Innovation From the Lab to the Clinic: Taming the Wild West of CAR-T Cell Therapy Regulation.

Authors: Jin Xu & Lars Erik Schiro, PhD

Why is Car-T cell regulation still the ‘Wild West’?

??? In the rapidly evolving field of immunotherapy, CAR-T cell therapy is standing out as a groundbreaking approach with the potential to transform cancer treatment. However, despite its promise, CAR-T cell therapy remains a complex and evolving landscape, and due to its novelty is often described as a regulatory ‘wild west’. The journey from initial drug discovery to clinical application is fraught with challenges that must be addressed to ensure safe, effective, and accessible treatments for global cancer patients. In the current article, we will dive deeper into the main obstacles that CAR-T cell therapy regulation is facing and discuss potential strategies for taming this uncharted territory. It is crucial for us to understand these challenges and continue the work towards innovative solutions. We can pave the way for a future where CAR-T therapies are not just groundbreaking but also safe and available to everyone. Join the conversation and let us delve into how we can collectively advance the CAR-T regulation to unlock its full potential in the fight against cancer.

Regulatory framework in CAR-T cell therapy

???The regulatory framework for CAR-T cell therapy is a crucial factor in bringing these innovations from the lab to the clinic. Regulatory guidelines for CAR-T therapies are still evolving and may vary significantly between regions. For example, the regulatory frameworks for advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) in Europe and the United States differ significantly in terminology, definitions, evaluation time for marketing authorization applications (MAA), and the number of authorized products.

Europe adopts the regulation of advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMP), ATMPs are divided into gene therapy medicinal products, somatic cell therapy medicinal products, tissue-engineered products, and combined ATMPs. The US uses broader categories, mainly gene therapies and cellular therapies, with distinctions between structural and non-structural cells and tissues (Iglesias-Lopez et al. 2019).

Differences in regulatory frameworks for ATMPs between EU and the US

???Terminology and Definitions: In the European Medicines Agency (EMA, hereafter referred to as EU), ATMPs are divided into gene therapy medicinal products, somatic cell therapy medicinal products, tissue-engineered products, and combined ATMPs. The United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA, hereafter referred to as US) uses broader categories, mainly gene therapies and cellular therapies, with distinctions between structural and non-structural cells and tissues.

???Evaluation Time: In the EU, all ATMPs undergo a centralized procedure evaluated by the Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT) and the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP), ensuring a single evaluation across the entire region. Conversely, the US handles evaluations with expedited pathways such as Priority Review and Accelerated Approval, significantly shortening the review period to as little as six months compared to the standard ten months.

???Authorized Products: The EU has authorized fewer ATMPs than the US due to more stringent requirements and ethical considerations. The US benefits from broader classifications and expedited programs like the Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy (RMAT) designation, facilitating more approvals. The US often approves cancer and hematologic drugs earlier and more frequently, using innovative trial designs and surrogate endpoints, particularly through accelerated approval pathways and uncontrolled trials. In contrast, the EU generally requires at least one randomized controlled trial to support the approval of cancer medications.

Cancer drug regulation reform in the EU

???The EU still faces obstacles with varying country-specific requirements, such as the amount of information needed and the availability of insurers to ensure drug reimbursement policies, and pricing in each member state. CAR-T cell therapy requires a specific clinical environment, which is unequally accessible across countries. The therapy may prove prohibitively expensive, for example, the CAR-T therapy in Italy would generate an increase in cost from 15% to 23%, and require additional investments equal to 15,000 -100,897 EUR from the hospital perspective, thus making appropriate reimbursement essential to ensure affordability and patient access. Additionally, there is a lack of standardized cancer diagnosis and disease care across countries, complicating clinical trial and marketing authorization planning.

???After January 12, 2025, the new Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Regulation will be mandatory in the EU, ensuring that approved therapies are economically viable and provide value to the healthcare system and society. The new framework covers joint clinical assessments, joint scientific consultations, the identification of emerging health technologies, and voluntary cooperation. The joint review process aims to be more integrated, efficient and improving equity, accelerating patient access to the latest innovations.

