Nonclinical precedent Request an invite
Precedia/Gene therapy/Test article

Clinical lot or not: what material did approved gene therapies test?

From the FDA and EMA reviews of all 26 approved gene therapies. Each answer links to the regulator's own sentence.

Check my plan against these
Short answer
22 of 26 approved gene therapies were tested in animals with something other than the clinical lot.
Several of these8/26
Surrogate (animal analogue)7/26
Earlier process or lot6/26
Clinical lot or same process4/26
Prototype1/26

Precedent by precedent

26 approved gene therapies, with the reviewers' own words.

Adstiladrin

nadofaragene firadenovec · IFN-alpha2b (adenovirus, intravesical)
Test article vs clinical lot
Several older rAd-IFN and Syn3NODA DS batches; not all representative of the clinical/commercial manufacturing process. Bridging: Quality data for some batches provided on request; considered supportive of the nonclinical profile
“Upon request data on some of the batches have been provided. Nevertheless, taken together, not all batches used in the non-clinical PK and toxicity studies are sufficiently representative for the clinical/commercial manufacturing process, but the provided data are considered supportive of the non-clinical profile of the product.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 45Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Beqvez

fidanacogene elaparvovec · Factor IX
Test article vs clinical lot
Several toxicology studies used a closely related predecessor product, AAVRh74var-Padua, similar to BEQVEZ. Bridging: Batches used in the pivotal nonclinical biodistribution and toxicity/genotoxicity testing considered representative of clinical batches
“Several toxicology studies were conducted using a closely related predecessor product, AAVRh74var- -Padua, which is similar to BEQVEZ except the”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 2Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Casgevy

exagamglogene autotemcel · BCL11A enhancer (CRISPR-Cas9, ex vivo HSC)
Test article vs clinical lot
Non-GMP lots from three healthy donors made with the same process and manufacturer as the GMP clinical material. Bridging: Toxicology lots were manufactured in a non-GMP facility using the same process and same manufacturer as for GMP material
“The pivotal single dose toxicity and tumorigenicity study has been conducted using lots from three healthy donors. The lots were manufactured under non-GMP conditions in a non-GMP facility using the same process and same manufacturer as for GMP material.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 48Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Elevidys

delandistrogene moxeparvovec · Micro-dystrophin
Test article vs clinical lot
Nonclinical material from Process A (Nationwide Children’s), Process B at ThermoFisher and Process B at Catalent. Bridging: Process A and Process B products not analytically comparable; commercial product is Process B (Catalent)
“ELEVIDYS (also named SRP-9001 in the nonclinical studies) has been produced from different manufacturing processes and manufacturing sites including Process A at Nationwide Children’s Hospital, Process B at ThermoFisher, and Process B at Catalent.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 8Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Fayuvi

rebisufligene etisparvovec · SGSH (AAV9)
Test article vs clinical lot
Definitive GLP safety and biodistribution studies and all clinical trials used FAYUVI manufactured under GMP conditions via Process A. Bridging: In vivo pharmacology studies bridged in vivo potency between the clinical Process A material and the later manufacturing process
“The definitive nonclinical Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) safety/biodistribution (BD) studies and all clinical trials (Nos. ABT-001, ABT-003, and LTFU-ABO-102) were conducted with FAYUVI manufactured under GMP conditions via Process A.”
✓ VerifiedFDA summary basis for approval, p. 11Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Genglycos

pariglasgene brecaparvovec · G6PC (AAV8)
Test article vs clinical lot
Clinical vector DTX401 in toxicology studies; earlier vector versions encoding the same protein only in pharmacology Studies 1–4. Bridging: Titers from the initial assay converted to the final titer method by a conversion factor; doses reported as equivalents
“The earlier versions of the product evaluated in Studies #1- 4 do not contain the of DTX401 but support the activity of DTX401 as they encode the same protein product. Note: The Applicant initially evaluated titers of DTX401 using which was later replaced with a method. A conversion factor of is applied to convert titers to equivalents.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 5Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Glybera

alipogene tiparvovec · LPL (AAV1)
Test article vs clinical lot
Plasmid-derived AMT-010 batches and the baculovirus-derived commercial product AMT-011 both used in non-clinical studies. Bridging: AMT-011 qualified independently of AMT-010 on non-clinical data; toxicology and pharmacology studies were repeated with AMT-011
“Different batches of AMT-010 (plasmid derived) were used and the applicant intended to compare AMT-010 and AMT-011 (baculovirus derived) in non clinical bridging studies.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 23Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Hemgenix

etranacogene dezaparvovec · Factor IX
Test article vs clinical lot
Programme initiated with predecessor AMT-060, same vector backbone but lacking the 2-nucleotide change giving the Padua FIX variant. Bridging: Predecessor and clinical vector showed a comparable safety profile when tested side-by-side in mice and NHPs
“The non-clinical development programme was initiated with AMT-060, which has a similar vector backbone as etranacogene dezaparvovec (AMT-061), but lacks the 2-nucleotide change in the hFIX coding sequence (enhancing the FIX activity of Padua FIX variant).”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 24Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Imlygic

