Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Rajeshwari Sridhara is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Rajeshwari Sridhara.


Clinical Cancer Research | 2015

FDA Approval: Palbociclib for the Treatment of Postmenopausal Patients with Estrogen Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer

Julia A. Beaver; Laleh Amiri-Kordestani; Rosane Charlab; Wei Chen; Todd R. Palmby; Amy Tilley; Jeanne Fourie Zirkelbach; Jingyu Yu; Qi Liu; Liang Zhao; Joyce Crich; Xiao Hong Chen; Minerva Hughes; Erik Bloomquist; Shenghui Tang; Rajeshwari Sridhara; Paul G. Kluetz; Geoffrey Kim; Amna Ibrahim; Richard Pazdur; Patricia Cortazar

On February 3, 2015, the FDA granted accelerated approval to palbociclib (IBRANCE, Pfizer Inc.), an inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4 and CDK6), for use in combination with letrozole for the treatment of postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER)–positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer as initial endocrine-based therapy for their metastatic disease. The approval is based on a randomized, multicenter, open-label phase I/II trial (PALOMA-1) in 165 patients randomized to palbociclib (125 mg orally daily for 21 consecutive days, followed by 7 days off treatment) plus letrozole (2.5 mg orally daily) or letrozole alone. The phase II portion of the trial was divided into two cohorts: cohort 1 enrolled 66 biomarker-unselected patients and cohort 2 enrolled 99 biomarker-positive patients. The major efficacy outcome measure was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). A large magnitude of improvement in PFS was observed in patients receiving palbociclib plus letrozole compared with patients receiving letrozole alone (HR, 0.488; 95% confidence interval, 0.319–0.748). Multiple sensitivity analyses were supportive of clinical benefit. The most common adverse reaction in patients receiving palbociclib plus letrozole was neutropenia. This article summarizes the FDA thought process and data supporting accelerated approval based on PALOMA-1 that may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in the ongoing and fully accrued confirmatory trial PALOMA-2. Clin Cancer Res; 21(21); 4760–6. ©2015 AACR.


Clinical Cancer Research | 2014

FDA Approval: Ado-trastuzumab Emtansine for the Treatment of Patients with HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer

Laleh Amiri-Kordestani; Gideon M. Blumenthal; Qing Xu; Lijun Zhang; Tang Sw; Ha L; Wendy C. Weinberg; Chi B; Candau-Chacon R; Hughes P; Anne Marie Russell; Sarah Pope Miksinski; Xiao Hong Chen; W. D. McGuinn; Todd R. Palmby; Sarah J. Schrieber; Qi Liu; Wang J; Pengfei Song; Nitin Mehrotra; Skarupa L; Clouse K; Al-Hakim A; Rajeshwari Sridhara; Amna Ibrahim; Robert Justice; Richard Pazdur; Patricia Cortazar

On February 22, 2013, the FDA licensed ado-trastuzumab emtansine (Kadcyla; Genentech, Inc.) for use as a single agent for the treatment of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who previously received trastuzumab and a taxane, separately or in combination. The clinical basis for licensure was a phase III trial in 991 patients with HER2-positive MBC that randomly allocated patients to receive ado-trastuzumab emtansine (n = 495) or lapatinib in combination with capecitabine (n = 496). The coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) based on tumor assessments by an independent review committee and overall survival (OS). Statistically significant improvements in PFS and OS were observed in patients receiving ado-trastuzumab emtansine compared with patients receiving lapatinib plus capecitabine [difference in PFS medians of 3.2 months, HR, 0.65 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.55–0.77), P < 0.0001 and difference in OS medians of 5.8 months, HR, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.55–0.85), P = 0.0006]. The most common adverse reactions in patients receiving ado-trastuzumab emtansine were fatigue, nausea, musculoskeletal pain, thrombocytopenia, headache, increased aminotransferase levels, and constipation. Other significant adverse reactions included hepatobiliary disorders and left ventricular dysfunction. Given the PFS and OS results, the benefit–risk profile was considered favorable. Clin Cancer Res; 20(17); 4436–41. ©2014 AACR.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2015

Overall Response Rate, Progression-Free Survival, and Overall Survival With Targeted and Standard Therapies in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: US Food and Drug Administration Trial-Level and Patient-Level Analyses

Gideon M. Blumenthal; Stella W. Karuri; Hui Zhang; Lijun Zhang; Sean Khozin; Dickran Kazandjian; Shenghui Tang; Rajeshwari Sridhara; Patricia Keegan; Richard Pazdur

