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

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.     

The relationship among primary anatomic subsite and risk and distribution of second malignant neoplasms in patients with stage I/II diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: An analysis of the surveillance,epidemiology, and end results database

BackgroundRecent studies have reported that diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) involving different primary extranodal sites have distinct clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis. However, the risk of secondary malignant neoplasms (SMNs) in DLBCL survivors with different primary extranodal sites are unknown.MethodsA total of 40,714 patients diagnosed with stage I/II DLBCL were included from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database from 1983 to 2015.The standardized incidence ratio (SIR) and absolute excess risk (AER) were used to assess the risk of SMNs.ResultsThe results show that the risk of SMN was significantly higher in extranodal DLBCL than in the US general population (SIR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.11–1.26), and the risk of developing SMN remains significantly elevated with increased latency. Moreover, there were multiple site-specific risk patterns. There was a 22%, 44%, 66%, 123% and 151% increased risk of SMN 10 years after primary gastrointestinal tract, head/neck, skeletal, lung and liver/pancreas DLBCL diagnosis, respectively. There was a significant decrease risk of SMN with increasing age at diagnosis for primary gastrointestinal tract and skeletal DLBCL. In addition, DLBCL patients with primary sites in the gastrointestinal tract, thyroid and liver/pancreas had the highest incidences of secondary stomach cancer, second thyroid cancer, and second hepatobiliary cancer, respectively, which indicated that the initial site of DLBCL may predict the type of SMN.ConclusionsThe strategies for cancer surveillance after extranodal DLBCL diagnosis may need to be individualized according to the subsite of extranodal DLBCL.