for avg duration and intensity morning stiffness PLUS

    VAS  30 for 2 of 3 parameters:

    -pt global assessment

    -nocturnal and total back pain

    -Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) 10 question avg VAS


Phase 3 protocols study population13 l.jpg

Phase 3 Protocols: Study Population

  • Exclusion

    -Complete Ankylosis of Spine

    -DMARDs other than Sulfasalazine, MTX or Hydroxychloroquine

    -Prednisone >10mg/d or changed w/i 2 weeks baseline

    -NSAIDS changing


Study 016 0037 study 1 l.jpg

Study 016.0037 (Study 1)


Csr 016 0037 clinical protocol l.jpg

CSR 016.0037 Clinical Protocol

Study Design

- n= 277 active AS patients randomized 1:1 Etanercept or placebo for 24 weeks

-Randomization stratified for presence of DMARDs (Sulfasalazine, Methotrexate, and Hydroxychloroquine)

Dosing

-Etanercept 25 mg sc biw or Placebo sc biw


Csr 016 0037 clinical protocol16 l.jpg

CSR 016.0037 Clinical Protocol

Primary efficacy analysis

- MITT population ( all randomized and 1+ dose given)

- ASAS 20 at 12 (and 24 wks) compare etanercept with placebo Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel Test with stratification for DMARDs


Study completion at 12 and 24 wks l.jpg

Study Completion at 12 and 24 wks


Demographics 016 0037 l.jpg

Demographics 016.0037


Baseline characteristics l.jpg

Baseline Characteristics


Extra spinal inflammatory sx l.jpg

Extra-Spinal Inflammatory Sx


Primary endpoints l.jpg

Primary Endpoints


Asas 50 and asas 70 l.jpg

ASAS 50 and ASAS 70

  • ASAS 50 response computed and analyzed similar to ASAS 20 except that a 50% improvement in 3 of 4 components in addition to 10mm point absolute improvement. Deterioration rules same as ASAS 20

  • ASAS 70 similar rules to ASAS 50 except that a 70% improvement needed


Asas 20 50 70 at 12 and 24 weeks l.jpg

ASAS 20/50/70 at 12 and 24 weeks

12 weeks

24 weeks


Partial remission l.jpg

Partial Remission

  • Criteria proposed by ASAS Working Group

  • Value of <20 (on a VAS scale of 0-100) in each of the four ASAS Response Criteria:

    • Patient Global Assessment

    • Average of Nocturnal/total back pain

    • BASFI

    • Last 2 questions of BASDAI


Asas defined partial remission l.jpg

ASAS Defined-Partial Remission


Asas individual components mean percent improvement from baseline at 12 wks l.jpg

ASAS Individual ComponentsMean Percent Improvement from baseline at 12 wks


Acute phase reactants mean median values during treatment l.jpg

Acute Phase Reactants Mean (median) values during treatment

* P value <0.001


Dcart 20 and dcart 40 l.jpg

DCART 20 and DCART 40

  • DCART 20= 4 criteria of ASAS Response Criteria + chest expansion( spinal mobility) and CRP( acute phase reactants). DCART 20 same requirements ASAS20 for first 4, the other two 20% improvement relative to baseline w/o absolute numeric change. DCART 20=5 of 6 improvement, no worsening remaining domain.

  • DCART 40= uses 4 ASAS Response Criteria but requires 40% improvement relative to baseline plus absolute 20 unit(mm) improvement 3 of 4 w/o worsening remaining domain


Asas dcart 20 40 exploratory analysis l.jpg

ASAS DCART 20/40 Exploratory Analysis

* P value <0.001


Asas 20 12 weeks non skeletal inflammatory condition l.jpg

ASAS 20/12 weeks Non-Skeletal Inflammatory Condition

  • Similar response rates to etanercept for patients subsetted by whether they did or did not have a history of:

    • uveitis or iritis( n= 82)

    • Inflammatory bowel disease(n=13)

    • bacterial dysentery, urethritis, Chlamydial infection or sexually transmitted disease(n= 24)