PURPOSE To conduct analyses exploring trial-level and patient-level associations between overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) trials. METHODS We identified 14 trials (N = 12,567) submitted to US Food and Drug Administration since 2003 of treatments for advanced NSCLC. Only randomized, active-controlled trials with more than 150 patients were included. Associations between trial-level PFS hazard ratio (HR), OS HR, and ORR odds ratio were analyzed using a weighted linear regression model. Patient-level responder analyses comparing PFS and OS between patients with and without an objective response were performed using pooled data from all studies. RESULTS In the trial-level analysis, the association between PFS and ORR was strong (R(2) = 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.98). There was no association between OS and ORR (R(2) = 0.09; 95% CI, 0 to 0.33) and OS and PFS (R(2) = 0.08; 95% CI, 0 to 0.31). In the patient-level responder analyses, patients who achieved a response had better PFS and OS compared with nonresponders (PFS: HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.42; OS: HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.43). CONCLUSION On a trial level, there is a strong association between ORR and PFS. An association between ORR and OS and between PFS and OS was not established, possibly because of cross-over and longer survival after progression in the targeted therapy and first-line trials. The patient-level analysis showed that responders have a better PFS and OS compared with nonresponders. A therapy in advanced NSCLC with a large magnitude of effect on ORR may have a large PFS effect.


Clinical Cancer Research | 2014

FDA Approval Summary: Vemurafenib for Treatment of Unresectable or Metastatic Melanoma with the BRAFV600E Mutation

Geoffrey Kim; Amy E. McKee; Yang-Min Ning; Maitreyee Hazarika; Marc R. Theoret; John R. Johnson; Qiang Casey Xu; Shenghui Tang; Rajeshwari Sridhara; Xiaoping Jiang; Kun He; Donna Roscoe; W. David McGuinn; Whitney S. Helms; Anne Marie Russell; Sarah Pope Miksinski; Jeanne Fourie Zirkelbach; Justin C. Earp; Qi Liu; Amna Ibrahim; Robert Justice; Richard Pazdur

On August 17, 2011, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved vemurafenib tablets (Zelboraf, Hoffmann-LaRoche Inc.) for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma with the BRAFV600E mutation as detected by an FDA-approved test. The cobas 4800 BRAF V600 Mutation Test (Roche Molecular Systems, Inc.) was approved concurrently. An international, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial in 675 previously untreated patients with BRAFV600E mutation–positive unresectable or metastatic melanoma allocated 337 patients to receive vemurafenib, 960 mg orally twice daily, and 338 patients to receive dacarbazine, 1,000 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks. Overall survival was significantly improved in patients receiving vemurafenib [HR, 0.44; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.33–0.59; P < 0.0001]. Progression-free survival was also significantly improved in patients receiving vemurafenib (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.20–0.33; P < 0.0001). Overall response rates were 48.4% and 5.5% in the vemurafenib and dacarbazine arms, respectively. The most common adverse reactions (≥30%) in patients treated with vemurafenib were arthralgia, rash, alopecia, fatigue, photosensitivity reaction, and nausea. Cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas or keratoacanthomas were detected in approximately 24% of patients treated with vemurafenib. Other adverse reactions included hypersensitivity, Stevens–Johnson syndrome, toxic epidermal necrolysis, uveitis, QT prolongation, and liver enzyme laboratory abnormalities. Clin Cancer Res; 20(19); 4994–5000. ©2014 AACR.


Clinical Cancer Research | 2014

Radium Ra 223 dichloride injection: U.S. Food and Drug Administration Drug Approval Summary

Paul G. Kluetz; William F. Pierce; Virginia Ellen Maher; Hui Zhang; Shenghui Tang; Pengfei Song; Qi Liu; Haber Mt; Leutzinger Ee; Al-Hakim A; Chen W; Todd R. Palmby; Alebachew E; Rajeshwari Sridhara; Amna Ibrahim; Robert Justice; Richard Pazdur