talimogene laherparepvec · GM-CSF (oncolytic HSV-1)
Test article vs clinical lot
Process B (earlier process) material in toxicology studies; Phase III and commercial product made by Process C. Bridging: Comparability between batches from the different manufacturing processes demonstrated
“Process B material was applied in additional non-clinical toxicology studies and phase II clinical studies. Commercial talimogene laherparepvec will be produced using Process C which is the same manufacturing process as used for manufacture of Phase III material. Comparability between batches manufactured using the different manufacturing processes has been adequately demonstrated.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 17Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Itvisma

onasemnogene abeparvovec (intrathecal) · SMN1 (AAV9, intrathecal)
Test article vs clinical lot
Research grade lots scAAV9.CBA.SMN, OAV101 and OAV101B used in the nonclinical programme. Bridging: Among the research lots, OAV101B had specifications most comparable to the clinical product
“The nonclinical development program for ITVISMA evaluated research grade lots, referred to as scAAV9.CBA.SMN, OAV101, and OAV101B, to inform the safety and activity of ITVISMA.”
✓ VerifiedFDA summary basis for approval, p. 15Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Kebilidi

eladocagene exuparvovec · AADC
Test article vs clinical lot
Nonclinical studies used clinical lots 2004-101 and PBR-0045-001, not the intended commercial formulation. Bridging: Comparability of the clinical lots to lots made using the intended commercial process was provided
“Comparability of the clinical lots 2004-101 and PBR-0045- 001 to lots made using the intended commercial process was provided. It is clear that in the initial submission no nonclinical studies had been carried out using the intended commercial formulation.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 38Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Kresladi

marnetegragene autotemcel · ITGB2 (LVV, ex vivo HSC)
Test article vs clinical lot
Surrogate murine Lin- HSPCs transduced with the clinical vector used for the definitive in vivo toxicology and biodistribution studies. Bridging: All cells were transduced with the clinical vector, Chim-CD18-WPRE LV, which is used to produce RP-L201
“The applicant also used surrogate Lin- HSPCs transduced with the Chim-CD18-WPRE LV transplanted into recipient mice for their definitive in vivo toxicology and BD studies. All cells were transduced with the clinical vector, Chim-CD18-WPRE LV, which is used to produce RP-L201.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 8Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Lenmeldy

atidarsagene autotemcel · ARSA (LVV, ex vivo HSC)
Test article vs clinical lot
Murine Lin- HSPCs from As2-/- mice and healthy human HSPCs transduced with ARSA LVV used for most nonclinical studies. Bridging: Remaining nonclinical studies used the clinical LVV, while some studies used vector versions with WPRE or an HA epitope tag
“Therefore, lineage negative (Lin-) mHSPCs (derived from the BM of As2-/- mice) and healthy hHSPCs (derived from umbilical cord blood or BM) transduced with ARSA LVV were used for the majority of the nonclinical studies.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 7Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Luxturna

voretigene neparvovec · RPE65
Test article vs clinical lot
A precursor AAV2-hRPE65v2 vector product was used in normal-sighted dog studies at 1.5 x 1012 vg/eye. Bridging: Commercial lot shown comparable to the clinical material by lot release data and side-by-side comparability testing
“Subretinal injection of 1.5 x 1012 vg/eye of a precursor AAV2-hRPE65v2 vector product in normal-sighted dogs resulted in ocular inflammation and retinal degeneration histologically in regions exposed to the vector.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 2Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Lyfgenia

lovotibeglogene autotemcel · HBB T87Q (LVV, ex vivo HSC)
Test article vs clinical lot
Murine bone marrow cells transduced with BB305 used in the primary and secondary transplantation studies, not patient CD34+ cells
“In vivo studies were also conducted to assess the activity and safety of mBMCs transduced with BB305 following primary and secondary transplantation in β-thalassemic and wild-type C57BL/6 mice.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 3Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Otarmeni

lunsotogene parvec · OTOF (AAV, intracochlear)
Test article vs clinical lot
Non-GMP DB-OTO lot B564TOXP1 used in all three GLP studies; clinical product manufactured under GMP. Bridging: Nonclinical material judged comparable to the clinical investigational product based on process consistency
“The nonclinical studies used non-GMP (Good Manufacturing Practice) material, while the clinical product is manufactured under GMP conditions. However, the nonclinical material was determined to be comparable to the clinical investigational drug product based on the process consistency. The same non-GMP lot (B564TOXP1) was used across all three GLP studies to ensure consistency in the pivotal safety and activity studies.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 7Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Papzimeos

zopapogene imadenovec · HPV6/11 antigens (gorilla adenovirus)
Test article vs clinical lot
Research-grade lot PRGN-2012 of the clinical vector. Bridging: Adenovirus and fusion protein stated to be identical to the clinical product
“Reviewer Note: PAPZIMEOS is referred to as PRGN-2012 (research grade lot) in this review memo. There are no differences between the adenovirus and fusion protein in PRGN-2012 compared to the clinical product, PAPZIMEOS.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 8Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Roctavian

