COVISHIELD completes enrolment of phase 3 clinical trials

The promising results of the clinical trials have given confidence that COVISHIELD can be a realistic solution to the widespread pandemic. It is also by far the most advanced vaccine in human testing in India.

COVISHIELD vaccine

The Indian Council of Medical Research and Serum Institute of India announced on November 12, 2020, that the enrolment of phase 3 clinical trials for COVISHIELD, a potential candidate of COVID-19, has been completed in India.

For COVISHIELD, the clinical trial site fees have been funded by ICMR while other expenses have been taken care of by SII. Currently, ICMR and SII have been conducting phase 2/3 clinical trial of COVISHIELD vaccine candidate at 15 different centres all over the country and has completed the enrolment of all 1,600 participants on October 31, 2020.

COVISHIELD: Collaboration between ICMR and SII:

While commenting in the association, the CEO of Serum Institute of India, Adar Poonawala stated that ICMR has played a significant role in strengthening India’s fight against COVID-19. The collaboration between the two will further help in putting India at the forefront of developing an effective vaccine.

He added that the partnership between ICMR and SII further testifies the significance of public-private institutes collaborating to scale up the management as well as contain the virus.

Development of COVISHIELD:

The potential vaccine candidate has been developed at the Serum Institute of India, Pune laboratory with a master speed from Oxford University/AstraZeneca. Made in the United Kingdom, it is being currently tested in large efficacy trials in Brazil, UK, USA, and South Africa.

The promising results of the clinical trials have given confidence that COVISHIELD can be a realistic solution to the widespread pandemic. It is also by far the most advanced vaccine in human testing in India.

Availability of COVISHIELD in India:

On the basis of the 2/3 trial results of COVISHIELD, SII with the help of ICMR will be pursuing the early availability of the vaccine in India. The Institute has already manufactured 40 million doses of COVISHIELD vaccine, under the license of at-risk manufacturing and stockpiling from the Drugs Controller General of India.

SII and ICMR collaborate on COVOVAX:

According to the official release, SII and ICMR have decided to further collaborate for the clinical development of COVOVAX that has been developed by US-based NOVAVAX and upscaled by Serum Institute of India.

The potential vaccine candidate has been formulated at SII and will be tested in a phase 3 trial in India. Also, an application for the same to the regulatory authorities will also be made soon by SII and ICMR.

We Don’t Have Enough Women in Clinical Trials — Why That’s a Problem

  • Experts say women are underrepresented in clinical trials for new medications.
  • They say this sometimes results in women having more side effects to drugs due to incorrect dosages or biological differences.
  • Experts maintain that a greater effort must be made to increase the number of women in trials, especially in early phases.

Female_Patient_Doctor_732x549-thumbnail-1-732x549

Women are at greater risk for adverse side effects from medications due to a lack of female representation in clinical trials.

That’s according to recent research on the issue.

In one study, researchers from the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of Chicago analyzed data from thousands of articles from medical journals.

They say they found a gender gap in drug doses for 86 medications approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

“Sex inequality hides in plain sight today: most drugs are prescribed to women and men at the same dose,” the study authors wrote. “Many currently prescribed drugs were approved by the [FDA] prior to 1993, with inadequate enrollment of female animals in preclinical research and of women in clinical trials.”

It was the adverse effects on women from Ambien, a popular sleep medicine, that sparked the study.

Irving Zucker, PhD, lead author of the research and a professor emeritus of psychology and integrative biology at Berkeley, told Healthline, “The immediate impetus for me was the finding that the sedative/hypnotic drug zolpidem (Ambien), a widely used sleep medication, was causing serious side effects in women, including increased traffic accidents the morning after taking the drug.

“The standard dose produced much higher blood concentrations and longer drug elimination times in women than men. The [FDA] then issued a directive that women should be given half the standard dose administered to men,” Zucker explained.

“I wondered if there were other drugs that also had a robust pharmacokinetic (what the body does to a drug) sex difference, with women sustaining higher blood concentrations than men and whether this could contribute to the known increased risks to drug side effects in women.”

What the research revealed

Zucker, along with his co-author Brian Prendergast, PhD, a professor at the University of Chicago, analyzed studies in which women were given the same drug dosage as men.

They reported that in more than 90 percent of cases, women experienced stronger side effects than men and experienced adverse drug reactions at nearly twice the rate of men.

“I don’t believe anyone can reasonably find this acceptable.Some have tried to explain this in part as women have a lower threshold for reporting adverse drug effects, but much evidence suggests this is not the cause of the sex difference in adverse drug reactions,” Zucker said.

Nancy Pire-Smerkanich, DRSc, is an assistant professor of regulatory and quality sciences in the School of Pharmacy at the University of Southern California. She says the results of the research aren’t surprising.