On May 15, 2013, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved radium Ra 223 dichloride (Ra-223; Xofigo injection; Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc.) for the treatment of patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), symptomatic bone metastases, and no known visceral metastatic disease. The FDA review was based on clinical trial BC1-06, which randomly allocated patients (2:1) to either Ra-223 plus best standard of care (BSoC) or placebo plus BSoC. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) with a key secondary endpoint of time to first symptomatic skeletal event (SSE). A statistically significant improvement in OS was demonstrated [HR, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.55–0.88, P = 0.0019]. At the prespecified interim analysis, the median OS durations were 14.0 and 11.2 months in the Ra-223 and placebo arms, respectively. The improvement in OS was supported by a delay in time to first SSE favoring the Ra-223 arm. The most common (>10%) adverse reactions in patients receiving Ra-223 were nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, and peripheral edema. The most common (>10%) hematologic laboratory abnormalities were anemia, lymphocytopenia, leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia. Ra-223 is the first α-emitting radiotherapeutic and the first radiopharmaceutical to demonstrate an OS advantage in metastatic prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res; 20(1); 9–14. ©2013 AACR.


Oncologist | 2012

FDA Approval Summary: Sunitinib for the Treatment of Progressive Well-Differentiated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

Gideon M. Blumenthal; Patricia Cortazar; Jenny J. Zhang; Shenghui Tang; Rajeshwari Sridhara; Anthony Murgo; Robert Justice; Richard Pazdur

On May 20, 2011, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved sunitinib malate capsules (Sutent®; Pfizer, Inc., New York) for the treatment of progressive, well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) in patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic disease. In a phase III randomized trial, 171 patients received either sunitinib (37.5 mg) or placebo once daily. The progression-free survival (PFS) interval was the primary efficacy endpoint. Secondary endpoints included the overall survival (OS) time, objective response rate (ORR), patient-reported outcomes, and safety. Based on early results favoring sunitinib, the independent data monitoring committee recommended trial termination prior to the prespecified interim analysis. This premature analysis may have led to an overestimate of the treatment effect. In the FDA analysis of investigator-assessed PFS times, the median values for the sunitinib and placebo arms were 10.2 months and 5.4 months, respectively. The ORRs were 9.3% and 0% in the sunitinib and placebo arms, respectively. The OS data were not mature at the time of approval and were confounded by 69% crossover. Common adverse reactions in patients receiving sunitinib included diarrhea, nausea, asthenia, fatigue, neutropenia, hypertension, and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome. Two patients on sunitinib died as a result of cardiac failure. The Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee voted eight to two that, despite residual uncertainty about the magnitude of the PFS effect because of early trial termination, sunitinib demonstrated a favorable benefit-risk profile in pNET patients. The FDA concurred with the committees assessment and granted sunitinib regular approval for this rare malignancy with few available therapies.


Clinical Cancer Research | 2016

FDA Approval of Palbociclib in Combination with Fulvestrant for the Treatment of Hormone Receptor–Positive, HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer

Amanda J. Walker; Suparna Wedam; Laleh Amiri-Kordestani; Erik Bloomquist; Shenghui Tang; Rajeshwari Sridhara; Wei Chen; Todd R. Palmby; Jeanne Fourie Zirkelbach; Wentao Fu; Qi Liu; Amy Tilley; Geoffrey Kim; Paul G. Kluetz; Amy E. McKee; Richard Pazdur

On February 19, 2016, the FDA approved palbociclib (Ibrance, Pfizer) for use in combination with fulvestrant (Faslodex, AstraZeneca) for the treatment of women with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with disease progression following endocrine therapy. The approval was based on the results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in 521 pre- and postmenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced or MBC. Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive palbociclib plus fulvestrant (n = 347) or placebo plus fulvestrant (n = 174). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). A statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS (9.5 months vs. 4.6 months) was observed in patients receiving palbociclib plus fulvestrant [HR 0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.36–0.59; P < 0.0001]. Safety data confirmed the known adverse reaction profile of palbociclib. The most common adverse reactions (>20%) in patients treated with palbociclib were neutropenia, leukopenia, infections, fatigue, nausea, anemia, stomatitis, headache, diarrhea, and thrombocytopenia. This approval was granted in the context of a prior accelerated approval for palbociclib in combination with letrozole in patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer as initial endocrine-based therapy. Clin Cancer Res; 22(20); 4968–72. ©2016 AACR.


Statistical Methods in Medical Research | 2008

Use of progression-free survival as a surrogate marker in oncology trials: some regulatory issues

Aloka Chakravarty; Rajeshwari Sridhara

There has been interest in using progression-free survival as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival in oncology clinical trials. In order to objectively define this endpoint, clear understanding of what progression means, how it is measured and what its implications are need to be discussed. This article discusses some regulatory aspects of using progression-free survival as an endpoint.