valoctocogene roxaparvovec · Factor VIII
Test article vs clinical lot
One mouse study used a batch from early research process B, not representative of the commercial formulation; later studies used clinical-like lots. Bridging: Lots manufactured by the commercial process reported comparable to lots produced with earlier processes
“However, as this study used a batch of BMN 270 drug product manufactured according to process B, which is an early research/development process, it appears that the test article administered to CD1 mice cannot be considered as representative of the clinical formulation produced according to commercial process CPD’.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 31Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Skysona

elivaldogene autotemcel · ABCD1 (LVV, ex vivo HSC)
Test article vs clinical lot
Healthy-donor CD34+ HSCs transduced with the same Lenti-D LVV used to produce the clinical product, not patient cells. Bridging: All cells were transduced with the same LVV, Lenti-D, that is used to produce eli-cel
“Therefore, CD34+ HSCs from healthy donors (with normal ALDP expression) were used for the in vivo pharmacology/toxicology studies. All cells were transduced with the same LVV, Lenti-D, that is used to produce eli-cel”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 6Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Strimvelis

autologous CD34+ cells transduced with ADA (no INN) · ADA (gamma-retroviral, ex vivo HSC)
Test article vs clinical lot
CD34+ cells from healthy human umbilical cord blood transduced with the GSK3336223 vector, used instead of patient cells. Bridging: The test item was accepted as representative of Strimvelis
“The test item used in the biodistribution studies (referred to as GSK3235757A) comprised of CD34+ cells derived from healthy human UCB transduced with GSK3336223 vector and is accepted as representative of Strimvelis.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 25Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Tudriqev

vusolimogene oderparepvec · GALV-GP + GM-CSF (oncolytic HSV-1)
Test article vs clinical lot
Clinical product TUDRIQEV in tumor-bearing mice; murine surrogate mRP1 in healthy rats. Bridging: Clinical-site and commercial-site (Framingham) batches compared in tumor-bearing mice; no differences in toxicology or biodistribution
“Toxicology studies evaluating TUDRIQEV and mRP1 were conducted in tumor-bearing immunocompetent mice and healthy rats, respectively.”
✓ VerifiedFDA summary basis for approval, p. 13Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Vyjuvek

beremagene geperpavec · COL7A1 (HSV-1, topical)
Test article vs clinical lot
Early-phase nonclinical studies used the early (Phase 1/2) production process; late-phase nonclinical studies used the Phase 3 process. Bridging: In vivo comparability study (KB103-IVV-010) in immunocompetent mice comparing batches from the two processes
“Note: As described in Module 2.4, the VYJUVEK material for the early-phase nonclinical and clinical programs (Phase 1/2) were produced using a production process, while the material in late-phase nonclinical and clinical programs (Phase 3) were produced using a production process.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 7Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Waskyra

etuvetidigene autotemcel · WAS (LVV, ex vivo HSC)
Test article vs clinical lot
Mouse surrogate: lineage-deficient HSPCs transduced with either the w1.6W or the clinical w1.6W_mut6 vector. Bridging: The clinical w1.6W_mut6 vector was used alongside the earlier w1.6W vector in both mouse models
“In both models, the test article was comprised of a mouse surrogate test article: lineage￾deficient (Lin-) HSPCs transduced with either the w1.6W or the w1.6W_mut6 (clinical) vector.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 34Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Zevaskyn

prademagene zamikeracel · COL7A1 (RV-modified keratinocyte sheets)
Test article vs clinical lot
Representative nonclinical product: RVV-transduced human keratinocytes (cells alone) on human acellular dermal matrix, implanted into mouse wounds
“In the toxicology and biodistribution (BD) study, nonclinical products representative of ZEVASKYN comprised of human acellular dermal matrix and RVV-transduced human keratinocytes (cells alone) were implanted into excisional wounds generated in mice for 4- or 8-weeks.”
✓ VerifiedFDA summary basis for approval, p. 12Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Zolgensma

onasemnogene abeparvovec · SMN1
Test article vs clinical lot
The two 12-week GLP studies used process B material; all other safety studies used pre-process A batch material. Bridging: Current-process lots comparable to the initial clinical lot, including potency-to-vector-genome ratio and survival in a mouse SMA model
“All studies were performed with pre-process A batch material, except for the two 12-week GLP studies (process B).”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 35Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews

Zynteglo

betibeglogene autotemcel · HBB T87Q (LVV, ex vivo HSC)
Test article vs clinical lot
Surrogates: BB305 LVV-transduced thalassaemic mouse bone marrow cells or healthy human donor HSCs, not patient cells. Bridging: Surrogate test articles were transduced with BB305 LVV and administered to beta-thalassaemic and NSG mice
“the test articles used during non-clinical studies were surrogates, and consisted of either thalassaemic mouse bone marrow cells transduced with BB305 LVV, or human healthy donor HSCs transduced with BB305 LVV, administered to β-thalassaemic (Hbbth1/th1) mice and immunodeficient NOD scid gamma (NSG) mice, respectively.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 25Source ↗
Genetically modified?
Not stated in public reviews