“Men and women are different in the way they metabolize or process drugs,” Pire-Smerkanich told Healthline. “In women, the pharmacokinetics can be affected by several factors, including higher body fat composition, lower body weight, slower GI, less intestinal enzymatic activity, and slower kidney function.

“For example,” she added, “while both men and women have the same types of enzymes… that metabolize drugs, there are sex-dependent differences in addition to genetic differences.”

Pire-Smerkanich explained, “Men and women may be different in the way they respond to certain drugs. The pharmacodynamics (what the drug does to the body) can be affected by many factors, including sex hormones, which can fluctuate due to menstruation, pregnancy, menopause, [and] oral contraceptives. Other factors include the environmental differences and disparities in the practice of medicine between men and women.”

Exclusion from clinical trials

For decades, women were often excluded from clinical drug trials.

This was based in part on the unsubstantiated belief that fluctuations in female hormones would make women difficult to study, Zucker argues.

There were also concerns surrounding women of childbearing age in clinical trials.

“Women of childbearing ages were long excluded because of concerns that drugs could harm fetuses, as occurred with the drug thalidomide that produced severe limb abnormalities and diethylstilbestrol that increased cancer risks in children exposed to the drug during gestation,” Zucker said.

Although there’s been an increase in women in clinical trials in recent years, Pire-Smerkanich says there are still problems with female representation in early phases of drug trials.

“Women are actually well represented in the later stage trials, those known as Phase 3 studies,” she said. “However, the dosing regimens used in later stage studies are based on the pharmacokinetic data collected in the early trials, where women continue to be underrepresented.

“This is not just about metabolism or breaking down drugs but also what happens to them next — where do they go? Do they get absorbed? Do they get distributed or moved around? And how do they leave the body as excretions?”

Pire-Smerkanich added, “The early phase studies are also where we learn about how the drug works in the body, so it would be important to include women as early as possible in the drug development process.”

What needs to be done

Dr. Judith Currier, a professor of medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, says more work needs to be done to address the gender gap in clinical trials.

“It’s an area of medicine that we need to put more focus on, and we need to ensure that women are involved and included in clinical studies of medications and that they participate,” she told Healthline.

“We have to be smart about it in terms of using the knowledge we have about pharmacology to understand the medications where the potential for differences are greatest,” Currier added.

Pire-Smerkanich says women are willing to participate in drug trials, as long as they’re informed of the risks involved.

“Women need to be studied earlier in the drug development process and throughout the life cycle, and I think researchers are interested in doing this. Whether they are always supported in these efforts is another unknown,” she said.

“What I do believe is that women are willing to be part of the process and can contribute to our understanding of drugs. [They] just need to be made aware of the need and how they can contribute because as a ‘subgroup’ we have tremendous potential.”

PRA Named CRO for Leukemia & Lymphoma Society Global Master Clinical Trial

Last month, the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society (LLS) and PRA Health Sciences announced their partnership in LLS’s first-of-its-kind global master clinical trial to develop new treatments for children with relapsed acute leukemia. The LLS PedAL (Pediatric Acute Leukemia) master clinical trial will simultaneously test multiple targeted therapies for children who experience a relapse of their acute leukemia. Now PRA has signed on as the contract research organization for the trial. 

Unknown

“From the point of view of LLS, a master clinical trial is a trial where the patient’s biology and the patient’s disease is at the center of the trial and that determines what types of therapy can be offered to the patient,” Gwen Nichols, Chief Medical Officer at the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, explained to Clinical Research News. It’s a flipping of the standard clinical trial, she said. Instead of starting with a drug and seeking patients, the trial will start with patients and seek the right therapies.

Approximately 40% of children with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and 20% of children with high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) will relapse, according to LLS data. While those percentages are dishearteningly high, childhood leukemia remains a rare disease with all the clinical trial challenges that entails.

The PedAL trial will include one master protocol with hopefully many study arms, or sub-studies, focused on different targets. There will likely be some standard-of-care control arms, and some virtual controls arms. LLS will serve as the single sponsor, gathering collaborators across pharma, liaising with regulatory groups in the US and Europe, and insulating pharma from the some of the risks of recruiting and running small, rare disease pediatric trials. LLS has a distinct advantage over traditional pharma study sponsors, Nichols argues, because the Society does not have a financial interest in the molecules being tested. “Our only interest is that we get the right trial and do it properly,” Nichols said.

The master trial is a great model for relapsed pediatric leukemia because it will connect the most kids to the most drug developers, explained Brandon Early, VP of Project Delivery at PRA. “All of those kids come into one master protocol and then based on their subsequent biology, assign them to any sub-studies.” 

