1 / 46

Backup Slides

Backup Slides. Physiology of Anemia. J&J Breast Cancer (EPO-ANE-3010). Design Features Excludes patients who ever had hormonal Rx or who are on anticoagulants Tumor Assessments and Follow Up are adequate Routine Assessment for TVEs included Dosing of epoetin alfa=Procrit label

Lucy
Download Presentation

Backup Slides

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. Backup Slides

  2. Physiology of Anemia

  3. J&J Breast Cancer (EPO-ANE-3010) • Design Features • Excludes patients who ever had hormonal Rx or who are on anticoagulants • Tumor Assessments and Follow Up are adequate • Routine Assessment for TVEs included • Dosing of epoetin alfa=Procrit label • Stratified Randomization by • Prior adjuvant anthracycline • Her-2 Neu status • DFS Interval between initial diagnosis and metastatic disease

  4. GBR-7 (H/N) RTOG 9903 (H/N) GER-22 (NSCLC) CAN-20 (NSCLC) CAN-17 (Breast) AGO (Cervical) BEST (Breast) Supportive Safety Studies from J&J ODAC 2004 N93-004 (J&J PMC; SCLC) EPO-ANE-3010 (J&J PMC; Breast) 2001-0145 (SCLC) PREPARE (Breast) ARA-03 (Breast) DAHANCA (H/N) GELA (NHL) PMC Studies from Amgen Henke (Head/Neck)

  5. AGO Neoadjuvant Breast (PREPARE) Aranesp 1° Objectives RFS, OS EC→T q 21 SURGERY Transfusion Support Breast Cancer >2 cm N=720 2° Objectives pCR, LN status, in breast recurrence, remission rate Aranesp Dose Dense + Intense E→T→CMF Transfusion Support • Randomized, Open Label, Multifactorial • 1° and 2° Endpoints: • Q 21 vs Q 14 Dose Intense chemo • Influence of Aranesp vs Supportive Care on 1° and 2° endpoints is also a 2° endpoint Target Hgb 12-13 Study DE2001-0033 E=epirubicin, C=cyclophosphamide, T=paclitaxel, M=MTX, F=5FU

  6. AGO Neoadjuvant Breast (PREPARE) • Trial presented at ODAC 2004 • Accrual June 2002 - March 2005 • Results not available • Limitations • Primary Data not provided to FDA • Open Label • Multifactorial • M0 status confirmed by CXR, Abd US, Bone Scan • Inadequate follow up surveillance for recurrence • Off-label Aranesp dose + dose adjustments • No routine assessment of TVEs Study DE2001-0033

  7. WSG Adjuvant Breast (ARA-03) 1° Endpoint: EFS TAC or CEF x 6 Aranesp Breast Cancer T1-3 and >3 + LN N=690 of planned 1234 RT+ Hormones 2° Endpoints: OS, Local Relapse TAC or CEF x 6 Transfusion Support Target Hgb >14 Randomized, Open Label Trial presented at ODAC 2004 Accrual began January 2004; currently ongoing TAC=Docetaxel, Doxirubicin, Cyclophosphamide CEF=Cyclophosphamide, Epirubicin, 5-FU Study DE 2002-0015

  8. WSG Adjuvant Breast (ARA-03) • Limitations • Heterogeneous chemotherapy regimens; no attempt to stratify • Open Label • M0 status confirmed by CXR, Abd US, Bone Scan • Inadequate follow up surveillance for recurrence • Off-label Aranesp dose + dose adjustments • No routine assessment of TVEs Study DE 2002-0015

  9. GELA DLBCL (LNH03-6B) 1° Objective EFS (Q 14 vs Q 21) Aranesp R-CHOP Q 14 x 8 + MTX IT x 4 Transfusion or Aranesp if Hgb≤9 DLBCL N=328 of planned 600 2° Objectives RR, DFS, OS, Progression rate, Relapse Rate Aranesp R-CHOP Q 21 x 8 + MTX IT x 4 Transfusion or Aranesp if Hgb≤9 • Randomized, Open Label, Multifactorial • 1° Endpoint: • Q 21 vs Q 14 Dose Intense chemo • Control arm could receive Aranesp Target Hgb 13-15 Study FR 2003-2005

