Advertisement

A decade of marketing approval of gene and cell-based therapies in the United States, European Union and Japan: An evaluation of regulatory decision-making

      Abstract

      There is a widely held expectation of clinical advance with the development of gene and cell-based therapies (GCTs). Yet, establishing benefits and risks is highly uncertain. We examine differences in decision-making for GCT approval between jurisdictions by comparing regulatory assessment procedures in the United States (US), European Union (EU) and Japan. A cohort of 18 assessment procedures was analyzed by comparing product characteristics, evidentiary and non-evidentiary factors considered for approval and post-marketing risk management. Product characteristics are very heterogeneous and only three products are marketed in multiple jurisdictions. Almost half of all approved GCTs received an orphan designation. Overall, confirmatory evidence or indications of clinical benefit were evident in US and EU applications, whereas in Japan approval was solely granted based on non-confirmatory evidence. Due to scientific uncertainties and safety risks, substantial post-marketing risk management activities were requested in the EU and Japan. EU and Japanese authorities often took unmet medical needs into consideration in decision-making for approval. These observations underline the effects of implemented legislation in these two jurisdictions that facilitate an adaptive approach to licensing. In the US, the recent assessments of two chimeric antigen receptor-T cell (CAR-T) products are suggestive of a trend toward a more permissive approach for GCT approval under recent reforms, in contrast to a more binary decision-making approach for previous approvals. It indicates that all three regulatory agencies are currently willing to take risks by approving GCTs with scientific uncertainties and safety risks, urging them to pay accurate attention to post-marketing risk management.

      Key Words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Cytotherapy
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Fischbach M.A.
        • Bluestone J.A.
        • Lim W.A.
        Cell-based therapeutics: the next pillar of medicine.
        Sci Transl Med. 2013; 5: 179ps7
        • Wirth T.
        • Parker N.
        • Ylä-Herttuala S.
        History of gene therapy.
        Gene. 2013; 525: 162-169
        • Kumar S.R.
        • Markusic D.M.
        • Biswas M.
        • High K.A.
        • Herzog R.W.
        Clinical development of gene therapy: results and lessons from recent successes.
        Mol Ther — Methods Clin Dev. 2016; 3: 16034
        • Brévignon-Dodin L.
        • Singh P.
        ATMP in practice: towards a new industry landscape in tissue engineering.
        J Commer Biotechnol. 2008; 15: 59-65
        • Schneider C.K.
        • Salmikangas P.
        • Jilma B.
        • Flamion B.
        • Todorova L.R.
        • Paphitou A.
        • et al.
        Challenges with advanced therapy medicinal products and how to meet them.
        Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2010; 9: 195-201
        • Salmikangas P.
        • Menezes-Ferreira M.
        • Reischl I.
        • Tsiftsoglou A.
        • Kyselovic J.
        • Borg J.J.
        • et al.
        Manufacturing, characterization and control of cell-based medicinal products: challenging paradigms toward commercial use.
        Regen Med. 2015; 10: 65-78
        • Bravery C.A.
        • Carmen J.
        • Fong T.
        • Oprea W.
        • Hoogendoorn K.H.
        • Woda J.
        • et al.
        Potency assay development for cellular therapy products: an ISCT* review of the requirements and experiences in the industry.
        Cytotherapy. 2013; 15 (e9): 9-19
        • Pignatti F.
        • Ashby D.
        • Brass E.
        • Eichler H.-G.
        • Frey P.
        • Hillege H.
        • et al.
        Structured frameworks to increase the transparency of the assessment of benefits and risks of medicines: current status and possible future directions.
        Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2015; 98: 522-533
        • Eichler H.-G.
        • Pignatti F.
        • Flamion B.
        • Leufkens H.
        • Breckenridge A.
        Balancing early market access to new drugs with the need for benefit/risk data: a mounting dilemma.
        Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2008; 7: 818-826
        • Tafuri G.
        • Stolk P.
        • Trotta F.
        • Putzeist M.
        • Leufkens H.G.
        • Laing R.O.
        • et al.
        How do the EMA and FDA decide which anticancer drugs make it to the market? A comparative qualitative study on decision makers' views.
        Ann Oncol. 2014; 25: 265-269
        • Liberti L.
        • Breckenridge A.
        • Hoekman J.
        • McAuslane N.
        • Stolk P.
        • Leufkens H.
        Factors related to drug approvals: predictors of outcome?.
        Drug Discov Today. 2017; 22: 937-946
        • Hauray B.
        From regulatory knowledge to regulatory decisions: the European evaluation of medicines.
        Minerva. 2017; 55: 187-208
        • Coppens D.G.M.
        • De Bruin M.L.
        • Leufkens H.G.M.
        • Hoekman J.