From January 2025, The EU member states will jointly review the data for a new CAR-T, and national HTA bodies assess the therapy's cost-effectiveness, budget impact, and overall value. Based on this assessment, healthcare policymakers decide on reimbursement and guidelines for clinical use.

Other regulatory challenges

???Efficacy and Safety Concerns: CAR-T therapy can cause severe side effects, such as cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity. Despite these risks, the benefits for many patients, particularly those with refractory or relapsed blood cancers, are substantial. However, there is limited knowledge about CAR-T's long-term efficacy and safety. Studies like Cordeiro et al. (2019) suggest a safe long-term profile with manageable late adverse events, as most late events in their cohort were not severe and often related to prior or subsequent therapies.

???Complex Manufacturing Process: CAR-T cells are manufactured individually for each patient, creating variability and complexity in production. Ensuring consistent quality and safety across different batches and patients is crucial for GMP compliance, but remains challenging. This batch-to-batch variability may be improved by recent advances in AI technologies.?

???New Clinical Trial Designs: Variability in innovative adaptive trial designs adds complexity to comparing results and establishing standardized protocols.?

How Can CAR-T Regulation Be Enhanced?

???Harmonizing Regulatory Standards: Efforts to harmonize regulatory standards and process across regions can streamline the approval process and reduce variability. International collaborations and mutual recognition agreements between regulatory bodies can facilitate a more unified approach to CAR-T cell therapy regulation.

???Developing Adaptive Regulatory Frameworks: Adaptive regulatory frameworks that evolve in response to new data and technological advancements are crucial. This involves flexible guidelines that accommodate the unique aspects of CAR-T therapy and iterative review processes that allow for ongoing adjustments. According to the European Network for Health Technology Assessment, there remains a need to establish a more well-defined process for submitting new evidence during an ongoing joint clinical assessment. This process should be tailored to different clinical settings and contexts, with consistently applied and predictable principles for the acceptability of evidence.

???Strengthening Collaboration: Strengthening collaboration between cross-border clinical trial organizations, industry stakeholders, and academic researchers can promote a more cohesive and efficient clinical environment. Shared technologies and resources can help address common challenges and accelerate the development and approval of CAR-T therapies.

???Utilizing Real-World Evidence (RWE): Incorporating real-world evidence from different resources into regulatory decision-making can provide additional insights into the long-term safety and efficacy of CAR-T therapies, complementing clinical trial data and supporting more informed regulatory assessments.?

???Relieving Constraints on Novel Oncology Clinical Trial Designs: The EU opening up to surrogate, intermediate and novel endpoints that reflect the reality, context and constraints of state-of-the-art clinical drug development would ultimately help to improve the accuracy and reliability of cancer clinical trial data. Any loss of predictive quality may be compensated for by the inclusion of larger study populations in each trial when possible, and in combination with well-selected and defined primary and secondary endpoints.?

???By addressing these regulatory challenges through innovative strategies and collaborative efforts, we can enhance the framework for CAR-T cell therapy, ensuring that these transformative treatments are delivered safely and efficiently to patients in need.

Summary

In the evolving field of immunotherapy, CAR-T cell therapy is emerging as a groundbreaking approach with the potential to revolutionize cancer treatment. Despite it's promise, CAR-T cell therapy remains a regulatory 'wild west' due to its novelty and complexity. The transition from lab to clinic is fraught with challenges that must be addressed to ensure safe, effective, and accessible treatments for cancer patients worldwide. Regulatory frameworks for CAR-T therapies vary significantly between regions, adding to the complexity. For instance, the EU and the US differ in their regulatory approaches, evaluation times, and the number of authorized products, making harmonization essential. The EU is working towards standardizing processes with initiatives like the EU-X-CT and the new HTA Regulation to improve trial access and ensure the economic viability of approved therapies. Additionally, addressing challenges such as efficacy, safety concerns, and complex manufacturing processes is critical. By fostering international collaboration, developing adaptive regulatory frameworks, and incorporating real-world evidence, we can pave the way for the safe and efficient delivery of CAR-T therapies, unlocking their full potential in the fight against cancer.

This post represents individual opinion, and does not represent current or previous employers.

If you like this content, please share it with a colleague! ??

