OtherCriticised but accepted
No conventional toxicology or pharmacokinetic studies; risk-based approach justification instead
Why: Considerable clinical efficacy and safety experience; risk-based approach under the ATMP framework · Human data · Within the guideline
“In line with Annex I, part IV of Directive 2001/83/EC applied to ATMP, a risk-based approach discussion was provided by the applicant to further justify the extent of non-clinical data provided in the dossier and particularly the lack of pharmacokinetic and toxicity studies.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 35Source ↗ “Since considerable clinical experience is now available on the efficacy and safety of sipuleucel-T in the proposed indication, no additional studies in animals are needed.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 36Source ↗ Safety pharmacologyAcceptedBeyond the letter
No conventional safety pharmacology studies; only non-GLP observations within rat pharmacodynamic studies
Why: Sufficient clinical safety data from clinical trials and US post-marketing experience · Human data
“Since sufficient clinical safety data are available from clinical trials and post-marketing experience in the USA, no dedicated non-clinical safety pharmacology studies with sipuleucel-T are deemed necessary at this stage.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 35Source ↗ BiodistributionCriticised but acceptedBeyond the letter
No cell distribution or trafficking studies
Why: Available clinical efficacy and safety data · Human data
“Data on distribution and trafficking of cells would have been useful to know whether cells distribute to the prostate or non-prostate tissues expressing PAP antigen or to their draining lymph node. However, in view of the available clinical efficacy and safety data, such a study would not add relevant clinical information at this stage.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 35Source ↗