Specificity clinical studies applications

The first mouse monoclonal antibody specific for human CD3 was produced in 1979 and named orthoclone OKT3. Aside from its use in the laboratory, OKT3 became the first anti-CD3 antibody to be utilized in transplantation medicine, but its wider application was hampered by its immunogenic and mitogenic properties (reviewed in [6]). Consequently, humanized and engineered anti-CD3 antibodies were developed to circumvent these limitations (Table 1). Since T cells and the TCR are involved in many immunological diseases, it is not surprising that the application of CD3 antibodies is not restricted to the field of transplantation. For example, CD3 antibodies are tested in clinical studies of diseases such as autoimmune diabetes (type 1 diabetes), immune-mediated inflammatory arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease [7]. 

The preclinical knowledge base is initially developed by designing studies to answer fundamental questions. The development of this knowledge base is generally applicable to most pharmaceuticals as well as biopharmaceuticals, and include data to support (1) the relationship of the dose to the biological activity, (2) the relationship of the dose to the toxicity, (3) the effect of route and/or schedule on activity or toxicity and (4) identification of the potential risks for subsequent clinical studies. These questions are considered in the context of indication and/or disease state. In addition there are often unique concerns related to the specific category or product class. 

The advent of recombinant DNA technology led to the development of antibodies and fragments that are tailored for optimal behaviour in vivo [7,8]. Humanized and chimeric antibodies can be constructed to circumvent the human anti-mouse antibody response elicited by mouse antibody treatment of patients, which severely hampers the application of these powerful molecules. The treatment of rheumatoid arthritis patients with doses of as high as 10 mg kg cA2 chimeric antibody specific for TNFa [9], emphasizes that at present the production and purification methods for these proteins have been optimized to such extent that clinical studies can be considerably intensified. 

Class III Premarket Approval. Similar to a new drug approval, a premarket approval grants the applicant a license to market a specific well-characterized device. These devices are subject to the requirements of Section 515 of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. A post-amendment device is a device put in commercial distribution after May 28, 1976. If it is not substantially equivalent to a preamendment device it is automatically in Class III, and a premarket approval application (PMA) is required. The application must include reports of preclinical and clinical studies done in support of claims of safety and efficacy as well as any labeling claims made for the device. Once the PMA is submitted, the FDA determines whether the application includes the required information. If the PMA is suitable for scientific review, the FDA has 180 days from the filing date to approve or deny the application. Polybutester, polydioxanone, polyglyconate, and ePTFE sutures are all regulated as Class III devices. 

Prospective, multisite, uncontrolled clinical studies were conducted to study the effectiveness of the formulations and the acceptability of the polym ethane delivery system. The formulation was imbibed into 2.5-in. hydrophilic polyurethane foam discs (LMI, St. Charles, MI). Each disc contained 2.4 g of the formulation. The method of application was developed in tests that limited the active ingredient to the same amount or less than the monograph specifications for the formulation ingredients. Fourteen volunteers were given boxes containing 42 individually wrapped foam pads impregnated with the fonnulation and were asked to complete the questionnaire weekly. 

Extrapolation of data from one material to another must always be based on sound scientific principles and all available data. Even so, extrapolation always bears risk. To demonstrate that every batch of clinical trial material was within applicable specifications for the duration of its use in clinical studies, some firms test every batch of clinical trial material at expiry. This is especially valuable when an expiration-dating period was not based on real-time data for the precise clinical trial material in the precise container-closure used in the clinical trials. 

Between the time of their filing the patent application and its issue, the company was planning several clinical studies when it came to their attention that another issued U.S. patent existed, which was filed before their chemist synthesized the compound of formula I. The patent of concern was directed to steroidal compounds, although it did not disclose their particular compound of formula I, nor did it indicate any specific utility in combination with a progestin for contraception. The patent specification (the entirety of the document) disclosed a number of Markush structures of varying scope as well as a description of the compounds as having utility for the treatment of prostate cancer. Claim 13 from the issued patent is illustrated in Figure 1.5 and it particularly concerned them. 

Case report forms. The application is required to contain copies of individual case report forms for each patient who died during a clinical study or who did not complete the study because of an adverse event, whether believed to be drug related or not, including patients receiving reference drugs or placebo. This requirement may be waived by the FDA for specific studies if the case report forms are unnecessary for a proper review of the study. 

As implied by its title, the safety update report is not submitted with the original BLA, but is submitted in the form of updates at specific points in the application review process. Applicants must submit safety update reports 4 months after the BLA submission, after receipt of a complete response letter, and other times requested by CBER. In these reports, the sponsor must update the pending BLA with new safety information learned about the product that may reasonably affect the labeling statements in the contraindications, warnings, precautions, and adverse reactions sections. The updates must include the same types of information from clinical studies, animal studies, and other sources, and must be submitted in the same format as the BLA s integrated safety summary. They must also include case report forms for each patient who died during a clinical study or who did not complete the study because of an adverse event. 

Although these studies are promising as a basis for specific clinical guidance, the application to general populations is limited. The interaction of specific nutrients, for example, remains unknown. In AREDS, only patients in intermediate AMD, categories 3 and 4, showed a treatment benefit. And, high-dose beta-carotene supplementation may have adverse effects among smokers. 

---