PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Richard Pazdur

Publications and source records attributed to Richard Pazdur.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2007

Food and Drug Administration drug approval summary: Sunitinib malate for the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumor and advanced renal cell carcinoma.

On January 26, 2006, sunitinib (Sutent) received regular approval as monotherapy for the treatment of patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor after disease progression on or intolerance to imatinib mesylate (Gleevec). Time-to-tumor progression (TTP) of sunitinib-treated patients was superior to that of placebo-treated patients. Median TTP of sunitinib-treated patients was 27.3 weeks, compared with 6.4 weeks for placebo-treated patients (p < .0001). Partial responses were observed in 6.8% of sunitinib-treated patients and no placebo-treated patients. Sunitinib also received accelerated approval on January 26, 2006, as monotherapy for treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). In two single-arm trials of sunitinib in patients with metastatic RCC, partial responses were observed in 25.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.5, 34.9) and 36.5% (95% CI, 24.7, 49.6) of patients. Median response durations in the two trials were 27.1 weeks (95% CI, 24.4, incalculable) and 54 weeks (95% CI, 34.3, 70.1). Treatment-emergent adverse events in sunitinib-treated patients included diarrhea, mucositis, skin abnormalities, altered taste, electrolyte abnormalities, hypertension, and diminution in left ventricular ejection fraction. Cardiac safety of sunitinib in patients with preexisting cardiac abnormalities remains unknown. Based on nonclinical findings, physicians prescribing sunitinib should monitor for adrenal insufficiency in patients who undergo stressors such as surgery, trauma, or severe infection. Caution should be exercised when administering sunitinib in combination with known CYP3A4 inducers or inhibitors.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Sorafenib for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: This report describes the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) review and approval of sorafenib (Nexavar, BAY43-9006), a new small-molecule, oral, multi-kinase inhibitor for the treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: After meeting with sponsors during development studies of sorafenib, the FDA reviewed the phase 3 protocol under the Special Protocol Assessment mechanism. Following new drug application submission, FDA independently analyzed the results of two studies in advanced RCC: a large, randomized, double-blinded, phase 3 international trial of single-agent sorafenib and a supportive phase 2 study. RESULTS: In the phase 3 trial, 902 patients with advanced progressive RCC after one prior systemic therapy were randomized to 400 mg sorafenib twice daily plus best supportive care or to a matching placebo plus best supportive care. Primary study end points included overall survival and progression-free survival (PFS). A PFS analysis, pre-specified and conducted after a total of 342 events, showed statistically significant superiority for the sorafenib group (median = 167 days) compared with that for the controls (median = 84 days, log-rank P < 0.000001); the sorafenib/placebo hazard ratio was 0.44 (95% confidence interval, 0.35-0.55). Results were similar regardless of patient risk score, performance status, age, or prior therapy. The (partial) response rate to sorafenib was 2.1%. Overall survival results are preliminary. The principal toxicities in the sorafenib patients included reversible skin rashes in 40% and hand-foot skin reaction in 30%; diarrhea was reported in 43%, treatment-emergent hypertension was reported in 17%, and sensory neuropathic changes were reported in 13%. Grade 4 adverse events were uncommon. Grade 3 adverse events were hand-foot skin reaction (6%), fatigue (5%), and hypertension (3%). Laboratory findings included asymptomatic hypophosphatemia in 45% of sorafenib patients versus 11% in the placebo arm and elevation of serum lipase in 41% of sorafenib patients versus 30% in the placebo arm. Grade 4 pancreatitis was reported in two sorafenib patients, although both patients subsequently resumed sorafenib, with one at full dose. CONCLUSIONS: Sorafenib received FDA regular approval on December 20, 2005 for the treatment of advanced RCC based on the persuasive magnitude of improvement in PFS with acceptable safety. The recommended dose is 400 mg (two 200-mg tablets) twice daily taken either 1 h before or 2 h after meals. Adverse events were accommodated by temporary dose interruptions or reductions.

Antineoplastic Agents↗
PubMed2006

Approval summary: nelarabine for the treatment of T-cell lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma.

