Nonclinical precedent Request an invite

Vabysmo

faricimab
multispecificVEGF-A x Ang-2Humanized bispecific IgG1 CrossMab, Fc-silenced (no FcγR/FcRn binding)Neovascular AMD, diabetic macular edema, diabetic retinopathy
Species
MonkeyRabbit
Longest study
26 wk
Genotox
Not conducted Not conducted
Carcinogenicity
Not conducted Not conducted
Repro
Conducted Conducted
First dose
Conducted Stated

Speciesopen answer page →

Species
Cynomolgus monkey only for pivotal tox (rabbit dropped after early studies)
“She agreed, as the Applicant proposed, that the monkey alone should be used in the planned 6-month chronic toxicity study.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 26Source ↗
Why that species
100% VEGF sequence homology and comparable Ang-2 binding affinity in monkey; rabbit unsuitable (severe toxicity, ADA)
“The monkey was selected as the most relevant species based on 100% sequence homology (VEGF) and binding affinity (Ang-2) comparable to humans.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 48Source ↗
Surrogate molecule
No surrogate; clinical molecule tested in monkey (and rabbit in early studies)
“Faricimab (RO6867461) bound to full length Ang 2 with high affinity across species including human, cynomolgus monkey, rabbit, and mouse, measured by Surface Plasmon Resonance (SPR).”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 18Source ↗
Species: general tox
Cynomolgus monkey (up to 6 months); rabbit (up to 2 weeks)
“Repeat-dose toxicity studies of up to 2 weeks in rabbits and up to 6 months in cynomolgus monkeys have been conducted.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 31Source ↗
Species: DART
Cynomolgus monkey (EFD); pre/postnatal study not feasible due to ADA and exposure loss
“A pre- and postnatal development study could not be conducted in cynomolgus monkeys due to ADA formation and exposure loss observed in general toxicology studies preventing sufficient systemic exposure with faricimab in such a study.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 34Source ↗
Species: carcinogenicity
Not conducted (no relevant binding to rodent VEGF-A)
“No standard rodent carcinogenicity studies have been conducted as faricimab showed no relevant binding to mouse or rat VEGF-A.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 37Source ↗
Surrogate used in
No surrogate used; clinical molecule in cynomolgus monkey, the only cross-reactive species
“In summary, no target-related toxicological changes were observed up to the highest doses tested with faricimab including the evaluation of repeat-dose toxicity, male and female fertility, and embryofetal development using cynomolgus monkeys, the only feasible species cross-reactive to faricimab.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 35Source ↗

Study lengthopen answer page →

Longest pivotal study
26 weeks
“The 26-week IVT monkey study (report # 1057630) was submitted in draft form on 3/24/2015 (SD # 21), and in final form on 7/27/2015 (SD # 24).”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 27Source ↗
Pivotal GLP studies
GLP 2-month IVT/IV monkey study with 4-week recovery; 26-week monthly IVT monkey study with 13-week recovery
“Study # 1053361, 2-Month Toxicity and Toxicokinetic Study with RO6867461 Following Intravitreous and Intravenous Administration in Cynomolgus Monkeys with a 4-Week Recovery Phase”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 17Source ↗
Route in tox
Intravitreal (monthly, one eye) plus IV arms; IV for EFD study
“Safety pharmacology endpoints were included as part of the 2-month cynomolgus monkey study (neurological exam, respiration rate, body temperature) following IVT (1.5 to 6 mg/eye, once monthly, one eye dosed) and IV dosing (5 mg/kg once monthly)”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 22Source ↗

Skipped studiesopen answer page →

Genotoxicity
Not conducted (ICH S6(R1))
“In accordance with ICH S6(R1) guidance, standard genotoxicity studies were not conducted with faricimab.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 37Source ↗
Carcinogenicity
Not conducted (no rodent VEGF-A binding); weight-of-evidence carcinogenicity assessment document
“No standard rodent carcinogenicity studies have been conducted as faricimab showed no relevant binding to mouse or rat VEGF-A.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 37Source ↗
Reproductive & developmental
Monkey EFD (IV, GD20-48): non-dose-dependent increase in abortions, no NOAEL; fertility via 6-month study organ histology
“An embryofetal development (EFD) study in cynomolgus monkeys showed an increase incidence of abortions in faricimab treated monkeys at IV doses of 1 or 3 mg/kg administered weekly on gestation days 20 to 48.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 6Source ↗
Safety pharmacology
No stand-alone studies; endpoints in 2-month and 6-month monkey tox studies
“Stand-alone safety pharmacology studies were not performed.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 22Source ↗
Genotox: Ames
Not conducted (ICH S6(R1))
“In accordance with ICH S6(R1) guidance, standard genotoxicity studies were not conducted with faricimab.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 37Source ↗
Genotox: in vitro mammalian
Not conducted (ICH S6(R1))
“In accordance with ICH S6(R1) guidance, standard genotoxicity studies were not conducted with faricimab.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 37Source ↗
Genotox: in vivo
Not conducted (ICH S6(R1))
“In accordance with ICH S6(R1) guidance, standard genotoxicity studies were not conducted with faricimab.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 37Source ↗
Carcinogenicity model
Not conducted; carcinogenicity assessment document (weight of evidence)
“No standard rodent carcinogenicity studies have been conducted as faricimab showed no relevant binding to mouse or rat VEGF-A.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 37Source ↗
Carcinogenicity timing
Not required; weight of evidence does not suggest carcinogenic potential
“No standard rodent carcinogenicity studies have been conducted as faricimab is not fully cross-reactive in rodents. The intended anti-angiogenic effects of faricimab and the weight of evidence do not suggest a carcinogenic potential of faricimab.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 34Source ↗
hERG / QT
No hERG assay; monkey telemetry ECG incl. QT/QTc comparable to controls
“In both studies, heart rate and ECG endpoints, including QT and QTc, were comparable between control and faricimab-dosed groups.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 34Source ↗