PedAL is also a timely model. In the US, pharma companies now need to adhere to the RACE Act. The Research to Accelerate Cures and Equity (RACE) for Children Act was enacted in August 2017, and, beginning in August 2020, any original new drug application or biologics license application submitted for a new active ingredient must, in general, contain reports of molecularly targeted pediatric cancer investigations if the drug is intended to treat an adult cancer or directed at a molecular target that the FDA determines to be substantially relevant to the growth or progression of a pediatric cancer. 

But pediatric cancer trials are still challenging to recruit and run. As a pharma company, Nichols explained, “You have a molecule you think might hit one of the targets of pediatric leukemia. Let’s say you’re an incredibly generous company and you’re ready to start pediatric development. You would need—if it’s a targeted agent—you’d need to screen hundreds of kids to find the couple dozen that would fit on your trial. That doesn’t work for pharma because that’s a huge expense and a time commitment, and it doesn’t work for the kids because they don’t get offered a therapy except for 10% of them or 12% of them or whatever the number is, depending on how common the target is.”

With the PedAL trial, LLS and PRA hope to facilitate the screening of many pediatric patients and allocate them to several appropriate trial arms. Pharma companies, then, will pay for their patients and their arms, but not for all of the screening and infrastructure that goes into the initial testing and division of patients. The IP for the compound and testing arm belongs to the pharma company. “We’re doing this because we want them to move it forward in development and get it approved if it’s efficacious,” Nichols said.

 

For Trials and Data

But the goal of LLS and PRA is not only a master clinical trial through which patients can be placed on several treatment arms. “Screening itself will yield more information about the underlying biology for these children, generate more subsequent research on just the basic biological science, and then create that feedback loop… to give pharma companies more targets to go after,” Early said. “Hopefully we’ll just create a big old snowball here!”

And what to do with this blizzard of data? 

LLS is, “keeping this, all the data about the biology of the leukemias,” Nichols explained. “We’re consolidating it, we’re sharing it with researchers. And right now, we’re in the process of consolidating data that already exists so that we can start building a historical control that’s a work tool.” 

The historical control, Nichols hopes, will help keep a lot of sick kids off study control arms. “The reason we have to do [control arms] now is because we don’t have good quality historical data. And that’s part of what we’re building with this master trial: the ability both retrospectively and prospectively to collect the data.”

Such a databank will help answer future questions when pharma inevitably comes with targets, Nichols hopes. Questions like: How many kids every year have that targeted AML? How many respond to standard of care? How long will a trial take? What will a trial look like? What’s the appropriate place to intervene?

She expects that data to inform future trials as well, letting pharma companies really tease apart the promise of potential therapies: Is this a therapy that gets you to bone marrow transplant? Is this a therapy that is a bridge to that transplant? Or is this a potential therapy that could be curative and avoid a transplant?

 

CRO Challenge

The PedAL trial is meant to introduce a lot of structure and efficiency into the process of asking and answering these types of questions, but don’t let “efficiency” suggest “simple”. 

“It’s a way to get operational efficiency for the patient population,” Early said, but Nichols jumped in to clarify: “It is operationally efficient for the companies and for the patients, but it is operationally challenging from an organizational point of view!” she interjected.

“It requires a lot of finesse to get all the operational details right,” Early conceded, acknowledging the challenges before PRA.

Trials will happen at more than 200 sites worldwide that are part of the NCI-supported Children’s Oncology Group (COG) network of children’s hospitals, including those in the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. Many of these sites are familiar to PRA, but some will be new. 

“In something of this magnitude, there is a lot of operational considerations,” said Early. “There’s a lot of operational planning that needs to happen there; there’s a lot of regulatory engagement.”

PRA plans to build the master trial with multiple tiers of activation, using just-in-time activation as children are identified at some institutions. “The idea would be to limit the burden on the sites so that they don’t have to do all of the maintenance and care and feeding of it on the open trial,” he said. In the meantime, PRA is focused on getting the little details correct, meeting all of the regulatory requirements, and ensuring ease of communication and ease of understanding, Early said. “We’re looking to leverage technology to help us here in working with the sites and making their lives easier and centralizing as much as we can.”

Among those technologies, PRA is finalizing considerations around eConsent, data collection instruments for patient reported outcomes, and what digital enhancements would make trials easier on patients and parents, Early said. “We’re taking a long, hard look at how patients move through the healthcare system, move through their treatments, and leaning on the investigators to really make sure that we’ve fit that together as much as we can. For a lot of these kids, they are probably attached to their phone all the time, so anything we can do to keep it digital when they come into clinical research and not moving into an analog phase would be good,” he explained.

 

Countdown to Enrollment

LLS began laying groundwork for the LLS PedAL master clinical trial in November 2019, with Nichols leading a team of experts in pediatric acute leukemia to conceive, develop, and implement LLS PedAL. In early February 2020, representatives spoke at the annual ACCELERATE conference in Brussels, Belgium on the initiative. In June, LLS and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the Children’s Oncology Group (COG) announced their collaboration.