PURPOSE: To describe the clinical studies, chemistry manufacturing and controls, and clinical pharmacology and toxicology that led to Food and Drug Administration approval of nelarabine (Arranon) for the treatment of T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoblastic lymphoma. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Two phase 2 trials, one conducted in pediatric patients and the other in adult patients, were reviewed. The i.v. dose and schedule of nelarabine in the pediatric and adult studies was 650 mg/m2/d daily for 5 days and 1,500 mg/m2 on days 1, 3, and 5, respectively. Treatments were repeated every 21 days. Study end points were the rates of complete response (CR) and CR with incomplete hematologic or bone marrow recovery (CR*). RESULTS: The pediatric efficacy population consisted of 39 patients who had relapsed or had been refractory to two or more induction regimens. CR to nelarabine treatment was observed in 5 (13%) patients and CR+CR* was observed in 9 (23%) patients. The adult efficacy population consisted of 28 patients. CR to nelarabine treatment was observed in 5 (18%) patients and CR+CR* was observed in 6 (21%) patients. Neurologic toxicity was dose limiting for both pediatric and adult patients. Other severe toxicities included laboratory abnormalities in pediatric patients and gastrointestinal and pulmonary toxicities in adults. CONCLUSIONS: On October 28, 2005, the Food and Drug Administration granted accelerated approval for nelarabine for treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoblastic lymphoma after at least two prior regimens. This use is based on the induction of CRs. The applicant will conduct postmarketing clinical trials to show clinical benefit (e.g., survival prolongation).

Animals↗
PubMed2006

United States Food and Drug Administration approval summary: bortezomib for the treatment of progressive multiple myeloma after one prior therapy.

PURPOSE: On March 25, 2005, bortezomib (Velcade for Injection; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, and Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development, L.L.C.) received regular approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (U.S. FDA) for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) progressing after at least one prior therapy. This approval was based on bortezomib's efficacy and safety which was shown in a single, large, comparative international open-label phase 3 trial that randomized 669 patients with MM previously treated with at least one systemic regimen to receive single-agent bortezomib or high-dose dexamethasone. The FDA analysis of the trial data and bortezomib's regulatory development are summarized here. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN AND RESULTS: Following a preplanned interim analysis of time to disease progression (the primary end point), an independent data-monitoring committee advised the sponsor to halt the study and offer bortezomib to all dexamethasone-treated study patients. Time to progression was significantly prolonged in the bortezomib treatment arm (median, 6.2 months) compared with the dexamethasone arm (median, 3.5 months; log-rank test, P < 0.0001; hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.69). Analysis of overall survival done on the interim database (with 20% of events) showed the superiority of bortezomib for patients (log-rank test, P < 0.05; hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-0.81). Using criteria from the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation, the response rate (complete plus partial response) with bortezomib was also superior to dexamethasone (38% versus 18%; P < 0.0001). Adverse events on the bortezomib arm were similar to those previously observed in phase 2 studies; some notable adverse events included asthenia, peripheral neuropathy, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: The U.S. FDA had earlier (May 2003) granted bortezomib accelerated approval for the treatment of patients with MM progressing after two prior therapies. The results of the phase 3 trial and the FDA analysis of the data, along with the sponsor's completion of other postmarketing commitments, confirm bortezomib's benefit and support regular approval.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Topotecan in combination with cisplatin for the treatment of stage IVB, recurrent, or persistent cervical cancer.

PURPOSE: Topotecan, a camptothecin analog previously approved for the treatment of ovarian cancer and small-cell lung cancer, was granted regular approval by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on June 14, 2006, for use in combination with cisplatin to treat women with stage IVB, recurrent, or persistent carcinoma of the cervix not amenable to curative treatment with surgery and/or radiation therapy. The purpose of this summary is to review the database supporting this approval. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In a randomized multicenter study enrolling 293 eligible patients, topotecan plus cisplatin (TC) was compared with cisplatin monotherapy. The TC regimen consisted of cisplatin 50 mg/m2 IV over 1 hour on day 1 and topotecan 0.75 mg/m2 IV over 30 minutes on days 1, 2, and 3 every 21 days. RESULTS: There was a clinically relevant and statistically significant improvement in overall survival in the TC treatment arm. Median overall survival was 9.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]:7.9-11.9) in the TC arm, compared to 6.5 months (95% CI:5.8-8.8) with cisplatin alone. The unadjusted hazard ratio for overall survival between treatment arms was 0.76 (95% CI: 0.59-0.98, P = .033) favoring the combination arm. The most common toxicities with TC included myelosuppression, nausea and vomiting, mucositis, rash, and hepatotoxicity. CONCLUSIONS: This report describes the FDA's review supporting this first approval of a chemotherapeutic drug for advanced cervical cancer based on demonstration of a survival benefit.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
PubMed2005

Food and Drug Administration Drug approval summary: temozolomide plus radiation therapy for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme.

