E Hanna

Advanced therapy medicinal products: current and future perspectives

Background Advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) are innovative therapies that encompass gene therapy, somatic cell therapy, and tissue-engineered products. These therapies are expected to bring important health benefits, but also to substantially impact the pharmaceuticals budget. Objective The aim of this study was to characterise the ATMPs in development and discuss future implications in terms of market access. Methods Clinical trials were searched in the following databases: EudraCT (EU Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials), ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP (International Clinical Trials Registry Platform of the World Health Organization). Trials were classified by category of ATMP as defined by European regulation EC No. 1394/2007, as well as by development phase and disease area. Results The database search identified 939 clinical trials investigating ATMPs (85% ongoing, 15% completed). The majority of trials were in the early stages (Phase I, I/II: 64.3%, Phase II, II/III: 27.9%, Phase 3: 6.9%). Per category of ATMP, we identified 53.6% of trials for somatic cell therapies, 22.8% for tissue-engineered products, 22.4% for gene therapies, and 1.2% for combined products (incorporating a medical device). Disease areas included cancer (24.8%), cardiovascular diseases (19.4%), musculoskeletal (10.5%), immune system and inflammation (11.5%), neurology (9.1%), and others. Of the trials, 47.2% enrolled fewer than 25 patients. Due to the complexity and specificity of ATMPs, new clinical trial methodologies are being considered (e.g., small sample size, non-randomised trials, single-arm trials, surrogate endpoints, integrated protocols, and adaptive designs). Evidence generation post-launch will become unavoidable to address payers’ expectations. Conclusion ATMPs represent a fast-growing field of interest. Although most of the products are in an early development phase, the combined trial phase and the potential to cure severe chronic conditions suggest that ATMPs may reach the market earlier than standard therapies. Targeted therapies have opened the way for new trial methodologies, from which ATMPs could benefit to get early access. ATMPs may be the next source of major impact on payers’ drug budgets.

Gene therapies development: slow progress and promising prospect

ABSTRACT Background: In 1989, the concept of human gene therapies has emerged with the first approved human gene therapy trial of Rosenberg et al. Gene therapies are considered as promising therapies applicable to a broad range of diseases. Objective: The objective of this study was to review the descriptive data on gene therapy clinical trials conducted worldwide between 1989 and 2015, and to discuss potential success rates of these trials over time and anticipated market launch in the upcoming years. Methods: A publicly available database, ‘Gene Therapy Clinical Trials Worldwide’, was used to extract descriptive data on gene therapy clinical trials: (1) number of trials per year between 1989 and 2015; (2) countries; (3) diseases targeted by gene therapies; (4) vectors used for gene delivery; (5) trials status; (6) phases of development. Results: Between 1989 and 2015, 2,335 gene therapy clinical trials have been completed, were ongoing or approved (but not started) worldwide. The number of clinical trials did not increase steadily over time; it reached its highest peak in 2015 (163 trials). Almost 95% of the trials were in early phases of development and 72% were ongoing. The United States undertook 67% of gene therapy clinical trials. The majority of gene therapies clinical trials identified targeted cancer diseases. Conclusion: The first gene therapy was approved in the European Union in 2012, after two decades of dashed expectations. This approval boosted the investment in developing gene therapies. Regulators are creating a specific path for rapid access of those new therapies, providing hope for manufacturers, healthcare professionals, and patients. However, payers are increasingly scrutinizing the additional benefits of the new therapies. Major steps forward are expected in the field of gene therapies in the future.

Risk of Discontinuation of Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products Clinical Trials

Objective Advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) constitute a class of innovative products that encompasses gene therapy, somatic cell therapy, and tissue-engineered products (TEP). There is an increased investment of commercial and non-commercial sponsors in this field and a growing number of ATMPs randomized clinical trials (RCT) and patients enrolled in such trials. RCT generate data to prove the efficacy of a new therapy, but the discontinuation of RCTs wastes scarce resources. Our objective is to identify the number and characteristics of discontinued ATMPs trials in order to evaluate the rate of discontinuation. Methods We searched for ATMPs trials conducted between 1999 to June 2015 using three databases, which are Clinicaltrials.gov, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and the EU Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials (EudraCT). We selected the ATMPs trials after elimination of the duplicates. We identified the disease areas and the sponsors as commercial or non-commercial organizations. We classified ATMPs by type and trial status, that is, ongoing, completed, terminated, discontinued, and prematurely ended. Then, we calculated the rate of discontinuation. Results Between 1999 and June 2015, 143 withdrawn, terminated, or prematurely ended ATMPs clinical trials were identified. Between 1999 and June 2013, 474 ongoing and completed clinical trials were identified. Therefore, the rate of discontinuation of ATMPs trials is 23.18%, similar to that for non-ATMPs drugs in development. The probability of discontinuation is, respectively, 27.35, 16.28, and 16.34% for cell therapies, gene therapies, and TEP. The highest discontinuation rate is for oncology (43%), followed by cardiology (19.2%). It is almost the same for commercial and non-commercial sponsors; therefore, the discontinuation reason may not be financially driven. Conclusion No failure risk rate per development phase is available for ATMPs. The discontinuation rate may prove helpful when assessing the expected net present value to support portfolio arbitration and may be considered by patients and potential investigators in their decisions to participate in ATMP trials. These results carry limitation because the rationale for discontinuation is unknown. Further research about the reasons of discontinuation and the risk of negative results is needed to inform stakeholders.