Advertisement

Safety-Related Regulatory Actions and Risk Factors for Anticancer Drugs in Japan

  • Hiroki NakayamaEmail author
  • Naoki Matsumaru
  • Katsura Tsukamoto
Original Research Article
  • 17 Downloads

Abstract

Introduction

The approval of anticancer drugs in Japan has increased to meet high medical demand. To maximize the benefits of anticancer drugs, adverse drug reactions (ADRs) must be properly managed. However, in some cases, clinically significant safety issues are detected after launch, and safety-related regulatory actions (SRRAs) are implemented.

Objectives

We aimed to determine the characteristics of SRRAs for anticancer drugs approved in Japan and to identify factors related to the drug development and regulatory approval process associated with the occurrence of an SRRA.

Methods

We defined an SRRA as the issuance of a ‘Yellow Letter’, ‘Blue Letter’, or an official notification by the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare. Anticancer drugs approved in Japan as new active ingredients from April 2004 to July 2016 were analyzed using publicly available information. The Kaplan–Meier survival curve was plotted to estimate the probability of the occurrence of an SRRA, and the Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify risk factors associated with the occurrence of an SRRA. Independent variables were selected using backward/forward stepwise selection according to Akaike’s Information Criterion.

Results

An SRRA was implemented for 38 of 63 anticancer drugs. Approximately 70% of SRRAs occurred within 2 years after approval, and the median time between approval and the occurrence of an SRRA was 1.6 years (interquartile range 0.94–2.4). No Yellow Letter was issued during the follow-up period; however, one Blue Letter was issued for ‘acute lung injury and interstitial pneumonia’ for sorafenib. According to official notifications, ‘clinically significant adverse reactions’ was the most revised section of package inserts (62%). The probability of an SRRA at the 1-, 2- and 3-year follow-up was 15.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.4–24.4%), 41.3% (95% CI 27.8–52.3%), and 56.8% (95% CI 41.8–68.0%), respectively. Monoclonal antibodies were associated with a low risk of occurrence of an SRRA (hazard ratio [HR] 0.29, p = 0.019), while the large number of patients in pivotal studies (per 100 patients) was associated with a high risk of occurrence (HR 1.07, p = 0.012).

Conclusions

The high-risk period for the occurrence of an SRRA for anticancer drugs in Japan was within 2 years after approval. Among the factors related to the drug development and regulatory approval process, anticancer drugs in the form of non-monoclonal antibodies, and whose pivotal studies included a large number of patients, were more likely to be associated with an SRRA. Postmarketing follow-up should therefore be carefully performed, especially in the first 2 years after approval and for non-monoclonal antibody anticancer drugs. Moreover, postmarketing follow-up is crucial, even if large-scale pivotal studies for regulatory approval have already been performed.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors express their gratitude to Katsuya Nakano for his review of the study from a regulatory affairs viewpoint.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Conflicts of interest

Hiroki Nakayama is an employee of Astellas Pharma Inc. Naoki Matsumaru and Katsura Tsukamoto declare no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Supplementary material

40290_2018_260_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (125 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 124 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Mol PG, Arnardottir AH, Motola D, Vrijlandt PJ, Duijnhoven RG, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM, et al. Post-approval safety issues with innovative drugs: a European cohort study. Drug Saf. 2013;36(11):1105–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fujikawa M, Ono S. Analysis of safety-related regulatory actions for new drugs in Japan by nature of identified risks. Pharm Med. 2017;31(5):317–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Coulson A, Levy A, Gossell-Williams M. Monoclonal antibodies in cancer therapy: mechanisms, successes and limitations. West Indian Med J. 2014;63(6):650–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Catapano AL, Papadopoulos N. The safety of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies: implications for cardiovascular disease and targeting the PCSK9 pathway. Atherosclerosis. 2013;228(1):18–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nakayama H, Tsukamoto K. Unique characteristics of regulatory approval and pivotal studies of orphan anticancer drugs in Japan. Investig New Drugs. 2018;36(4):702–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ueno T, Asahina Y, Tanaka A, Yamada H, Nakamura M, Uyama Y. Significant differences in drug lag in clinical development among various strategies used for regulatory submissions in Japan. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2014;95(5):533–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maeda H, Kurokawa T. Recent trends for drug lag in clinical development of oncology drugs in Japan: does the oncology drug lag still exist in Japan? Int J Clin Oncol. 2015;20(6):1072–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency. The Yellow Letter/Blue Letter. 2018. https://www.pmda.go.jp/english/safety/info-services/drugs/esc-rsc/0001.html. Accessed 16 Nov 2018.
  9. 9.
    Yamada T, Kusama M, Hirai Y, Arnold F, Sugiyama Y, Ono S. Analysis of pharmaceutical safety-related regulatory actions in Japan: do tradeoffs exist between safer drugs and launch delay? Ann Pharmacother. 2010;44(12):1976–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ishiguro C, Misu T, Iwasa E, Izawa T. Analysis of safety-related regulatory actions by Japan’s pharmaceutical regulatory agency. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2017;26(11):1314–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    National Cancer Institute. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.03. 2010. https://ctep.cancer.gov/protocolDevelopment/electronic_applications/ctc.htm#ctc_40. Accessed 16 Nov 2018.
  12. 12.
    Akaike H. Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In: Petrov BN, Caski F, editors. Second international symposium on information theory. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado; 1973. p. 267–81.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kanda Y. Investigation of the freely available easy-to-use software ‘EZR’ for medical statistics. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2013;48(3):452–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Giezen TJ, Mantel-Teeuwisse AK, Straus SM, Schellekens H, Leufkens HG, Egberts AC. Safety-related regulatory actions for biologicals approved in the United States and the European Union. JAMA. 2008;300(16):1887–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yonemori K, Hirakawa A, Ando M, Hirata T, Yunokawa M, Shimizu C, et al. The notorious “drug lag” for oncology drugs in Japan. Investig New Drugs. 2011;29(4):706–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tsuji K, Tsutani K. Approval of new drugs 1999–2007: comparison of the US, the EU and Japan situations. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2010;35(3):289–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Heemstra HE, Giezen TJ, Mantel-Teeuwisse AK, de Vrueh RL, Leufkens HG. Safety-related regulatory actions for orphan drugs in the US and EU: a cohort study. Drug Saf. 2010;33(2):127–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. Overview of orphan drug/medical device designation system. (in Japanese) 2015. http://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/seisakunitsuite/bunya/0000068484.html. Accessed 15 Aug 2018.
  19. 19.
    Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. Implementation of a conditional early approval system for pharmaceutical products. 2017. https://www.pmda.go.jp/files/000222439.pdf. Accessed 28 Sept 2018.
  20. 20.
    Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. Implementation of the “Risk Management Plan”. Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Safety Information No. 300. 2013. https://www.pmda.go.jp/files/000153064.pdf#page=5. Accessed 28 Sept 2018.
  21. 21.
    Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency. review report for cabazitaxel (in Japanese). 2014. http://www.pmda.go.jp/drugs/2014/P201400085/780069000_22600AMX00751_A100_1.pdf. Accessed 28 Sept 2018.
  22. 22.
    Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency. Review report for sorafenib (in Japanese). 2008. http://www.pmda.go.jp/drugs/2008/P200800005/630004000_22000AMX00014000_A100_1.pdf. Accessed 28 Sept 2018.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Healthcare Policy and CSRAstellas Pharma Inc.TokyoJapan
  2. 2.Global Regulatory ScienceGifu Pharmaceutical UniversityGifuJapan

Personalised recommendations