Asas 20 at 12 weeks subset with psoriasis l.jpg

ASAS 20 at 12 weeks: Subset with Psoriasis


Asas 20 at 12 weeks subsetted by baseline variables l.jpg

ASAS 20 at 12weeks: Subsetted by Baseline Variables

  • Similar ASAS 20 response rates at 12 weeks in patients subsetted by :

    • Race

    • Weight

    • Disease Duration

    • Geographic site


Impact of age upon asas 20 at 12 wks l.jpg

Impact of Age upon ASAS 20 at 12 wks

Quartiles


Impact of gender on asas 20 12 wks l.jpg

Impact of Gender on ASAS 20 -12 wks


Asas 20 at 12 weeks subsetted by baseline disease severity l.jpg

ASAS 20 at 12 weeks: Subsetted by Baseline Disease Severity

  • Similar effect size for ASAS 20 response rates at 12 weeks for patients above or below the median at baseline for:

    • Average back pain

    • Patient global assessment

    • BASFI

    • BASDAI

  • Same effect size in presence or absence of Hip Disease


Asas 20 at 12 weeks prior or concomitant meds l.jpg

ASAS 20 at 12 weeks prior or concomitant meds

  • Effect size for etanercept at 12 weeks did not appear to be affected by concomitant use of the following medications:

    • NSAIDS (n=247)

    • Corticosteroids (n=36)

    • DMARDs (n=87)

    • Sulfasalazine (n=59)

    • Methotrexate (n=32)


Asas 20 at 12 and 24 weeks hla b27 positive vs negative l.jpg

ASAS 20 at 12 and 24 weeks HLA B27 positive vs negative


Adverse events all intensities l.jpg

Adverse Events all Intensities


Important safety outcomes l.jpg

Important Safety Outcomes


Percent serious adverse events l.jpg

Percent Serious Adverse Events


Withdrawals for safety l.jpg

Withdrawals for Safety


Infections all intensities l.jpg

Infections: All Intensities


Summary efficacy l.jpg

Summary: Efficacy

  • Etanercept 25mg sc biw was superior to placebo in achievement of ASAS 20 Response Criteria at both 12 and 24 weeks.

  • Treatment difference is 33%

  • DMARDS did not appear to affect difference

  • Prognostic factors potentially associated with lower response

    • Older Age

    • Female gender

    • HLA-B27 antigen negative

    • Concomitant Psoriasis


Summary of safety l.jpg

Summary of Safety

  • Etanercept 25 mg sc biw: higher observed incidence of certain adverse events compared to placebo

    • Serious adverse events (7% vs 4%)

    • Withdrawals for Safety (5% vs 1%)

    • Grade 3 /4 Adverse Events/ Infections (10% vs 3%)

  • Of the 7 safety withdrawals among etanercept recipients, 4 were for bowel symptoms, of which 2 were Inflammatory Bowel Disease, one a new diagnosis, the other a recurrence.


Study csr 47687 study 2 l.jpg

Study CSR-47687 (Study 2)


Csr 47687 clinical protocol l.jpg

CSR: 47687 Clinical Protocol

  • Study Design

    • N=84 active AS patients randomized 1:1 Etanercept or placebo for 12 weeks

    • Randomization stratified for DMARDs (Sulfasalazine,Methotrexate,Hydroxychloroquine)

  • Dosing:Etanercept 25mg sc biw or Placebo

  • Primary efficacy analysis

    • MITT population (all randomized and one dose given)

    • ASAS 20 at 12 wks compare etanercept/placebo Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test with stratification for DMARDs


Study 2 population comparison with study 1 population l.jpg

Study 2 Population : Comparison with Study 1 Population

  • Study 2 population balanced between study arms, comparable with Study 1 population except :

    • Lower mean weight 75kg vs 82 kg

    • Prior use of DMARDs 69% vs 31% in study population 1

    • Lower incidence of ocular inflammation16% vs 30%, uveitis 22% vs 30%, higher psoriasis 15% vs 10% study1. The incidence of patients with history of IBD was similar at 6% study 2 vs 5% in study 1