Early in the process, LLS anticipated treating the first patient in the spring or summer of 2020. Now LLS PedAL is on track to begin treating patients by summer 2021. 

“We decided not to try and rush this through, but rather make sure that Europe and the United States are aligned so we can do one trial for each compound, not two completely different trials because the European health authorities see it differently than the FDA does,” Nichols explained. 

Right now that means LLS is focused on teasing out consensus on endpoints, how to define response, and more. “We have to be sure our European colleagues feel the same way, that it’s going to be accepted throughout the world so that we don’t have tiny trials in many different places and never answer a question,” she said.

Nichols couldn’t name any pharma collaborators yet, but she said that LLS does have memorandums of understanding with partners. “We do not have formal contracts until all of the study designs are finalized,” she said. “We’re pretty darn close. Since we’re bringing their compounds to the regulators, they’re on board.”

She expects the earliest trials to happen with adult compounds that are poised for pediatric development, she said. “But we do have several compounds that have very little pediatric data but that the pediatricians are incredibly interested in because they are targets for poor prognosis leukemias. I think while they may not be the first we put through, they will be close followers,” she added.

LLS’s goal is to launch the PedAL trial with sufficient organizational, regulatory, and scientific agreement between collaborators so that new cancer drugs reach the children that need them. “So many trials that start, never finish,” Nichols lamented. “Well, that doesn’t help children at all.”

Moderna Fully Enrolls 30,000-Person COVID-19 Vaccine Trial, Boosts Minority Participation

Moderna has fully enrolled its late-stage coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine trial by hitting its target of 30,000 participants. More than one-third of this cohort includes minority participants.

98af2e52-8609-4f83-87a2-866f69d814fe

The enrollment of approximately 37% of minority participants in Moderna’s Phase III COVE trial marks a big step toward mitigating disparity issues faced by many COVID-19 vaccine trials. In early October, it was reported that Moderna’s private contractors were experiencing trouble recruiting enough Black, Latino and Native American participants to its COVID-19 vaccine trial. As a result, the Cambridge, Mass.-based biotech slowed enrollment and told its research centers to focus more on recruiting participants from minority populations.

Boosting the minority population in these trials is crucial, as many of these populations have been the hardest hit by the pandemic. Black patients, for instance, are about three times more likely to be infected with COVID-19and twice likely to die from the disease compared with White patients in the U.S.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) partnered with Moderna to develop the COVID-19 vaccine candidate, mRNA-1273, which so far has shown promise against the contagious respiratory disease in interim analyses.

The Phase III COVE trial, designed in collaboration with the NIH and FDA, evaluates the efficacy of the vaccine in Americans with the highest risk of severe COVID-19. Participants include people over the age of 65 as well as individuals under 65 but with high-risk chronic diseases, such as diabetes and severe obesity, that make them more susceptible to poor COVID-19-related outcomes. The randomized, placebo-controlled study uses a 100 µg dose level of mRNA-1273, and prevention of symptomatic COVID-19 comprises the primary endpoint. 

Full enrollment for Moderna’s Phase III COVE trial may mean early efficacy data could be available as early as November. If the data are sufficient, the company will decide to apply for regulatory authorization once the company has collected two months’ worth of safety follow-up data for half of the study participants. This milestone is anticipated for some time before Thanksgiving.

Moderna’s chief executive officer, Stephane Bancel, recently said mRNA-1273 could receive emergency approval in December. As the trial continues to accrue the necessary data, Moderna and its manufacturing partners are gearing up its plans to produce 20 million doses of the vaccine by the end of this year. This would equate to two shots for 10 million people. The company added that it will also produce up to 500 million doses in 2021 and will later increase that to a billion doses.

In related news, Moderna has already received written confirmation from the European Medicine Agency that its COVID-19 vaccine candidate is eligible for submission of marketing authorization application in Europe. Eligibility was made based on data from a Phase I interim analysis which show that mRNA-1273 was generally well-tolerated and generated strong and rapid immune responses against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, the virus responsible for COVID-19.

Prior to this European confirmation, Moderna also announced it has started arolling submission for mRNA-1273 to Health Canada based on the positive Phase I data. The Canadian Government previously increased its order of 20 million doses of the vaccine candidate to up to 56 million doses beginning in 2021.

Also nearing enrollment completion is Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine trial, which has so far recruited 39,862 out of its planned 44,0000 participants. A total of 34,601 of these participants have already received their second booster dose in the trial. The company has also received recent approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to enroll children as young as 12, a population currently underrepresented in many COVID-19 vaccine trials.

AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 Vaccine Boosts Immune Response in Older, Younger Adults

Days after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration greenlit the restart of AstraZenecas Phase III COVID-19 vaccine trial, the U.K.-based company said the preventative medication boosts immune responses in older and younger adults against the novel coronavirus.

692f0fca-ccf6-44e4-b4c2-c04144abcf79

Not only is the vaccine candidate AZD1222 showing efficacy in older patients, those who are most at risk from COVID-19, but AstraZeneca also said adverse events from its candidate among elderly patients were found to be lower, CNBCreported this morning. That news will prove to be heartening as the trial comes off a month-long pause due to concerns the medication had caused serious neurological reactions in two trial participants, one in the United States and the other in the United Kingdom. An AstraZeneca spokesperson told CNBC the “immunogenicity responses were similar between older and younger adults and that reactogenicity was lower in older adults, where the COVID-19 disease severity is higher.”

The announcement this morning builds on previous positive Phase I data for the vaccine candidate that showed the preventative medication generated both neutralizing antibodies and immune T-cells that target the virus that causes COVID-19. The vaccine provoked a T cell response within 14 days of vaccination and an antibody response within 28 days, according to Oxford University, AstraZeneca’s partner in developing the vaccine candidate. It’s believed at this time that the vaccine could provide protection against the novel coronavirus for about a year. Additional protection will require a booster or additional vaccination.

More detailed reports of the latest findings from the ongoing AZD1222 study are expected to be published soon, CNBC said.

AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine candidate AZD1222 is a viral vector-based, weakened version of adenovirus containing the genetic material of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. It was co-developed with the Jenner Institute at Oxford University. The vaccine candidate has been backed in the United States through a $1 billion investment from the federal government’s Operation Warp Speed program aimed at developing a vaccine for the novel coronavirus as quickly as possible.  If the vaccine makes it through regulatory trials, AstraZeneca plans to manufacture two billion doses of its vaccine, with 400 million slated for the U.S. and UK, and one billion allotted for low- and middle-income countries.

AstraZeneca’s vaccine is expected to be one of the earliest COVID-19 vaccines available in the United States and Western Europe. Rolling reviews of the vaccine have already begun in some countries, AstraZeneca said Friday after the FDA authorized the restart of the Phase III study in the United States. The trial had resumed earlier this month in Britain, as well as Brazil and other countries.

Both Moderna and Pfizer and BioNTech anticipate data from their Phase III studies within the next several weeks. Pfizer CEO Albert Boula said his company could seek Emergency Use Authorization in late November if the data is positive. Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel anticipates seeking EUA in December. AstraZeneca said results from its Phase III study are anticipated later this year, depending on the rate of infection within the communities where the clinical trials are being conducted.

5 Smart Ways to Maintain Regulatory Continuity and Consistency During a Global Pandemic

The impact of COVID-19 on the life sciences industry is both acute and sustained. With an unknown timeline for disruptions, organizations are planning business activities for the short-term with decisions being made weekly and even daily. In periods of rapid change, potential continuity and consistency risks may arise for organizations with unestablished processes and controls.

Our Global Regulatory Affairs team has compiled these helpful ideas for maintaining consistency in your regulatory processes and responsibilities during times of uncertainty.

DSC_0386

 

 

 Tarun Pandotra- Director Regulatory Affairs

 

 

Keep a hawk-eye on event-related regulatory changes: Due to the pandemic, the manner in which regulatory filings can be submitted has changed. In certain countries, regulatory authority offices no longer be accepting paper or CD submissions, instead requiring electronic submissions. It is important to identify the new requirements to ensure your submission is accepted. In addition, their have been changes to guidelines on reporting adverse events for drugs in development, including those in development to treat COVID-19. Many Regulatory agencies has come out with a directives or notifications for companies managing the Regulatory compliances during the pandemic. Many other countries have given relaxation on submission of administrative documents.  Ensuring that your company is aware of and compliant with all these new guidelines requires a dedicated resource for regulatory intelligence. Partner with an outside firm with expertise in this area to quickly identify areas of concern relevant to your drug.

Readjust the Technical Infrastructure: One of the more significant impacts of COVID-19 to the life sciences industry has been the decline in face-to-face interactions. Although the use of virtual programs and channels has been widely accepted, they have not been deployed at the speed and scale that we’ve seen in the last few months.

Virtual channels can be an effective way to reach a remote audience. There may, however, be unique compliance risks and considerations, including reduced visibility and lack of controls in existing systems, policies and processes. Virtual interactions and programs are not exempt from the scrutiny of federal and state governments and manufacturers should closely examine newly established operations to mitigate potential compliance risks.

