Juvenile toxAcceptedBeyond the letter
No juvenile toxicology study
Why: Unlikely to generate additional information; agreed in CHMP scientific advice · Other reason
“In accordance with EMA advice, a juvenile toxicology study was not conducted since it was unlikely to generate additional information from what is already available [CHMP Scientific Advice 2017]”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 29Source ↗ “The applicant´s view is agreed to.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 29Source ↗ DARTVerdict not stated
No NHP enhanced pre/postnatal study despite offspring TDAR suppression with PCSK9 antibodies; rat PPND only
Why: Unlike IgG antibodies, inclisiran is unlikely to cross the placental barrier · Pharmacology or kinetics
“An ePPND NHP study was not conducted for inclisiran, but (in contrast to IgG-based Mab therapeutics) inclisiran is unlikely to cross the placental barrier.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 6Source ↗ Impurity or metaboliteAcceptedBeyond the letter
Unspecified impurity limit exceeds ICH Q3A threshold; qualified by levels in pivotal toxicology lots, no dedicated impurity studies
Why: Impurities qualified by the repeat-dose toxicity studies · Other reason
“The limit for the single largest individual unspecified impurity of % exceeds the ICH Q3A threshold of 0.2% based on a 300 mg dose.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 17Source ↗ “The absence of dedicated impurity studies is adequately justified. Impurities can be considered qualified based on the repeat dose toxicity studies.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 42Source ↗ Safety pharmacologyVerdict not stated
No dedicated neurological safety pharmacology study; neurological evaluations in 40-week monkey study
“A dedicated safety pharmacology study to evaluate neurological function was not performed; however, neurological evaluations were incorporated into the 40- week repeat dose toxicology study”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 23Source ↗