SpeciesAcceptedBeyond the letter
No fully relevant standard species; chronic toxicity assessed in Tg2576 transgenic disease-model mouse instead
Why: Target (aggregated amyloid) absent in rodent and non-aged monkey · No relevant species
“Neither rat nor monkey is a particularly relevant species for general toxicity because of the lack of aggregated amyloid in rodent or non-aged monkey.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 2Source ↗ “the sponsor was informed that the 6-month study would be sufficient to characterize the chronic toxicity of aducanumab”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 13Source ↗ CarcinogenicityAcceptedBeyond the letter
No carcinogenicity studies for a chronic non-oncology indication
Why: Rat and mouse are not pharmacologically relevant species · No relevant species
“Carcinogenicity studies of aducanumab were not conducted because rat and mouse are not pharmacologically relevant species.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 48Source ↗ “The Division and the Executive Carcinogenicity Assessment Committee agreed (September 11, 2015) with the sponsor’s justification for not conducting carcinogenicity studies of aducanumab.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 13Source ↗ DARTAccepted
Reproductive and developmental toxicity tested only in rat, which is not a pharmacologically relevant species
Why: DART generally not required for Alzheimer's dementia because of the age of the intended population · Within the guideline · Other reason
“Therefore, rat does not appear to be a pharmacologically relevant species. Reproductive and developmental toxicity studies are generally not required by FDA for products indicated for the treatment of patients with dementia of the Alzheimer’s type because of the age of the intended population.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 48Source ↗