Taking advantage of expedited development opportunities: In response to COVID-19, many regulatory agencies globally have issued guidance around expedited development steps specific to drugs or vaccines in development to treat or prevent COVID-19. For example, in India, the CDSCO has come up with accelerated review of clinical development programs including clinical trials for NCE/NBE or even for re-purpose products. A good regulatory partner can support you to understand how to take advantage of expedited steps.

Managing your Resources: As the situation continues to evolve, businesses must assess how they can use their limited resources efficiently. Re-appraising the balance between in-house capabilities and strategic outsourcing relationships could present invaluable solutions and also opportunities. More specifically, employing strategic outsourced solution providers as needed can provide essential support for strategically managing the current temporary volatility, but also for meeting long-term regulatory needs. The benefits are many; being ready for quality and regulatory compliance speeds time to market, reduces the risk of products being taken off the market, and may even help to increase market share where demand is growing.

Regularly review your portfolio to assess approvability: No matter what phase of development your compound is in, it is important to consistently review your portfolio to assess your opportunity for approvability and determine any obstacles hindering your progress. As resources are stretched in a global pandemic, it is even more critical to put those resources in the right place. A thorough gap analysis of your portfolio can expose opportunities to accelerate a product utilising a breakthrough, expedited or rolling submission for your compound, as well as show where putting a compound on the back burner may be advantageous. An expert regulatory affairs consultant can help you complete this review and offer strategic guidance on cost-efficient steps to bring your most promising compounds to market.

GR-CIS’s Global Regulatory Affairs team strategically shortens approval timelines and efficiently gets your products to market and beyond. We are committed to keeping our clients abreast of changes in the regulatory landscape and to keep them ahead of competition.

Vaxart begins dosing in trial of oral Covid-19 vaccine candidate

Biotechnology firm Vaxart has started dosing participants in a Phase I clinical trial of oral tablet Covid-19 vaccine candidate, VXA-CoV2-1.

vaxart

Biotechnology firm Vaxart has started dosing participants in a Phase I clinical trial of oral tablet Covid-19 vaccine candidate, VXA-CoV2-1.

VXA-CoV2-1 is a room temperature stable oral tablet, unlike other vaccines, which require cold storage. It can potentially ease problems such as distribution and administration of cold chain dependent injectable vaccines.

 With its tablet form, VXA-CoV2-1 can make help achieve herd immunity as it is easier to vaccinate more people faster.

The open-label, dose-ranging trial (NCT04563702) will analyse the safety and immunogenicity of two doses of VXA-CoV2-1 in up to 48 healthy participants aged between 18 and 54. Vaxart expects to complete enrolment for the trial by next month.

The participants will be given a low or high dose of VXA-CoV2-1 oral tablet on days one and 29 of the trial.

During the active phase, safety, reactogenicity and immunogenicity assessments will be conducted at set times.Vaxart founder and chief scientific officer Sean Tucker said: “We are advancing VXA-CoV2-1 into clinical development based on the strength of preclinical data that showed that the vaccine is capable of inducing both a robust systemic immune response and a strong mucosal immune response, specifically in the lungs.

“We are eager to explore the clinical profile of VXA-CoV2-1 for effective protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission in healthy adults.”

The company plans to release the initial data readout from the trial in a few weeks.

In September this year, Vaxart received clearance from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to conduct the Phase I clinical trial. Approval was given after the company submitted an investigational new drug (IND) application in August.

Glitches in the COVID-19 Race: Less than 24 Hours After J&J Pauses Vaccine Trial, Eli Lilly Pauses Antibody Combo Trial

Eli Lilly announced that it is pausing its clinical trial of a combination antibody against COVID-19 over safety concerns. Typically, this would be because a patient or volunteer showed a serious side effect or became sick, but the company did not clarify what the reason for the pause is. The pause appears to refer to the ACTIV-3 clinical trial.

lilly-605x340

“Safety is of the utmost importance to Lilly,” the company told CNN by email. An independent Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) has recommended the pause.

The company added, “The trial, evaluating Lilly’s investigational neutralizing antibody as a treatment for COVID-19 in hospitalized patients, is sponsored by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Lilly is supportive of the decision by the independent DSMB to cautiously ensure the safety of the patients participating in this study.”

On September 16, Eli Lilly announced interim proof-of-concept data from its BLAZE-1 Phase II trial of LY-COV555, its neutralizing antibodies, singly or in combination against COVID-19. That study enrolled mild-to-moderate COVID-19 patients who had recently been diagnosed in the outpatient setting and received either placebo, 700 mg, 2800 mg and 7000 mg of the antibody.

In the trial, the cocktail reduced viral load, symptoms and COVID-related hospitalization and ER visits. The trial was of LY-CoV555 and LY-CoV016, which bind different but complementary regions of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. The combination cohort enrolled recently diagnosed patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. These patients received either 2800 mg of each antibody or placebo.