        Global regulatory differences for gene and cell based therapies: consequences and implications for patient access and therapeutic innovation.
        Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2018; 103: 120-127
        • Melchiorri D.
        • Pani L.
        • Gasparini P.
        • Cossu G.
        • Ancans J.
        • Borg J.J.
        • et al.
        Regulatory evaluation of Glybera in Europe - two committees, one mission.
        Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2013; 12: 719
        • European Medicines Agency
        European public assessment reports.
        (Available from:)
        • Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency
        Review Reports: Regenerative Medical Products.
        (Available from:)
        • Food and Drug Administration
        Approved Cellular and Gene Therapy Products.
        (Available from:)
        • Putzeist M.
        • Mantel-Teeuwisse A.K.
        • Aronsson B.
        • Rowland M.
        • Gispen-de Wied C.C.
        • Vamvakas S.
        • et al.
        Factors influencing non-approval of new drugs in Europe.
        Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2012; 11: 903-904
        • Putzeist M.
        • Mantel-Teeuwisse A.K.
        • Llinares J.
        • Gispen-De Wied C.C.
        • Hoes A.W.
        • Leufkens H.G.M.
        EU marketing authorization review of orphan and non-orphan drugs does not differ.
        Drug Discov Today. 2013; 18: 1001-1006
        • Hoekman J.
        • Boon W.
        • Bouvy J.
        • Ebbers H.
        • de Jong J.
        • De Bruin M.
        Use of the conditional marketing authorization pathway for oncology medicines in Europe.
        Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2015; 98: 534-541
        • Hara A.
        • Sato D.
        • Sahara Y.
        New governmental regulatory system for stem cell-based therapies in Japan.
        Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2014; 48: 681-688
        • Azuma K.
        Regulatory landscape of regenerative medicine in Japan.
        Curr Stem Cell Rep. 2015; 1: 118-128
        • Oye K.A.
        • Eichler H.G.
        • Hoos A.
        • Mori Y.
        • Mullin T.M.
        • Pearson M.
        Pharmaceuticals licensing and reimbursement in the European Union, United States, and Japan.
        Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2016; 100: 626-632
        • Eichler H.-G.
        • Baird L.G.
        • Barker R.
        • Bloechl-Daum B.
        • Børlum-Kristensen F.
        • Brown J.
        • et al.
        From adaptive licensing to adaptive pathways: delivering a flexible life-span approach to bring new drugs to patients.
        Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2015; 97: 234-246
        • Konomi K.
        • Tobita M.
        • Kimura K.
        • Sato D.
        New Japanese initiatives on stem cell therapies.
        Cell Stem Cell. 2015; 16: 350-352
        • Okada K.
        • Koike K.
        • Sawa Y.
        Consideration of and expectations for the pharmaceuticals, medical devices and other therapeutic products act in Japan.
        Regen Ther. 2015; 1: 80-83
        • Asada R.
        • Shimizu S.
        • Ono S.
        • Ito T.
        • Shimizu A.
        • Yamaguchi T.
        Analysis of new drugs whose clinical development and regulatory approval were hampered during their introduction in Japan.
        J Clin Pharm Ther. 2013; 38: 309-313
        • Putzeist M.
        • Heemstra H.E.
        • Garcia J.L.
        • Mantel-Teeuwisse A.K.
        • Gispen-De Wied C.C.
        • Hoes A.W.
        • et al.
        Determinants for successful marketing authorisation of orphan medicinal products in the EU.
        Drug Discov Today. 2012; 17: 352-358
        • Duijnhoven R.G.
        • Straus S.M.J.M.
        • Raine J.M.
        • Boer A.
        • de Hoes A.W.
        • Bruin M.L.D.
        Number of patients studied prior to approval of new medicines: a database analysis.
        PLoS Med. 2013; 10 (e1001407)
        • Kesselheim A.S.
        • Treasure C.L.
        • Joffe S.
        Biomarker-defined subsets of common diseases: policy and economic implications of orphan drug act coverage.
        PLoS Med. 2017; 14 (e1002190)
        • Abou-El-Enein M.
        • Elsanhoury A.
        • Reinke P.
        Overcoming challenges facing advanced therapies in the EU market.
        Cell Stem Cell. 2016; 19: 293-297
        • Driscoll D.
        • Farnia S.
        • Kefalas P.
        • Maziarz R.T.
        Concise review: the high cost of high tech medicine: planning ahead for market access.
        Stem Cells Transl Med. 2017; 6: 1723-1729
        • Enzmann H.
        New trends and challenges in the European regulation of innovative medicines.
        Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2016; 80: 314-320
        • Califf R.M.
        Benefit-risk assessments at the us food and drug administration: finding the balance.
        JAMA. 2017; 317: 693-694
        • Kesselheim A.S.