  10. GELA DLBCL (LNH03-6B) • Accrual began December 2003; ongoing • Interim results on 130 patients-1 yr OS, 1 yr EFS no difference observed • Design Problems • Control arm could receive Aranesp • Multifactorial • Open Label • Response Rate and DFS not clearly defined • Criteria for tumor response or progression not provided • Off-label Aranesp dose + dose adjustments • No routine assessment of TVEs Study FR 2003-2005

  11. GBR-7 (H/N) RTOG 9903 (H/N) GER-22 (NSCLC) CAN-20 (NSCLC) CAN-17 (Breast) AGO (Cervical) BEST (Breast) Supportive Safety Studies from J&J ODAC 2004 N93-004 (J&J PMC; SCLC) EPO-ANE-3010 (J&J PMC; Breast) 2001-0145 (SCLC) PREPARE (Breast) ARA-03 (Breast) DAHANCA (H/N) GELA (NHL) PMC Studies from Amgen Henke (Head/Neck)

  12. Common Limitations • Excessively high Target Hgb • Off Label Epoetin alfa dosage and dose adjustments • Inadequate radiological assessments to assess for recurrence • No routine assessment for TVEs • Open Label • Primary data not submitted to FDA on trials that have finished enrollment

  13. EPO-GBR-7 Head/Neck 1° Endpoint: 2 yr Local DFS Definitive RT Eprex Head/Neck Cancer (Stage II/III) N=301 2° Endpoint: 1, 2, 5 yr OS Definitive RT Transfusion Support Target Hgb 14.5-15 Randomized, Open Label Trial presented at ODAC 2004 Accrual August 1999 – April 2002 Terminated early due to slow accrual (goal = 800 pts)

  14. EPO-GBR-7 Head/Neck Result summary from J&J, April 2006 • No significant differences for local recurrence in or outside the RT field, 1 yr OS, RR

  15. EPO-GBR-7 Head/Neck • Limitations • Primary Data not given to FDA • No result for Primary Endpoint, 2 yr local DFS • Assessment method and the frequency of testing for local recurrence was inadequate • Suspected recurrences did not need biopsy • Assessment of Survival was not required for subjects withdrawn from study • Response judged from clinical assessments only • Dose and dose adjustments off-label • Target Hgb excessively high • No routine TVE assessments

  16. RTOG 99-03 Head/Neck 1° Endpoint: 2 yr LRF Definitive RT or chemoRT Procrit Head/Neck Cancer (Stage I-IV) N=148 2° Endpoint: OS Definitive RT or chemoRT Transfusion Support Target Hgb 13.5-16 M, 12.5-14 F Randomized, Open Label Trial presented at ODAC 2004 Accrual June 2000-October 2003 Terminated early due to DMC trend to lower LRC and OS in Procrit arm (goal = 372 pts) LRF-loco regional failure; LRC-loco regional control

  17. RTOG 99-03 Head/Neck Result summary (abstract 2004): • Limitations • Primary Data not given to FDA • No result for Primary Endpoint, 2 yr LRF • Dose adjustments off-label • Frequency of testing for local recurrence inadequate • Target Hgb excessively high • No routine TVE assessments

  18. EPO-GER-22 NSCLC 1° Endpoint: 2 yr OS Weekly chemo→RT Eprex NSCLC (Stage IIIA/IIIB) N=389 2° Endpoint: Remission Rate, Local Control Weekly chemo→RT Transfusion Support Target Hgb: 12-13 Randomized, Open Label Trial presented at ODAC 2004 Accrual August 2001-December 2005 Terminated early due to slow accrual (Target = 612 patients)

  19. EPO-GER-22 NSCLC Result summary from J&J, April 2006 • Limitations • Primary Data not given to FDA • No result for Primary Endpoint, 2 yr OS • Dose and dose adjustments off-label • Target Hgb excessively high • No routine TVE assessments