As of October 7, when Lilly updated news on the antibody programs, the company said, “Combination therapy has been generally well tolerated with no drug-related serious adverse events. In LY-COV555 monotherapy studies there have been isolated drug-related infusion reactions or hypersensitivity that were generally mild (two reported as serious infusion reactions, all patients recovered). Treatment emergent adverse events were comparable to placebo for both LY-CoV555 monotherapy and combination therapy.”

Today’s announcement would suggest that the DSMB saw something in the data to require a pause. It’s important to note that a trial pause is different than a clinical hold, with a clinical hold being a formal regulatory order that typically lasts longer. Pauses are very common in clinical trials, normally, but because of the heightened attention being paid to therapeutics and vaccines against COVID-19, are being made public.

Yesterday, Johnson & Johnson paused its clinical trial of its COVID-19 vaccine due to “an unexplained illness in a study participant” as well. J&J began its Phase III trial of JNJ-78436735 on September 23. The vaccine was developed by J&J’s Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies using its AdVac technology platform, which was also used to develop Janssen’s Ebola vaccine that was approved in Europe and to develop its Zika, RSV, and HIV vaccine candidates. The Phase III ENSEMBLE trial will evaluate the vaccine’s safety and efficacy compared to placebo in up to 60,000 adults ages 18 and older. It is enrolling volunteers in the U.S., Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Peru and South Africa.

J&J did not disclose much information about the unexplained illness, stating, “We must respect this participant’s privacy. We’re also learning more about this participant’s illness, and it’s important to have all the facts before we share additional information.”

The company also emphasized that adverse events are part of most clinical trials and that this is a “study pause” instead of a “clinical hold,” which is a formal regulatory action. A “clinical hold” can last much longer than a “study pause.” Normally, J&J indicated they would not announce study pauses to the public, but due to the overwhelming interest in the study and the urgency involved because of the COVID-19 pandemic, felt the need to release the information.

Eli Lilly and NIAID’s ACTIV-3 study was to begin evaluating LY-CoV555. The antibody was discovered by Abcellera Biologics in collaboration with NIAID’s Vaccine Research Center. It was then developed and manufactured by Lilly Research Laboratories in partnership with AbCellera.

ACTIV-3 is also testing the monoclonal antibody in combination with Gilead Sciences’ remdesivir.

It is also being evaluated in another ongoing NIAID trial, ACTIV-2, which is studying its safety and efficacy in people with mild to moderate symptoms of COVID-19 who have not been hospitalized. The DSMB has access to shared data across both studies.

Antibody therapies have been front-and-center since President Trump was treated with Regeneron Pharmaceuticals’ antibody cocktail, which Trump touted as a “cure.” Trump has previously promoted Eli Lilly’s treatments as well as others.

On October 8, Regeneron applied to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for its antibody cocktail. Around the same day, Eli Lilly reported it had submitted its EUA request for a EUA for LY-COV555 as a monotherapy to the FDA. At that time, it said it believed it could supply up to 100,000 doses by the end of October and up to 1 million by next year.

At the time, Lilly stated, “We expect to submit a subsequent request for EUA for combination therapy in November, pending the clinical trial enrollment, once additional safety data accumulate, and sufficient supply is manufactured.”

It is not yet clear if today’s pause will affect either the initial EUA application or the timeline for the subsequent combination EUA request.

Relief Therapeutics and NeuroRx Release Promising Data for Potential COVID-19 Treatment

Relief Therapeutics and NeuroRx released results on Tuesday from their open-label prospective study looking into RLF-100 (aviptadil) as a potential treatment for COVID-19 and respiratory failure.

ceba7909-3b18-400e-9e31-3cd0f1df033d

The topline results came from 45 patients who were assessed, 21 of whom were admitted to an intensive care unit with respiratory failure and critical COVID-19. All patients exhibited comorbidities that left them ineligible for the ongoing randomized controlled Phase IIb/III trial to determine the safety and efficacy of RLF-100. Additionally, they all appeared to deteriorate, despite receiving approved therapies for the disease.

Overall, approximately 81% of the patients who received RLF-100 survived beyond 60 days, compared to just 17% of control patients. Those who had the treatment also demonstrated a nine-fold increased probability of survival and recovery from respiratory failure.

“We are encouraged by these initial results in highly comorbid patients with COVID-19 respiratory failure, and we are pleased that the majority of these patients have returned safely to their families. We look forward to the upcoming results from the randomized, double-blind, prospective trial in less severely comorbid patients for confirmation of these results,” said Jihad Georges Youssef, MD, section chief of General Academic Pulmonary Medicine at the Houston Methodist Hospital, who serves as the study’s principal investigator at Houston Methodist and also serves as national co-chair for the ongoing randomized controlled trial.

