Nonclinical precedent Request an invite

Tecvayli: what was done before first-in-human, and what came after?

teclistamab · BCMA x CD3

Before first-in-human

First-in-human: where
US and ex-US (Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, UK): first-in-human study
“Trial Location: This study was conducted at 39 centers that treated at least 1 subject in Belgium (2), Canada (4), France (6), Germany (3), Italy (2), Netherlands (1), Spain (7), Sweden (3), the United Kingdom (3), and the United States (8).”
✓ VerifiedFDA multi-discipline review, p. 73Source ↗
Repeat-dose tox before first-in-human
Not stated in public reviews
Not reported in the public reviews. Reviewers summarise selectively, so this usually means it wasn't discussed publicly, not that it wasn't studied.
First-in-human starting dose
Not stated in public reviews
Why it's blank

The public FDA and EMA reviews of Tecvayli don't say how the first human dose was chosen. That rationale is in the IND, which is confidential, so it is missing for most approved products.

How it's usually set for multispecifics

ADCs with cytotoxic payloads follow the S9 rules (1/10 STD10 or 1/6 HNSTD of the ADC, scaled by body surface area). For immune agonists, a MABEL-based start dose should be considered instead.

“For example, for cytotoxic payloads, the starting clinical dose can be determined using either 1/10th the Severely Toxic Dose (STD) in 10% of animals (STD10) in rodents or 1/6th the Highest Non- Severely Toxic Dose (HNSTD) in non-rodents, for the ADC based on body surface area, depending on which is the most appropriate and/or sensitive species.”
✓ VerifiedICH 2018: ICH S9 Guideline: Nonclinical Evaluation for Anticancer…, p. 15Source ↗
This product's starting point

NOAEL / key findings: NOEL 30 mg/kg/week (highest dose); no PD activity or adverse effects in monkey (FDA multi-discipline review, p. 44)

Full method, every step sourced →

Longest repeat-dose systemic studies

Longest repeat-dose study and recovery
5-week weekly IV cynomolgus monkey study with 8-week recovery
“Monkeys were administered teclistamab (0 [control], 1, 10, or 30 mg/kg/dose, IV) once weekly for five total doses followed by an 8-week recovery period.”
✓ VerifiedFDA multi-discipline review, p. 38Source ↗
Pivotal GLP studies
GLP 5-week weekly IV monkey study (1, 10, 30 mg/kg) with 8-week recovery; 3-month study waived; rabbit SC local tolerance
“Monkeys were administered teclistamab (0 [control], 1, 10, or 30 mg/kg/dose, IV) once weekly for five total doses followed by an 8-week recovery period.”
✓ VerifiedFDA multi-discipline review, p. 38Source ↗

DART package

Species: DART
Not conducted; weight-of-evidence assessment (no informative species)
“No reproductive and developmental toxicity studies were conducted for teclistamab.”
✓ VerifiedFDA multi-discipline review, p. 46Source ↗
Reproductive & developmental
Not conducted; weight-of-evidence assessment (BCMA biology, knockout mice); no reproductive tissue findings in 5-week study
“No reproductive and developmental toxicity studies were conducted for teclistamab.”
✓ VerifiedFDA multi-discipline review, p. 46Source ↗
PPND / ePPND: when
Not conducted: reproductive and developmental toxicity studies would not be meaningful and are not warranted
“Similarly, reproductive and developmental toxicity studies would not provide meaningful information and are not warranted to support a BLA.”
✓ VerifiedFDA multi-discipline review, p. 38Source ↗

Carcinogenicity

Species: carcinogenicity
Not conducted (ICH S9, advanced cancer)
“Carcinogenicity studies were not conducted with teclistamab.”
✓ VerifiedFDA multi-discipline review, p. 46Source ↗
Carcinogenicity model
Not conducted (ICH S9, advanced cancer)
“Carcinogenicity studies were not conducted with teclistamab. As indicated in the ICH S9 guidance, carcinogenicity studies are not warranted to support marketing for therapeutics intended to treat patients with advanced cancer.”
✓ VerifiedFDA multi-discipline review, p. 46Source ↗
Carcinogenicity timing
Not required; FDA agreed carcinogenicity studies not needed
“We agree that carcinogenicity studies are not needed to support the approval of BLA 761261.”
✓ VerifiedFDA multi-discipline review, p. 46Source ↗

Same question, other multispecifics

Lunsumio

mosunetuzumab · CD20 x CD3
US, Republic of Korea, Canada: dose-escalation part (Group A) of study GO29781 in patients with R/R B-cell NHL

Rybrevant

amivantamab · EGFR x MET
US and ex-US (Australia, Canada, China, France, Japan, Korea, Spain, Taiwan, UK): first-in-human dose escalation/expansion in advanced NSCLC

Talvey

talquetamab · GPRC5D x CD3
US and ex-US (Belgium, France, Germany, Israel, Netherlands, Poland, Korea, Spain): first-in-human dose escalation/expansion

Ziihera

zanidatamab · HER2 x HER2 (biparatopic)
North America and South Korea: first-in-human study ZWI-ZW25-101 in HER2-expressing cancers

Bizengri

zenocutuzumab · HER2 x HER3
Not stated in public reviews

Blincyto

blinatumomab · CD19 x CD3
Not stated in public reviews

Columvi

glofitamab · CD20 x CD3
Not stated in public reviews

Elrexfio

elranatamab · BCMA x CD3
Not stated in public reviews

Epkinly

epcoritamab · CD20 x CD3
Not stated in public reviews

Hemlibra

emicizumab · FIXa x FX
Not stated in public reviews

Imdelltra

tarlatamab · DLL3 x CD3
Not stated in public reviews

Kimmtrak

tebentafusp · CD3 x gp100 (TCR fusion)
Not stated in public reviews

Korjuny

catumaxomab · EpCAM x CD3
Not stated in public reviews

Lynozyfic

linvoseltamab · BCMA x CD3
Not stated in public reviews

Ordspono

odronextamab · CD20 x CD3
Not stated in public reviews

Removab

catumaxomab · EpCAM x CD3
Not stated in public reviews

Vabysmo

faricimab · VEGF-A x Ang-2
Not stated in public reviews

Summary across all 18 multispecifics →