With Iclusig’s Return, Ariad Gets A Second Chance To Get The Dose Right
In allowing ponatinib back on the market, FDA is requiring the sponsor to address a gap in the original development program – failure to identify the optimal dose. However, Ariad is also looking at the post-marketing requirements as a step in the pathway to use in earlier treatment settings.
You may also be interested in...
Makena Sponsor Covis Seeks To Use FDA Officials’ Words, Actions On Accelerated Approval Against CDER
Company cites comments by Oncology Center of Excellence Director Richard Pazdur and Office of Neuroscience Director Billy Dunn on reasons why confirmatory trials fail and the need for regulatory flexibility. Ironically, both senior officials have publicly extracted commitments from companies to withdraw products if postmarketing trials do not verify clinical benefit.
Accelerated Approval: Makena Real-World Evidence Insufficient To Verify Clinical Benefit, CDER Says
Covis seeks to discuss study proposals and other accelerated approval precedents at still-unscheduled withdrawal hearing; CDER says company’s current RWE proposal is inadequate given its design and the failure of the PROLONG confirmatory clinical trial.
Ariad Took Dismissive View Of CV Events In Iclusig Labeling Proposals
FDA rejected two of the sponsor’s labeling proposals because they failed to adequately address safety issues seen in the PACE trial. Ariad apparently preferred to quantify in labeling only treatment-emergent adverse events that investigators attributed to ponatinib – an approach FDA disdains for single-arm studies.