A unique vaccine for birth control and treatment of advanced stage cancers secreting ectopically human chorionic gonadotropin

This article is a tribute and homage to Gerard Chaouat who invited me to contribute this article. My years in France have remained very memorable to me. Reviewed briefly is the vaccine that was made against human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) to prevent unwanted pregnancy in sexually active women. It has now been developed as a genetically engineered recombinant vaccine and passed onto industry for its production under good manufacturing practices (GMP) conditions for confirmatory trials. The trials have received the approval of the Drugs Controller General of India. The trials have started but have been interrupted by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This vaccine is likely to have another highly beneficial application in the treatment of cancers expressing ectopically hCG.

A comparison of the Food and Drug Administration’s and Health Canada’s regulatory decisions about failed confirmatory trials for oncology drugs: an observational study

Background Oncology drugs are frequently approved on the basis of surrogate outcomes that require further trials to confirm the benefits, but at times these trials fail and regulators need to decide whether to withdraw approval for the indication and/or to remove the drug from the market. This study compares decisions by the Food and Drug Administration and Health Canada about oncology drugs that were approved using either Accelerated Approval (FDA) or Notice of Compliance with conditions (NOC/c, Health Canada) and that failed confirmatory trials. Methods Drug/indications approved by the FDA through its Accelerated Approval Pathway and that later failed confirmatory studies were identified from a published study and additional information on these drugs was collected from Drugs@FDA. Health Canada websites were searched on September 11, 2021 for the same group of drugs to determine if they were approved in Canada under the NOC/c pathway for the same indication as in the US. Information from both the FDA and Health Canada about these products was entered into an Excel spreadsheet. Decisions about whether to withdraw the drugs or remove the failed indication for the drug and requirements for confirmatory studies were compared. In addition, the dates of decisions by the two agencies were compared. Results Ten drug/indications were available for comparison. Regulatory decisions were similar in 4 cases, different in 1 case and could not be determined in the remaining 5, in 1 case because decisions were pending in both countries and in the other 4, because the NOC/c had not been fulfilled in Canada. The requirements for the confirmatory studies were similar in both countries. Decisions were made earlier in the United States. Conclusions This study shows that decisions made by Health Canada and the FDA about whether to withdraw a drug or remove a failed indication when drug/indications fail a confirmatory trial are usually similar, although the sample size on which this conclusion is made is small. The clinical implications of these similarities and differences should be explored.

Fostamatinib for the treatment of hospitalized adults with COVD-19 A randomized trial

Background Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) requiring hospitalization is characterized by robust antibody production, dysregulated immune response and immunothrombosis. Fostamatinib, is a novel spleen tyrosine kinase inhibitor we hypothesize will ameliorate Fc activation and attenuate harmful effects of the anti-COVID-19 immune response. Methods We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in hospitalized adults requiring oxygen with Covid-19 where patients receiving standard of care were randomized to receive fostamatinib or placebo. The primary outcome was serious adverse events by day 29. Results A total of 59 patients underwent randomization (30 to fostamatinib and 29 to placebo). Serious adverse events occurred in 10.5% of patients in the fostamatinib group compared to 22% in placebo (P = .2). Three deaths occurred by day 29, all receiving placebo. The mean change in ordinal score at day 15 was greater in the fostamatinib group (-3.6 ± 0.3 vs. -2.6 ± 0.4, P = .035) and the median length in the ICU was 3 days in the fostamatinib group vs. 7 days in placebo (P = .07). Differences in clinical improvement were most evident in patients with severe or critical disease (median days on oxygen, 10 vs. 28, P = .027). There were trends towards more rapid reductions in C-reactive protein, D-dimer, fibrinogen and ferritin levels in the fostamatinib group. Conclusion For COVID-19 requiring hospitalization, the addition of fostamatinib to standard of care was safe and patients were observed to have improved clinical outcomes compared to placebo. These results warrant further validation in larger confirmatory trials.

Methods and Designs of Modern Breast Cancer Confirmatory Trials

Background: The benefit–risk assessments of new drugs for breast cancer (BC) face several challenges, as all stakeholders do not agree on the evidence bar required for market authorization, and by the fragmentation of breast cancer diagnosis. The aim of this study was to describe the changes in methods and designs of breast cancer confirmatory trials. Methods: All phase III randomized trials published between 2001 and 2020 and assessing systemic BC therapies were included. Trials’ main characteristics, endpoints, and statistical methods were collected using a standardized data extraction form. Results: A total of 347 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria. While most older trials (79%) included all subtypes of breast cancer, most recent trials populations were limited to one large intrinsic BC subgroup (69%). The use of gatekeeping testing strategies increased dramatically from 9% to 71%. The use of overall survival (OS) as an endpoint in the trials increased over time, but its use as a primary endpoint remained infrequent. The inclusion of OS testing in a hierarchical sequence in case of positive testing of a tumor-centered or composite endpoint appeared to have become the new standard. Conclusion: Our findings indicate some improvements in the quality of the evidence-base supporting new breast cancer drugs. The rigorous assessment of patient-relevant endpoints has increased over time, but this improvement is mainly related to the analysis of OS as a secondary endpoint analyzed in a hierarchical sequence.

Can pragmatic research, real-world data and digital technologies aid the development of psychedelic medicine?

Favourable regulatory assessments, liberal policy changes, new research centres and substantial commercial investment signal that psychedelic therapy is making a major comeback. Positive findings from modern trials are catalysing developments, but it is questionable whether current confirmatory trials are sufficient for advancing our understanding of safety and best practice. Here we suggest supplementing traditional confirmatory trials with pragmatic trials, real-world data initiatives and digital health solutions to better support the discovery of optimal and personalised treatment protocols and parameters. These recommendations are intended to help support the development of safe, effective and cost-efficient psychedelic therapy, which, given its history, is vulnerable to excesses of hype and regulation.

Bayesian Approaches for Confirmatory Trials in Rare Diseases: Opportunities and Challenges

The aim of this narrative review is to introduce the reader to Bayesian methods that, in our opinion, appear to be the most important in the context of rare diseases. A disease is defined as rare depending on the prevalence of the affected patients in the considered population, for example, about 1 in 1500 people in U.S.; about 1 in 2500 people in Japan; and fewer than 1 in 2000 people in Europe. There are between 6000 and 8000 rare diseases and the main issue in drug development is linked to the challenge of achieving robust evidence from clinical trials in small populations. A better use of all available information can help the development process and Bayesian statistics can provide a solid framework at the design stage, during the conduct of the trial, and at the analysis stage. The focus of this manuscript is to provide a review of Bayesian methods for sample size computation or reassessment during phase II or phase III trial, for response adaptive randomization and of for meta-analysis in rare disease. Challenges regarding prior distribution choice, computational burden and dissemination are also discussed.