On March 15, 2005, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved temozolomide (Temodar capsules, Schering-Plough Research Institute) for the treatment of adult patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme concomitantly with radiotherapy and then as maintenance treatment. Five hundred seventy-three glioblastoma multiforme patients were randomized to receive either temozolomide + radiotherapy (n = 287) or radiotherapy alone (n = 286). Patients in the temozolomide + radiotherapy arm received concomitant temozolomide (75 mg/m2) once daily for the duration of radiation therapy (42-49 days). This was followed, 4 weeks later, by six cycles of temozolomide, 150 or 200 mg/m2 daily for 5 days, every 4 weeks. Patients in the control arm received radiotherapy only. In both arms, radiotherapy was delivered as 60 Gy/30 fractions to the tumor site with a 2 to 3 cm margin. Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia prophylaxis was required during temozolomide + radiotherapy treatment and was continued until recovery of lymphocytopenia (Common Toxicity Criteria grade <1). At disease progression, temozolomide salvage treatment was given to 161 of 282 patients (57%) in the radiotherapy alone arm, and to 62 of 277 patients (22%) in the temozolomide + radiotherapy arm. Patients receiving concomitant and maintenance temozolomide + radiotherapy had significantly improved overall survival. The hazard ratio was 0.63 (95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.75; log-rank, P < 0.0001). Median survival was 14.6 months (temozolomide + radiotherapy) versus 12.1 months (radiotherapy alone). Adverse events during temozolomide treatment included thrombocytopenia, nausea, vomiting, anorexia, constipation, alopecia, headache, fatigue, and convulsions.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Approval summary for erlotinib for treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer after failure of at least one prior chemotherapy regimen.

PURPOSE: To describe the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) review and approval of erlotinib (Tarceva, OSI Pharmaceuticals, Melville, NY) for treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after failure of at least one prior chemotherapy regimen. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The FDA reviewed raw data in electronic format from a randomized controlled clinical trial comparing erlotinib with placebo in patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC after failure of at least one prior chemotherapy regimen. RESULTS: Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio (erlotinib, n = 488 and placebo, n = 243). Erlotinib was superior to placebo for survival, progression-free survival, and tumor response rate. Exploratory analyses indicate that epidermal growth factor receptor status may be an important predictor of the erlotinib survival effect. Rash (75% versus 17%) and diarrhea (54% versus 18%) in the erlotnib and placebo group respectively were the most common adverse events. Severe rash occurred in 9% and severe diarrhea in 6% of erlotinib-treated patients and each resulted in study discontinuation in 1% of patients. Dose reductions were required for 10% of patients with rash and 4% of patients with diarrhea. CONCLUSIONS: On November 18, 2004, the FDA granted erlotinib regular approval for treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC after failure of at least one prior chemotherapy regimen. The applicant has committed to conduct post-marketing clinical trials to assess further the effect of epidermal growth factor receptor expression, measured with immunohistochemical staining, on erlotinib treatment effect.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Letrozole in the extended adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal women with history of early-stage breast cancer who have completed 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen.

PURPOSE: To present the basis of the decision of the Food and Drug Administration to grant accelerated approval for letrozole for extended adjuvant treatment of early-stage breast cancer in postmenopausal women after completion of adjuvant tamoxifen. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The Food and Drug Administration reviewed the data from the MA17 trial, a single, multinational, randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled trial, submitted by the applicant to support the proposed new indication. RESULTS: MA17 consisted of a core study and Lipid and Bone Mineral Density safety substudies. It enrolled 5,187 patients. In the core study, median treatment duration was 24 months and median follow-up duration was 27.4 months. Using a conventional definition of disease-free survival, 122 events on letrozole and 193 events on placebo were observed (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-0.78; P = 0.00003). Distant disease-free survival also improved with letrozole, 55 versus 92 events (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.84; P = 0.003). No statistically significant improvement in overall survival was observed. Hot flushes, arthralgia/arthritis, myalgia, and new diagnosis of osteoporosis were more common on letrozole. Frequency of fractures and cardiovascular ischemic events was not significantly different. A statistically significant mean decrease in bone mineral density in the hip occurred at 24 months on letrozole. CONCLUSIONS: Letrozole administration led to a statistically significant prolongation in disease-free survival. Fractures and cardiovascular events were similar to placebo; however, new diagnoses of osteoporosis were more frequent. Short duration of treatment and follow-up precluded assessment of long-term safety and efficacy. Thus, accelerated approval was granted instead of regular approval.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

Approval summary: azacitidine for treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome subtypes.