RLF-100 is a formulation of Vasoactive Intestinal Polypeptide (VIP). VIP is known to be highly concentrated in the lungs, where it prevents the replication of the coronavirus. It also blocks the formation of inflammatory cytokines, prevents cell death and upregulates the production of surfactant. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has awarded RLF-100 Fast Track Designation.

“The patients included in this study are representative of those who are too ill to be included in the clinical trials of any known treatment for COVID-19,” said Dr. Jonathan Javitt, CEO and Chairman of NeuroRx, Inc. “We are grateful to Dr. Youssef and to the Houston Methodist Hospital for having the courage to treat and study patients at this level of risk. The results suggest that there may be substantial hope to mitigate the attack of the coronavirus on the delicate cells that line the lung with a natural peptide that has been protecting the lung’s lining since humans first walked the earth. While the number of patients treated at Houston Methodist is modest, the initial results in our nationwide expanded access program suggest similarly encouraging survival with RLF-100. We continue to closely monitor treatment with RLT-100 in other hospitals.”

NeuroRx and Relief Therapeutics announced back in September that they had established supply chain agreements and ordered sufficient amounts of RLF-100 to treat approximately one million patients with COVID-19. NeuroRx and Relief Therapeutics are leading U.S. and European Union commercialization plans, respectively. They have also entered a contract with Nephron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. to manufacture commercial supplies of RLF-100 to ensure that the drug supply is sustained and immediately available.

In addition, Bachem Americas has entered an agreement with the companies to manufacture RLF-100 to treat one million COVID-19 patients.

“In normal circumstances, it would be prudent to wait until all the data are in before initiating commercial scale-up,” said Javitt. “However, in an environment where more than 40,000 Americans are contracting COVID-19 daily and 800 are dying each day, there is not a moment to lose in ensuring that sufficient quantities of RLF-100 will be available, should the clinical trials succeed in proving safety and efficacy.”

Asia-Pacific has a Record Year for Clinical Trials, according to Novotech CRO

 Novotech CRO, the largest biotech CRO in Asia Pacific, says the region has had a record year for clinical trials in terms of the numbers of studies, experienced world-class sites and investigators, and patient enrollment.

shutterstock_1019928760

Novotech released its ‘Asia-Pacific Industry Highlights 2019-2020’ during the annual JP Morgan Healthcare Conference (Jan 7-10) in San Francisco, as part of its biotech industry briefing on the benefits of conducting clinical research in Asia-Pacific.

The briefing covered:
– Asia’s vast patient pools,
– High-quality infrastructure,
– Lower trial concentration,
– Comparable quality and lower costs,
– Key destination for biotech companies for later phase trials.

Novotech also spoke about the benefits of running trials with regional CRO partners in the context of multi-region trials.

Novotech CRO’s Dr John Moller said:

“Asia-Pacific is now recognised by clinical phase biotech companies for accelerated patient enrollment – especially in rare diseases, metabolic conditions, oncology, immuno-oncology and infectious diseases – and lower clinical research costs, with some of the most experienced investigators and research teams.

“Biotech clinical research has been increasing globally by roughly 10% per year, but in the Asia-Pacific region increased by over 25% in 2019. This follows news from Australia that most clinical phase biotechs would be eligible for a 40%+ cash rebate on clinical research spend, preserved as an incentive for conducting clinical research in Australia.

“We have seen small to mid-size biotechs increasingly looking to partner with CROs of a similar size and mindset. We also found the region focused on more efficient registration and approval processes with significant 2019 improvements in China and South Korea. We are ensuring our clients understand these changes which can save them valuable time and funds.

“Novotech expanded to meet growing demand, increasing staff by 20% in 2019 and announcing a strategic partnership with PPC Group. The partnership creates the largest specialist biotech CRO group in Asia-Pacific, and brings together 1,200 staff with significant scale and synergies across countries, research institutions, trial phases, therapeutic areas and functional specialities.

“Novotech clients now have access to more than 350 clinical and operations staff across 28 cities in mainland China.”

About Novotech – https://novotech-cro.com/welcome
Novotech, the Frost & Sullivan Asia-Pacific Biotech CRO of the Year the past 5 years, is internationally recognized as the leading Asia-Pacific full-service CRO. Established more than 20 years ago, Novotech now has 13 offices across 11 countries in APAC, and has been instrumental in the success of hundreds of Phase I-IV clinical trials in the region.

Novotech provides clinical development services across all clinical trial phases and therapeutic areas including: feasibility assessments; ethics committee and regulatory submissions, data management, statistical analysis, safety services, central lab services, report write-up to ICH requirements, project and vendor management.

Visit Us On TwitterVisit Us On Google PlusVisit Us On LinkedinVisit Us On Facebook