Primary endpoint l.jpg

Primary Endpoint


Asas defined partial remission49 l.jpg

ASAS-Defined Partial Remission


Adverse events all intensities50 l.jpg

Adverse Events all Intensities


Important safety outcomes51 l.jpg

Important Safety Outcomes


Study csr 016 0626 study 3 l.jpg

Study CSR: 016.0626 (Study 3)


Csr 016 0626 clinical protocol l.jpg

CSR 016.0626 Clinical Protocol

  • Study Design

    • N= 40 active AS patients randomized 1:1 to Etanercept or placebo for 16 weeks

  • Dosing: Etanercept 25mg sc biw or placebo


Csr 016 0626 clinical protocol54 l.jpg

CSR 016.0626 Clinical Protocol

  • Primary Efficacy Analysis

    • MITT population ( all randomized and one dose drug)

    • 20% response at 16 weeks in 3 of 5 Pre-specified Ankylosing Spondylitis Criteria (with one of the improved measures being spinal pain or morning stiffness without worsening in the remaining 2. For patients without joint swelling( one of the 5 measured elements) at baseline, improvement was required in 3 of the remaining 4 elements without concurrent worsening in the remaining one.


Five pre specified measures l.jpg

Five Pre-Specified Measures

  • Patient global assessment-5 point scale over the past week, improvement = decrease of 1

  • Nocturnal spinal pain: 100mm VAS, improvement 20% in # mm

  • Duration of morning stiffness; duration of morning stiffness in minutes on the day preceding clinic visit. 20% fewer or more minutes


Five pre specified measures56 l.jpg

Five Pre-Specified Measures

  • BASFI 10 questions VAS average

  • Swollen joint score: peripheral joint swelling in 44 diarthrodial joints rated on 4 point scale 0=no swelling, 1=mild, 2=moderate,3 = severe. Improvement defined as decrease in joint swelling by 20% in swelling score. If the swollen joint score was 0 at baseline, any increase in score=worsening


Primary endpoint57 l.jpg

Primary Endpoint


Ad hoc analysis modified asas 20 at 12 16wks l.jpg

Ad hoc Analysis: Modified ASAS 20 at 12/16wks


Other endpoints pain assessment dsfi krupp s fatigue measure at 16 weeks l.jpg

Other Endpoints: Pain Assessment, DSFI, Krupp’s Fatigue Measure at 16 weeks


Spinal mobility study 1 mean percent improvement from baseline at 12 weeks l.jpg

Spinal Mobility (Study 1)Mean Percent Improvement from baseline at 12 weeks

*

*

*

*=Nominal p-value <0.05


Spinal mobility study 2 mean percent improvement from baseline at 12 weeks l.jpg

Spinal Mobility(Study 2) Mean Percent Improvement from baseline at 12 weeks

*

*=Nominal p-value <0.05


Spinal mobility study 3 mean improvement from baseline at 12 weeks l.jpg

Spinal Mobility (Study 3) Mean % Improvement from baseline at 12 weeks

*=Nominal p-value <0.05


Tender and swollen peripheral joints study 1 median percent improvement at 12 wks l.jpg

Tender and Swollen Peripheral Joints (Study 1)Median Percent Improvement at 12 wks

*

*=Nominal p-value <0.05


Conclusions efficacy l.jpg

Conclusions: Efficacy

  • Etanercept was demonstrated statistically superior to placebo in 3 trials assessing symptomatic treatment in active Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS).

  • Older age, female gender were associated with lower response rate.

    • Responses in HLA-B27- negative and concomitant psoriasis patients were also lower but the number of patients with these conditions was small.


Conclusions methodology l.jpg

Conclusions: Methodology

  • Results using ASAS 20 generally demonstrated responses of similar direction and magnitude to previously used measures used in the assessment of therapeutic benefit in AS.


Conclusions safety l.jpg

Conclusions: Safety

  • Safety profile of etanercept in ankylosing spondylitis similar to that seen in RA and other indications

  • There were more withdrawals for inflammatory bowel disease in etanercept patients compared to placebo recipients in study 1 but numbers were small.


  • Login