PURPOSE: This article summarizes data submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for marketing approval of azacitidine as injectable suspension (Vidaza, Pharmion Corporation, Boulder, CO) for treatment of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In one phase 3 controlled trial, 191 study subjects were randomized to treatment with azacitidine or to observation; an additional 120 patients were treated with azacitidine in two phase 2 single arm studies. The primary efficacy end point was the overall response rate, defined as complete or partial normalization of peripheral blood counts and bone marrow blast percentages for at least 4 weeks. RESULTS: In the controlled trial, the overall response rate was 15.7% in the azacitidine treatment group; there were no responders in the observation group (P < 0.0001). Response rates were similar in the two single arm studies. During response patients stopped being red cell or platelet transfusion dependent. Median duration of responses was at least 9 months. An additional 19% of azacitidine-treated patients had less than partial responses, most becoming transfusion independent. The most common adverse events attributed to azacitidine were gastrointestinal, hematologic, local (injection site), and constitutional. There were no azacitidine-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: On May 19, 2004 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved azacitidine as injectable suspension for treatment of patients with the following myelodysplastic syndrome subtypes: refractory anemia or refractory anemia with ringed sideroblasts (if accompanied by neutropenia or thrombocytopenia or requiring transfusions), refractory anemia with excess blasts, refractory anemia with excess blasts in transformation, and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia. Full prescribing information is available at http://www.fda.gov/cder/foi/label/2004/050794lbl.pdf. Azacitidine is the first agent approved for treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome.

Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic↗
PubMed2005

Pemetrexed in malignant pleural mesothelioma.

PURPOSE: This report describes the data and analysis leading to the approval of pemetrexed (LY 231514, MTA, Alimta, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, IN) by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of a New Drug Application for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The FDA review of the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed assessed in a randomized clinical trial of 448 patients with unresectable MPM comparing pemetrexed plus cisplatin with cisplatin alone, as well as preclinical pharmacology and chemistry data, are described. The basis for marketing approval is discussed. RESULTS: In one randomized, single-blind, multicenter international trial, 226 patients were randomized to the pemetrexed and cisplatin arm and 222 patients were randomized to cisplatin alone. Median survival times were 12.1 months for pemetrexed and cisplatin and 9.3 months for cisplatin (P = 0.021; hazard ratio, 0.766; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.96). Myelosuppression, predominantly neutropenia, was the most common toxicity of pemetrexed plus cisplatin. Other common adverse events were fatigue, leucopenia, nausea, dyspnea, vomiting, chest pain, anemia, thrombocytopenia, and anorexia. CONCLUSIONS: Pemetrexed in combination with cisplatin was approved by the FDA on February 4, 2004 for the treatment of patients with MPM whose disease is either unresectable or who are otherwise not candidates for curative surgery. The recommended dose of pemetrexed is 500 mg/m(2) intra venous infusion over 10 minutes on day 1 of each 21-day cycle in combination with 75 mg/m(2) cisplatin infused over 2 hours beginning 30 minutes after the pemetrexed infusion. Patients must receive oral folic acid and vitamin B(12) injections before the start and during therapy to reduce severe toxicities. Patients should also receive corticosteroids with the chemotherapy to decrease the incidence of skin rash. Approval was based on a demonstration of survival improvement in a single randomized trial. Response rates and time to tumor progression were not included in product labeling because of inconsistencies in assessments among the investigators, independent radiologic reviewers, and the FDA, reflecting the difficulty of radiographic assessments in malignant mesothelioma. Complete prescribing information is available on the FDA Web site at http://www.fda.gov/cder/approval/index.htm.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

U.S. Food and Drug Administration Drug Approval Summary: conversion of imatinib mesylate (STI571; Gleevec) tablets from accelerated approval to full approval.