Clinical Cancer Research | 2017

U.S. FDA Approval Summary: Nivolumab for Treatment of Unresectable or Metastatic Melanoma Following Progression on Ipilimumab

Maitreyee Hazarika; Meredith K. Chuk; Marc R. Theoret; Sirisha Mushti; Kun He; Shawna L. Weis; Alexander Putman; Whitney S. Helms; Xianhua Cao; Hongshan Li; Hong Zhao; Liang Zhao; Joel Welch; Laurie Graham; Meredith Libeg; Rajeshwari Sridhara; Patricia Keegan; Richard Pazdur

On December 22, 2014, the FDA granted accelerated approval to nivolumab (OPDIVO; Bristol-Myers Squibb) for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma and disease progression following ipilimumab and, if BRAF V600 mutation positive, a BRAF inhibitor. Approval was based on a clinically meaningful, durable objective response rate (ORR) in a non-comparative analysis of 120 patients who received 3 mg/kg of nivolumab intravenously every 2 weeks with at least 6-month follow-up in an ongoing, randomized, open-label, active-controlled clinical trial. The ORR as assessed by a blinded independent review committee per RECIST v1.1 was 31.7% (95% confidence interval, 23.5–40.8). Ongoing responses were observed in 87% of responding patients, ranging from 2.6+ to 10+ months. In 13 patients, the response duration was 6 months or longer. The risks of nivolumab, including clinically significant immune-mediated adverse reactions (imARs), were assessed in 268 patients who received at least one dose of nivolumab. The FDA review considered whether the ORR and durations of responses were reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, the adequacy of the safety database, and systematic approaches to the identification, description, and patient management for imARs in product labeling. Clin Cancer Res; 23(14); 3484–8. ©2017 AACR.


Clinical Cancer Research | 2013

Enzalutamide for Treatment of Patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Who Have Previously Received Docetaxel: U.S. Food and Drug Administration Drug Approval Summary

Ning Ym; William F. Pierce; Virginia Ellen Maher; Karuri S; Shenghui Tang; Chiu Hj; Todd R. Palmby; Zirkelbach Jf; Marathe D; Nitin Mehrotra; Qi Liu; Ghosh D; Cottrell Cl; John Leighton; Rajeshwari Sridhara; Amna Ibrahim; Robert Justice; Richard Pazdur

This article summarizes the regulatory evaluation that led to the full approval of enzalutamide (XTANDI, Medivation Inc.) by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on August 31, 2012, for the treatment of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who have previously received docetaxel. This approval was based on the results of a randomized, placebo-controlled trial which randomly allocated 1,199 patients with mCRPC who had received prior docetaxel to receive either enzalutamide, 160 mg orally once daily (n = 800), or placebo (n = 399). All patients were required to continue androgen deprivation therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival. At the prespecified interim analysis, a statistically significant improvement in overall survival was demonstrated for the enzalutamide arm compared with the placebo arm [HR = 0.63; 95% confidence interval: 0.53–0.75; P < 0.0001]. The median overall survival durations were 18.4 months and 13.6 months in the enzalutamide and placebo arms, respectively. The most common adverse reactions (≥10%) included asthenia or fatigue, back pain, diarrhea, arthralgia, hot flush, peripheral edema, musculoskeletal pain, headache, and upper respiratory infection. Seizures occurred in 0.9% of patients on enzalutamide compared with no patients on the placebo arm. Overall, the FDAs review and analyses of the submitted data confirmed that enzalutamide had a favorable benefit–risk profile in the study patient population, thus supporting its use for the approved indication. The recommended dose is 160 mg of enzalutamide administered orally once daily. Enzalutamide represents the third product that the FDA has approved in the same disease setting within a period of 2 years. Clin Cancer Res; 19(22); 6067–73. ©2013 AACR.

Collaboration


Dive into the Rajeshwari Sridhara's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Paul G. Kluetz

Food and Drug Administration

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Robert Justice

American Society of Clinical Oncology

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Amna Ibrahim

Center for Drug Evaluation and Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Richard Pazdur

Center for Drug Evaluation and Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Virginia Ellen Maher

Food and Drug Administration

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Ghosh D

Food and Drug Administration

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jenny J. Zhang

Food and Drug Administration

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Ning Ym

Food and Drug Administration

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Nitin Mehrotra

Center for Drug Evaluation and Research

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge