Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Review

Recommendations for the development of rare disease drugs using the accelerated approval pathway and for qualifying biomarkers as primary endpoints

Authors: Emil D Kakkis, Mary O’Donovan, Gerald Cox, Mark Hayes, Federico Goodsaid, PK Tandon, Pat Furlong, Susan Boynton, Mladen Bozic, May Orfali, Mark Thornton

Published in: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

For rare serious and life-threatening disorders, there is a tremendous challenge of transforming scientific discoveries into new drug treatments. This challenge has been recognized by all stakeholders who endorse the need for flexibility in the regulatory review process for novel therapeutics to treat rare diseases. In the United States, the best expression of this flexibility was the creation of the Accelerated Approval (AA) pathway. The AA pathway is critically important for the development of treatments for diseases with high unmet medical need and has been used extensively for drugs used to treat cancer and infectious diseases like HIV.
In 2012, the AA provisions were amended to enhance the application of the AA pathway to expedite the development of drugs for rare disorders under the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA). FDASIA, among many provisions, requires the development of a more relevant FDA guidance on the types of evidence that may be acceptable in support of using a novel surrogate endpoint. The application of AA to rare diseases requires more predictability to drive greater access to appropriate use of AA for more rare disease treatments that might not be developed otherwise.
This white paper proposes a scientific framework for assessing biomarker endpoints to enhance the development of novel therapeutics for rare and devastating diseases currently without adequate treatment and is based on the opinions of experts in drug development and rare disease patient groups. Specific recommendations include: 1) Establishing regulatory rationale for increased AA access in rare disease programs; 2) Implementing a Biomarker Qualification Request Process to provide the opportunity for an early determination of biomarker acceptance; and 3) A proposed scientific framework for qualifying biomarkers as primary endpoints. The paper’s final section highlights case studies of successful examples that have incorporated biomarker endpoints into FDA approvals for rare disease therapies. The focus of this paper is on the situation in the Unites States, but the recommendations are reasonably applicable to any jurisdiction.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
3.
go back to reference Sebelius K. Building a strong foundation for a new century of treatments and cures. Health Aff. 2001;30(1):81–3.CrossRef Sebelius K. Building a strong foundation for a new century of treatments and cures. Health Aff. 2001;30(1):81–3.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act. 21 U.S.C. §356 (2011). Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act. 21 U.S.C. §356 (2011).
5.
go back to reference Government Accounting Office: FDA Needs to Enhance its Oversight of Drugs Approved on the Basis of Surrogate Endpoints. Washington, DC; 2009. GAO-09-866. Government Accounting Office: FDA Needs to Enhance its Oversight of Drugs Approved on the Basis of Surrogate Endpoints. Washington, DC; 2009. GAO-09-866.
6.
go back to reference Miyamoto BE, Kakkis ED. The potential investment impact of improved access to accelerated approval on the development of treatments for low prevalence rare diseases. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2011;6:49.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed Miyamoto BE, Kakkis ED. The potential investment impact of improved access to accelerated approval on the development of treatments for low prevalence rare diseases. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2011;6:49.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
7.
go back to reference Sasinowski FJ. Quantum of effectiveness evidence in FDA’s approval of orphan drugs cataloguing FDA’s flexibility in regulating therapies for persons with rare disorders. DIA J. 2011;46(2):238. Sasinowski FJ. Quantum of effectiveness evidence in FDA’s approval of orphan drugs cataloguing FDA’s flexibility in regulating therapies for persons with rare disorders. DIA J. 2011;46(2):238.
8.
go back to reference Fleming TR, DeMets DL. Surrogate End points in clinical trials: are we being misled? Ann Intern Med. 1996;125:605–13.CrossRefPubMed Fleming TR, DeMets DL. Surrogate End points in clinical trials: are we being misled? Ann Intern Med. 1996;125:605–13.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Institute of Medicine. Board on Health Sciences Policy: Rare Diseases and Orphan Products: Accelerating Research and Development. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011. Institute of Medicine. Board on Health Sciences Policy: Rare Diseases and Orphan Products: Accelerating Research and Development. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011.
10.
go back to reference Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA), Pub. L. 112–144, 126 Stat. 993, codified as amended at 21 U.S.C. §301 (2012). Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA), Pub. L. 112–144, 126 Stat. 993, codified as amended at 21 U.S.C. §301 (2012).
11.
go back to reference Pariser AR, Robb M, Sherman RE. Expedited programs for drug development and approval. Expert Opinion on Orphan Drugs. 2013;1(7):507–10.CrossRef Pariser AR, Robb M, Sherman RE. Expedited programs for drug development and approval. Expert Opinion on Orphan Drugs. 2013;1(7):507–10.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Institute of Medicine. Committee on Qualification of Biomarkers and Surrogate Endpoints in Chronic Disease: Perspectives on Biomarker and Surrogate Endpoint Evaluation: Discussion Forum Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011. Institute of Medicine. Committee on Qualification of Biomarkers and Surrogate Endpoints in Chronic Disease: Perspectives on Biomarker and Surrogate Endpoint Evaluation: Discussion Forum Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011.
14.
go back to reference Institute of Medicine. Committee on Qualifications of Biomarkers and Surrogate Endpoints in Chronic Disease: Evaluation of Biomarkers and Surrogate Endpoints in Chronic Disease. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2010. Institute of Medicine. Committee on Qualifications of Biomarkers and Surrogate Endpoints in Chronic Disease: Evaluation of Biomarkers and Surrogate Endpoints in Chronic Disease. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2010.
15.
go back to reference President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology: Report to the President on Compelling Innovation in Drug Discovery, Development and Evaluation. Washington, DC: Executive Office; 2012. President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology: Report to the President on Compelling Innovation in Drug Discovery, Development and Evaluation. Washington, DC: Executive Office; 2012.
16.
go back to reference Fleming TR. Surrogate endpoints and FDA’s accelerated approval process. Health Aff. 2005;24(1):67–8.CrossRef Fleming TR. Surrogate endpoints and FDA’s accelerated approval process. Health Aff. 2005;24(1):67–8.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Recommendations for the development of rare disease drugs using the accelerated approval pathway and for qualifying biomarkers as primary endpoints
Authors
Emil D Kakkis
Mary O’Donovan
Gerald Cox
Mark Hayes
Federico Goodsaid
PK Tandon
Pat Furlong
Susan Boynton
Mladen Bozic
May Orfali
Mark Thornton
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1750-1172
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-014-0195-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 1/2015 Go to the issue