UNLABELLED: Imatinib mesylate (Gleevec, Novartis Pharmaceuticals East Manruer, NJ) received accelerated approval on May 10, 2001 for the treatment of patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in (a) chronic phase after failure of IFN-alpha therapy, (b) accelerated phase, and (c) blast crisis. The accelerated approval was accompanied by a postmarketing commitment by Novartis Pharmaceuticals to continue patient follow-up to determine duration of treatment response and survival. The present review, based on a safety and efficacy report submitted on December 20, 2002, summarizes data applicable to the conversion of these three CML indications to full approval status. RESULTS: Chronic phase CML: Five hundred thirty-two chronic phase CML patients who had not benefited from prior IFN therapy were treated at a starting imatinib mesylate dose of 400 mg p.o. qd; dose escalation to 800 mg p.o. qd was allowed. Patients had received a median of 14 months of IFN therapy at doses > or =25 million IU/wk and were all in late chronic phase, with a median time from diagnosis of 32 months. Median duration of imatinib mesylate treatment was 29 months, with 81% of patients treated for > or =24 months (maximum 31.5 months). Initial favorable treatment responses were sustained. An estimated 87.8% of patients who had a major cytogenetic response maintained their response 2 years after their initial response. After 2 years of treatment, an estimated 85.4% of patients were free of progression to accelerated phase or blast crisis, and the estimated overall survival was 90.8% (95% confidence interval, 88.3-93.2). Accelerated phase CML: Patients enrolled totaled 293: 235 with CML accelerated phase, 48 with relapsed/refractory acute lymphocytic leukemia, 2 with relapsed/refractory acute myelocytic leukemia, and 8 with relapsed/refractory CML in lymphoid blast crisis. Patients received imatinib mesylate 400 or 600 mg p.o. qd. Dose escalation was permitted, to a maximum of 800 mg/d, taken as 400 mg bid. Efficacy results were improved in patients receiving imatinib mesylate 600 mg qd versus patients receiving 400 mg qd. The median duration of hematologic response was 29 versus 17 months and the estimated 24-month maintained hematologic response rate was 61% versus 42%. The median survival of patients treated with imatinib mesylate 600 mg qd was not reached versus 20.9 months for patients receiving 400 mg qd. Estimated 24-month survival rate was 66% versus 46%. The median survival in the advanced leukemia population (acute lymphocytic leukemia, acute myelocytic leukemia, and lymphoid blast crisis) was only 5 months, and only two patients are still on treatment. Blast crisis CML: A total of 260 patients were recruited. The imatinib mesylate dose was initially 400 mg qd (37 patients) but was subsequently increased to 600 mg qd (223 patients). Patients receiving imatinib mesylate 600 mg qd had a higher hematologic response rate than did patients receiving 400 mg (33% versus 16%). Major cytogenetic responses occurred in 15% of the 260 study patients. The overall median survival was 6.9 months: 7.1 months for patients treated with imatinib mesylate 600 mg and 4.7 months for patients receiving imatinib mesylate 400 mg. Estimated 12-month survival rate for all study patients was 32.1% and estimated 24-month survival rate was 18.3%. SAFETY: Imatinib mesylate was generally well tolerated, but relatively frequent reports of common toxicity criteria grade 3/4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were encountered. The most frequently reported adverse events included gastrointestinal disturbances, edema, rash, and musculoskeletal complaints. These rarely led to discontinuation of therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The results confirm those of the interim analysis and suggest that imatinib mesylate represents an effective therapeutic agent for the treatment of patients with CML in chronic phase after failure of IFN-alpha therapy, in blast crisis, and in accelerated phase.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

FDA drug approval summary: azacitidine (5-azacytidine, Vidaza) for injectable suspension.

On May 19, 2004, azacitidine (5-azacytidine; Vidaza(trade mark); Pharmion Corporation, Boulder, CO, http://www.pharmion.com) for injectable suspension received regular approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of all subtypes of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). This report summarizes the basis for this approval. Effectiveness was demonstrated in one randomized, controlled trial comparing azacitidine administered s.c. with best supportive care (observation group) and in two single-arm studies, one in which azacitidine was administered s.c. and in the other in which it was administered i.v. The dose of azacitidine, 75 mg/m2/day for 7 days every 28 days, was the same in all three studies. In the randomized trial, study participants were well matched with respect to age, sex, race, performance status, MDS subtype, and use of transfusion during the 3 months before study entry. Patients in the observation arm were permitted by protocol to cross over to azacitidine treatment if their disease progressed according to prespecified criteria. During the course of the study, more than half of the patients in the observation arm did cross over to the azacitidine treatment arm. The primary efficacy end point was the overall response rate. Response consisted of complete or partial normalization of blood cell counts and of bone marrow morphology. The response rate in the azacitidine arm was about 16%; there were no responses in the observation arm. The response rates in the two single-arm studies were similar (13% and 19%). The responses were sustained, with median durations of 11 months and 17 months respectively. Responding patients who were transfusion dependent at study entry lost the need for transfusions. In addition, about 19% of patients had less than partial responses (termed improvement), and two-thirds of them became transfusion independent. Common adverse events associated with azacitidine treatment were gastrointestinal (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, and anorexia), hematologic (neutropenia, thrombocytopenia), fevers, rigors, ecchymoses, petechiae, injection site events, arthralgia, headache, and dizziness. Liver function abnormalities occurred in 16% of patients with intercurrent hepatobiliary disorders and in two patients with previously diagnosed liver cirrhosis. Renal failure occurred in patients during sepsis and hypotension. There were no deaths attributed to azacitidine. Azacitidine, the first drug approved by the U.S. FDA for MDS, has a favorable safety profile and provides a clinical benefit of eliminating transfusion dependence and complete or partial normalization of blood counts and bone marrow blast percentages in responding patients.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