Stay tuned to learn more about this exciting development in cancer treatment and how it’s changing lives in Part 5, where we will be exploring future outlook and perspectives on Car-T cells.

Keywords:

#immunotherapy #cancer #clinicaltrials #preclinical #biotech #cartcells #leukemia #lymphoma? #tcellgenetherapy #hematology #oncology #healthcareinnovation #atmp #personalizedtreatment #precisionmedicine #personalizedmedicine #medicalaffairs #regulatoryaffairs #decentralizedclincaltrials #hta

References:

1. Farina, A., Moro, F., et al. (2021). Strength of clinical evidence leading to approval of novel cancer medicines in Europe: A systematic review and data synthesis. Pharmacology Research & Perspectives, 9.?

1. Iglesias-López C, Agustí A, Obach M, Vallano A. Regulatory Framework for Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products in Europe and the United States. Front Pharmacol. 2019 Aug 30;10:921. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2019.00921. Erratum in: Front Pharmacol. 2020 May 25;11:766. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2020.00766. PMID: 31543814; PMCID: PMC6728416.
2. Iglesias-Lopez, C., Obach, M., Vallano, A., & Agustí, A. (2021). Comparison of regulatory pathways for the approval of advanced therapies in the European Union and the United States.. Cytotherapy.?
3. Nagai, S. (2019). Flexible and Expedited Regulatory Review Processes for Innovative Medicines and Regenerative Medical Products in the US, the EU, and Japan. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 20.?
4. health.ec.europa.eu/health-technology-assessment/regulation-health-technology-assessment_en
5. EU HTA: If we want faster access to cancer treatment for all, we need to get it right, Politico.eu June 2024, European federation of pharmaceutical and industrial association.?
6. Grigor, E., Fergusson, D., Kekre, N., Montroy, J., Atkins, H., Seftel, M., Daugaard, M., Presseau, J., Thavorn, K., Hutton, B., Holt, R., & Lalu, M. (2019). Risks and Benefits of Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell (CAR-T) Therapy in Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.. Transfusion medicine reviews, 33 2, 98-110 .?
7. Chattaraj, A., Rehman, M., Khan, I., Franco, D., Ibrahim, A., Khanam, R., Tahir, N., Iqbal, Q., Waqar, S., Pachika, P., Khan, R., & Anwer, F. (2022). Safety and efficacy of allogeneic CAR-T cells in B-cell malignancies: A systematic review and meta-analysis.. Journal of Clinical Oncology.?
8. Zhang, M., Chen, D., Fu, X., Meng, H., Nan, F., Sun, Z., Yu, H., Zhang, L., Li, L., Li, X., Wang, X., Wang, M., You, F., Li, Z., Chang, Y., Zhou, Z., Yan, J., Li, J., Wu, X., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Xiang, S., Chen, Y., Pan, G., Xu, H., Zhang, B., & Yang, L. (2022). Autologous nanobody-derived fratricide-resistant CD7-CAR T cell therapy for patients with relapsed and refractory T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma.. Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research..
9. Foglia, E., Garagiola, E., Ladisa, V., Rambaldi, A., Cairoli, R., Sammassimo, S., Salé, E., Zinzani, P., Esposti, M., Alberti, L., Mulas, M., Melis, E., Onnis, S., Marcias, M., Satta, V., & Croce, D. (2023). Multidimensional Results and Reflections on CAR-T: The Italian Evidence. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20053830.
10. Roex, G., Timmers, M., Wouters, K., Campillo-Davo, D., Flumens, D., Schroyens, W., Chu, Y., Berneman, Z., Lion, E., Luo, F., & Anguille, S. (2020). Safety and clinical efficacy of BCMA CAR-T-cell therapy in multiple myeloma. Journal of Hematology & Oncology, 13.
11. Cordeiro, A., Bezerra, E., Hirayama, A., Hill, J., Wu, V., Voutsinas, J., Sorror, M., Turtle, C., Maloney, D., & Bar, M. (2020). Late events after treatment with CD19-Targeted Chimeric Antigen Receptor Modified T-cells.. Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.?
12. ?The European Network for Health Technology Assessment
13. ?Roche HTA presentation slides.