        • Avorn J.
        New “21st Century Cures” Legislation: speed and ease vs science.
        JAMA. 2017; 317: 581-582
        • Food and Drug Administration
        Expedited Programs for Regenerative Medicine Therapies for Serious Conditions: Draft Guidance for Industry.
        (Available from:)
        • Hanna E.
        • Rémuzat C.
        • Auquier P.
        • Toumi M.
        Advanced therapy medicinal products: current and future perspectives.
        (J Mark Access Health Policy; Available from:)
        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4846788/
        Date: 2016
        Date accessed: March 28, 2018
        • de Wilde S.
        • Guchelaar H.-J.
        • Zandvliet M.L.
        • Meij P.
        Clinical development of gene- and cell-based therapies: overview of the European landscape.
        Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev. 2016; 3: 16073
        • Boráň T.
        • Menezes-Ferreira M.
        • Reischl I.
        • Celis P.
        • Ferry N.
        • Gänsbacher B.
        • et al.
        Clinical Development and Commercialization of Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs) in the EU: how are the product pipeline and regulatory framework evolving?.
        Hum Gene Ther Clin Dev. 2017; 28: 126-135
        • Ruffin M.
        BIO-Europe Spring: Promise of Cell & Gene Therapy. BIO-Europe Spring 2016.
        (Stockholm; Available from:)
        • Ruffin M.
        • Werner M.
        • Preti R.
        2017 Cell & Gene Therapies. State of the Industry Briefing. JP Morgan Biotech Showcase.
        (San Francisco; Available from:)
        • Mullard A.
        PRIME time at the EMA.
        Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2017; 16: 226-228
        • Milne C.-P.
        • Mittra J.
        • Kojima N.
        • Sugiyama D.
        • Awatin J.
        • Simmons G.
        Prospects for harmonizing regulatory science programs in europe, japan, and the united states to advance regenerative medicine.
        Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2016; 50: 724-733
        • Vermeer N.S.
        • Duijnhoven R.G.
        • Straus S.M.J.M.
        • Mantel-Teeuwisse A.K.
        • Arlett P.R.
        • Egberts A.C.G.
        • et al.
        Risk management plans as a tool for proactive pharmacovigilance: a cohort study of newly approved drugs in Europe.
        Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2014; 96: 723-731
        • Jokura Y.
        • Yano K.
        • Yamato M.
        A comparison of the new Japanese expedited approval legislation for regenerative medicine product with the existing systems of the United States and European Union.
        (J Tissue Eng Regen Med; Available from:)
        • van Schothorst M.
        • Weeda J.
        • Schiffers K.
        • Oortwijn W.
        • Hoekman J.
        • Coppens D.
        • et al.
        Study on the regulation of advanced therapies in selected jurisdictions.
        (20147306 RfS Chafea/2014/Health/24 - Final Report; Available from:)
        • Thorpe K.E.
        • Zwarenstein M.
        • Oxman A.D.
        • Treweek S.
        • Furberg C.D.
        • Altman D.G.
        • et al.
        A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2009; 62: 464-475
        • Hoekman J.
        • Klamer T.T.
        • Mantel-Teeuwisse A.K.
        • Leufkens H.G.M.
        • De Bruin M.L.
        Characteristics and follow-up of postmarketing studies of conditionally authorized medicines in the EU.
        Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016; 82: 213-226
        • Pease A.M.
        • Krumholz H.M.
        • Downing N.S.
        • Aminawung J.A.
        • Shah N.D.
        • Ross J.S.
        Postapproval studies of drugs initially approved by the FDA on the basis of limited evidence: systematic review.
        BMJ. 2017; 357: j1680
        • Willyard C.
        FDA's post-approval studies continue to suffer delays and setbacks.
        Nat Med. 2014; 20: 1224-1225
        • de Wilde S.
        • Guchelaar H.-J.
        • Zandvliet M.L.
        • Meij P.
        Understanding clinical development of chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapies.
        Cytotherapy. 2017; 19: 703-709
        • Mt-Isa S.
        • Ouwens M.
        • Robert V.
        • Gebel M.
        • Schacht A.
        • Hirsch I.
        Structured Benefit–risk assessment: a review of key publications and initiatives on frameworks and methodologies.
        Pharm Stat. 2016; 15: 324-332
        • Berry D.
        The brave new world of clinical cancer research: adaptive biomarker-driven trials integrating clinical practice with clinical research.
        Mol Oncol. 2015; 9: 951-959
        • Brunner M.
        • Jilma B.
        Development of Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products: A Case for Early Scientific Advice.
        in: Müller M. Clinical Pharmacology: Current Topics and Case Studies. Springer International Publishing, 2016: 293-303 (Available from:)