Junovan Fails to Win ODAC Nod for Osteosarcoma Treatment

Publication
Article
Oncology NEWS InternationalOncology NEWS International Vol 16 No 6
Volume 16
Issue 6

The Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee (ODAC) voted 12-to-2 not to recommend that FDA approve Junovan (mifamurtide, IDM Pharma) for treating newly diagnosed, resectable high-grade osteosarcomas in combination with chemotherapy following surgical resection.

SILVER SPRING, Maryland-The Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee (ODAC) voted 12-to-2 not to recommend that FDA approve Junovan (mifamurtide, IDM Pharma) for treating newly diagnosed, resectable high-grade osteosarcomas in combination with chemotherapy following surgical resection.

Junovan is a liposomal formulation of muramyl tripeptide phosphatidylethanolamine (MPT-PE), which induces the infiltration of inflammatory macrophages into lung metastases. IDM Pharma presented data from a phase III NCI-sponsored cooperative group study of 678 nonmetastatic osteosarcoma patients with resectable disease (age range,1.4 to 30.6 years). The study, a factorial design, used two chemotherapy regimens-one standard and one experimental-each with or without Junovan.

The trial showed no statistical advantage for Junovan in disease-free survival, the primary endpoint, although the trend favored the drug. An analysis of overall survival, which was not prespecified in the protocol, showed a 77% 6-year survival probability for Junovan-treated patients vs 66% for those who did not receive the drug (P = .0183). "This robust survival benefit came without cost in safety," said Paul Meyers, MD, of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, who presented the trial data for IDM Pharma.

FDA reviewers said the single study did not provide substantial evidence of effectiveness: The primary endpoint did not reach significance, and the overall survival analysis was not part of the study plan. "Follow-up data have not been rigorously collected and are incomplete, with insufficient follow-up for a significant proportion of patients," said FDA statistical reviewer Laura Lu, PhD.

Related Videos
The difference in adverse effect profiles between sorafenib and nirogacestat may make one treatment more appealing than the other for certain patients with desmoid tumors, says Brian Van Tine, MD, PhD.
The August CancerNetwork Snap Recap takes a look back at key FDA news updates, as well as expert perspectives on the chemotherapy shortage.
Future developments in the sarcoma space may also involve research on circulating tumor DNA and metabolic therapies, according to Brian Van Tine, MD, PhD.
Current research in the sarcoma space includes the development of treatment options such as T-cell therapies, and combinations such as TKIs/immunotherapy, according to Brian Van Tine, MD, PhD.
Brian Van Tine, MD, PhD, states that sitravatinib appears to be active and well tolerated among patients with dedifferentiated or well-differentiated liposarcoma.
Brian Van Tine, MD, PhD, also discusses how the treatment of desmoid tumors has evolved following data supporting the use of sorafenib in this population.
CAR T-cell therapies and immunotherapy agents may offer up new options and even become standard of care in certain sarcoma subtypes.
There are several novel treatments that may be beneficial in several sarcoma subtypes including CAR T-cell therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors, according to Sandra P. D’Angelo, MD.
Data from a ctDNA analysis of the phase 3 INTRIGUE study indicate that KIT mutational status may be associated with response to certain Tyrosine kinase inhibitors in GIST, according to an expert from the Yale Cancer Center in New Haven, Massachusetts.