  20. EPO-CAN-17 Breast 1° Endpoint: QOL Chemo Eprex Breast Ca (Stage I-IV) N=354 2° Endpoint: RR, OS Chemo Transfusion Support Target Hgb: 12-14 Randomized, Open Label Trial presented at ODAC 2004 Accrual February 2002 – May 2003

  21. EPO-CAN-17 Breast • Results (J&J summary 4/06) Limitations • Primary Tumor Outcome or Survival data not given to FDA • Primary Endpoint: QOL • Open Label • Systematic tumor restaging in Stg IV dz not required post treatment • Length of f/u inadequate • Dose adjustments off-label • Target Hgb excessively high • No routine TVE assessments

  22. AGO/NOGGO Cervical 1° Endpoint: 5 yr RFS Chemo→RT Eprex SURGERY Cervical Ca (Stage Ib-IIb) N=264 2° Endpoint: OS, TTF Chemo→RT Transfusion Support Target Hgb: 13 Randomized, Open Label Trial presented at ODAC 2004 Accrual January 1999 – March 2001 RFS: Relapse Free Survival TTF: Time to Treatment Failure

  23. AGO/NOGGO Results (J&J summary 4/06) 5 year RFS (primary endpoint), OS, TTF: not reported • Limitations • Primary Data not given to FDA • Open Label • Dose adjustments off-label • Target Hgb excessively high • No routine TVE assessments

  24. Supportive Safety Studies from J&J GBR-7 (H/N) RTOG 9903 (H/N) GER-22 (NSCLC) CAN-20 (NSCLC) CAN-17 (Breast) AGO (Cervical) BEST (Breast) ODAC 2004 N93-004 (J&J PMC; SCLC) EPO-ANE-3010 (J&J PMC; Breast) Other Studies 2001-0145 (SCLC) PREPARE (Breast) ARA-03 (Breast) DAHANCA (H/N) GELA (NHL) PMC Studies from Amgen Henke (Head/Neck) Anemia of Cancer Lymphoid Malignancy Non-Myeloid Malignancy Moebus

  25. Non-Myeloid Malignancy (2003-0232) Chemo Aranesp 1° Endpoint: % transfusion Non-Myeloid Ca N=391 Chemo Placebo Target Hgb: 12-13 Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo Controlled Stratified by Tumor Type Accrual February 2004 – October 2004 Primary Data submitted March 2007

  26. Non-Myeloid Malignancy (2003-0232) • Results (FDA review of primary data) • No significant difference in OS ( HR 0.82 [95% CI 0.43, 1.57]). • Limitations • Primary endpoint: % transfusions • Data collection not adequate • No long term follow-up plan • Dosing was off-label in dose (300 µg Q3W) and adjustments • Heterogeneous cancer types • Target Hgb excessively high • No routine TVE assessments

  27. BRAVE (Breast) 1° Endpoint: OS Chemo Epoetin beta Breast Ca (Stage IV) N=463 2° Endpoint: PFS Chemo Transfusion Support Target Hgb: 13-15 Randomized, Open Label Stratified by chemo type and hormonal status Accrual November 2002 – June 2004

  28. BRAVE (Breast) • Results (summary results) • OS no significant difference (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.87, 1.33; p=0.522) • PFS no significant difference (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.89, 1.30; p=0.448) • TVE higher in ESA arm (13% v 6%, RR 2.36, 95% CI 1,23, 4.55; p=0.01) • Limitations • Primary data not supplied to FDA • Protocol not submitted to FDA • Target Hgb 13-15 • No routine TVE assessments

  29. Moebus (Breast) 1° Objective: EFS (Q14 v Q21) ∆Hgb Eprex Dose Dense/Intense ETC + GCSF 2° Objectives: 5 yr OS and DFS (Q14 v Q21), Intramammary recurrence (ESA v control) Transfusion Support Breast Ca (Adjuvant Node +) N=1284 Standard EC->T • Multifactorial • Accrual January 1999 – March 2001 Target Hgb 12.5-13 Study

  30. Moebus (Breast) • Results • 5 yr OS and DFS: no significant difference • ↑ TVE in ESA arm (3.0% vs 1.7%) • Limitations • Primary data not submitted to FDA • Inadequate study endpoints • Multifactorial • Inadequate frequency of radiographic assessments • Dosing adjustments off label • No routine TVE assessments