FDA drug approval summary: erlotinib (Tarceva) tablets.

On November 18, 2004, erlotinib (Tarceva); OSI Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Melville, NY, http://www.osip.com, and Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA, http://www.gene.com) received regular approval as monotherapy for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after failure of at least one prior chemotherapy regimen. Survival of erlotinib-treated patients was superior to that of placebo-treated patients. The median survival duration of erlotinib-treated patients was 6.67 months, compared with 4.70 months for placebo-treated patients. Exploratory univariate analyses showed a larger survival prolongation in two subsets of patients: those who never smoked and those with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-positive tumors. Patients who never smoked and were EGFR-positive had a large erlotinib survival benefit. Erlotinib was also superior to placebo for progression-free survival and a response rate of 8.9% versus 0.9%. Skin rash and diarrhea were the most common erlotinib adverse events. Severe rash occurred in 8%, and severe diarrhea occurred in 6% of erlotinib-treated patients. In the first-line treatment of NSCLC, two large, controlled, randomized trials showed no benefit from adding erlotinib to doublet, platinum-based chemotherapy. Therefore, erlotinib is not indicated for use in this setting.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2004

Approval summary: Docetaxel in combination with prednisone for the treatment of androgen-independent hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Docetaxel, a taxane previously approved for the treatment of breast cancer and non-small cell lung cancer, was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration on May 19, 2004 for use in combination with prednisone for the treatment of metastatic androgen-independent (hormone-refractory) prostate cancer. The purpose of this summary is to review the database supporting this approval. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In a randomized, global study enrolling 1,006 patients, two schedules of docetaxel were compared with mitoxantrone + prednisone as follows: MTZ q 3w, mitoxantrone 12 mg/m2 every 21 days + prednisone 5 mg twice a day for a total of 10 cycles; TXT q 3w, docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 21 days + prednisone 5 mg twice a day for a total of 10 cycles; and TXT qw, docetaxel 30 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 15, 22, and 29 every 6 weeks + prednisone 5 mg twice a day for a total of 5 cycles. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant overall survival advantage shown for the TXT q 3w arm over MTZ q 3w (median survival 18.9 months versus 16.5 months, P = 0.0094). No overall survival advantage was shown for TXT qw compared with MTZ q 3w. The most commonly occurring adverse events included anemia, neutropenia, infection, nausea, sensory neuropathy, fluid retention, alopecia, nail changes, diarrhea, and fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: This report describes the Food and Drug Administration review supporting this first approval of a combination therapy for hormone-refractory prostate cancer based on demonstration of a survival benefit.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2004

Enrollment of elderly patients in clinical trials for cancer drug registration: a 7-year experience by the US Food and Drug Administration.

PURPOSE: To analyze the age-related enrollment of cancer patients onto registration trials of new drugs or new indications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration from 1995 to 2002. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study involved retrospective analyses of demographic data of cancer patients enrolled onto registration trials. The data on 28,766 cancer patients from 55 registration trials were analyzed according to age distributions of > or = 65, > or = 70, and > or = 75 years. The rates of enrollment in each age group for each cancer were compared with the corresponding rates in the US cancer population. The age distributions of the US cancer population were derived from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program of the National Cancer Institute for the period 1995 to 1999 based on the 2000 US Census. RESULTS: The proportions of the overall patient populations aged > or = 65, > or = 70, and > or = 75 years were 36%, 20%, and 9% compared with 60%, 46%, and 31%, respectively, in the US cancer population. Statistically significant under-representation of the elderly (P < .001) was noted in registration trials for all cancer treatment except for breast cancer hormonal therapies. Patients aged > or = 70 years accounted for most of the under-representation. CONCLUSION: Elderly were under-represented in the registration trials of new cancer therapies. Various strategies may be needed to evaluate cancer therapies for the elderly in prospective clinical trials and to improve cancer care in the elderly population.

Age Factors↗