  31. TVE Risks • There are increased risks of TVE with the use of ESAs • Evidence: • EPO-CAN-15 (SCLC) • PR00-03-006 (Gastric/Rectal cancer) • GOG 191 (Cervical cancer) • Rosenzweig (Breast) • Bohlius meta-analysis JNCI April 2006 • SPINE Study • With the exception of EPO-ANE-3010, tumor promotion studies discussed do not routinely assess patients for TVE, & did not specify TVE as prespecified endpoint. • Safety signals for increased risk may be missed

  32. EPO-CAN-15 (SCLC) 1° Endpoint: PFS Chemo Epoetin SCLC (Limited Stg)N=106 2° Endpoints: RR, OS, median survival, LC Chemo Placebo Target Hgb: 14-16 Terminated early due to TVEs TVE OR 7.74 (ESA vs Control) ↑ Mortality (40% vs 19%) in ESA arm

  33. PR 00-03-006 (Gastric/Rectal) 1° Endpoint: % transfusion ChemoRT→surgery Epoetin Gastric/Rectal Ca N=59 2° Endpoints: RR, pCR ChemoRT →surgery Placebo Target Hgb: 14-15 Terminated early due to TVEs TVE OR 3.79 (ESA vs Control)

  34. GOG 191 (Cervical) 1° Endpoint: PFS ChemoRT Epoetin Cervical Ca N=113 2° Endpoints: OS, LC ChemoRT Transfusion Support Target Hgb: 13-14 Terminated early due to TVEs TVE OR 2.65 (ESA vs Control)

  35. Rosenzweig (Breast) 1° Endpoint: Unclear Unclear Epoetin Breast Ca (Stg 4) N=27 2° Endpoints: Unclear Unclear Transfusion Support Target Hgb: Unclear Terminated early due to TVEs TVE 29% vs 0% (ESA vs Control)

  36. JNCI Meta Analysis 2006: TVE

  37. JNCI Meta Analysis 2006: OS

  38. JNCI Meta Analysis • 2005 OS: HR 0.81 (95% CI: 0.67 to 0.99) • 2006 OS: HR 1.08 (95% CI: 0.99 to 1.18)

  39. Final Data/Study Report not received 2008 2007 2003 2006 2009 2001 2012 2004 2002 2010 2005 2011 GBR-7 RTOG 9903* GER-22 CAN-17† AGO* 232‡ PREPARE ARA-03 GELA *=Data never submitted to FDA =Last pt accrued †=Received limited safety data (no efficacy data) ‡=Received primary data =Final Data/Study Report Anticipated

  40. Final Data/Study Report not received *=Data never submitted to FDA †=Received limited safety data (no efficacy data) ‡=Received primary data

  41. Non Inferiority Trials • Purpose is to rule out a prespecified margin of inferiority between ESA and control • In trials with ESAs in cancer pts specifically designed to look for safety signals, non-inferiority design preferable over superiority design Prespecified Margin Inferior Non-inferior 1.0 Worse for Control Worse for ESA Hazard Ratio

  42. Studies Initiated by Amgen or J&J Epoetin alfa Studies ODAC 2004 EPO-ANE-3010 (J&J PMC; Breast) N93-004 (PMC; SCLC) Other Studies Aranesp Studies

  43. Completed studies w/summary results + no reported safety signal • 5 epoetin alfa studies have been completed, and have had summary results submitted to FDA either by a J&J report or by literature publication, and have not reported safety signals • Both FDA and J&J have not analyzed data from these trials • Study Limitations • 3 of the 5 studies have inadequate design to address risk of tumor promotion

  44. Completed studies w/summary results + no reported safety signal Epoetin alfa Studies ODAC 2004 Other Studies Aranesp Studies

  45. Hazards Ratios for Overall Survival by Studies

  46. Meta-Analysis results • Amgen meta analysis used Peto odds ratio, which: • Is based solely on the # of known deaths and total # of pts in each arm • Does not consider pt follow-up and survival times • Is not interpretable since study patients do not have the same study start day

More Related