First doseopen answer page →

First-in-human starting dose
Starting dose 0.5 mg/eye IVT supported by monkey tox data (6 mg/eye high dose not initially supported; dose escalation gated)
“The proposed clinical starting dose of 0.5 mg/eye is supported by the nonclinical data but the high dose of 6.0 mg/eye is not.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 26Source ↗
NOAEL / key findings
Ocular NOAEL 0.5 mg/eye (ADA-linked ocular inflammation at ≥1.5 mg/eye); systemic NOAEL 1.5 mg/eye; heart squamous cyst/plaque at high dose
“For ocular toxicity, the NOAEL was 0.5 mg/eye (the low dose). The LOAEL was 1.5 mg/eye (the mid-dose), due to ocular inflammation (observed by ophthalmology and confirmed by histopathology).”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 28Source ↗

Risksopen answer page →

Immune & cytokine safety
ADA-driven immune-complex ocular inflammation in monkey; minimal in vitro cytokine release or complement activation
“These data support that the ocular findings were primarily related to ADA formation and not a direct pro-inflammatory effect of faricimab.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 50Source ↗
Biodistribution & persistence
Low systemic bioavailability after IVT (2.2% rabbit, 13% monkey); faster clearance from FcRn-silenced Fc; vitreous cleared after recovery
“Bioavailability was 2.2% in the rabbit and 13% in the cynomolgus monkey.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 23Source ↗
Modality-specific risk
Intraocular inflammation/immunogenicity and possible heart findings; anti-angiogenic reproductive risk
“The main adverse findings identified in the nonclinical studies were ocular inflammation and various findings in the heart in both rabbits and monkeys.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 6Source ↗
Anti-drug antibodies: animals
ADA in 2- and 6-month monkey studies, correlated with reduced systemic exposure; exposure still sufficient
“A correlation between ADA development and reduced systemic exposure was observed in both 2- and 6-month GLP toxicology studies; this did not compromise the overall readout of the studies because there was still sufficient exposure in ADA-positive animals.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 30Source ↗
Anti-drug antibodies: patients
Anti-faricimab antibodies in ~8% to 10.4% of treated patients (0.8-1.8% pre-treatment)
“In the nAMD, DME, and RVO studies, the pre-treatment incidence of anti-faricimab antibodies was approximately 0.8 to 1.8%. After initiation of dosing, the incidence of anti-faricimab antibodies was approximately 8% to 10.4% in patients treated with VABYSMO across studies.”
✓ VerifiedUS prescribing informationSource ↗
Label warnings
  • Endophthalmitis and Retinal Detachments
  • Increase in Intraocular Pressure
  • Thromboembolic Events
  • Retinal Vasculitis and/or Retinal Vascular Occlusion
Ocular toxicityThrombosis & embolism
US prescribing information, Warnings and PrecautionsDailyMed ↗

Tox packageopen answer page →

Before first-in-human

First-in-human: where
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.
Repeat-dose tox before first-in-human
2-month IVT/IV cynomolgus monkey study with 4-week recovery, reviewed under the initial IND
“The following studies were reviewed under the initial IND by Dr Lansita (9-23- 2013).  Study # 1053361, 2-Month Toxicity and Toxicokinetic Study with RO6867461 following Intravitreous and Intravenous Administration in Cynomolgus Monkeys with a 4-Week Recovery Phase”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 26Source ↗
First-in-human starting dose
Starting dose 0.5 mg/eye IVT supported by monkey tox data (6 mg/eye high dose not initially supported; dose escalation gated)
“The proposed clinical starting dose of 0.5 mg/eye is supported by the nonclinical data but the high dose of 6.0 mg/eye is not.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 26Source ↗

Longest repeat-dose systemic studies

Longest repeat-dose study and recovery
26-week once-monthly IVT cynomolgus monkey study with 13-week recovery
“Study # 8292406, 26-Week Partial Ascending-Dose Toxicity and Toxicokinetic Study Following Once Monthly Intravitreous Injections in Cynomolgus Monkeys with a 13-Week Recovery”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 17Source ↗
Pivotal GLP studies
GLP 2-month IVT/IV monkey study with 4-week recovery; 26-week monthly IVT monkey study with 13-week recovery
“Study # 1053361, 2-Month Toxicity and Toxicokinetic Study with RO6867461 Following Intravitreous and Intravenous Administration in Cynomolgus Monkeys with a 4-Week Recovery Phase”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 17Source ↗

DART package

Species: DART
Cynomolgus monkey (EFD); pre/postnatal study not feasible due to ADA and exposure loss
“A pre- and postnatal development study could not be conducted in cynomolgus monkeys due to ADA formation and exposure loss observed in general toxicology studies preventing sufficient systemic exposure with faricimab in such a study.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 34Source ↗
Reproductive & developmental
Monkey EFD (IV, GD20-48): non-dose-dependent increase in abortions, no NOAEL; fertility via 6-month study organ histology
“An embryofetal development (EFD) study in cynomolgus monkeys showed an increase incidence of abortions in faricimab treated monkeys at IV doses of 1 or 3 mg/kg administered weekly on gestation days 20 to 48.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 6Source ↗
PPND / ePPND: when
PPND in cynomolgus monkey not conducted: ADA formation and exposure loss prevent sufficient systemic exposure
“A pre- and postnatal development study could not be conducted in cynomolgus monkeys due to ADA formation and exposure loss observed in general toxicology studies preventing sufficient systemic exposure with faricimab in such a study.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 34Source ↗

Carcinogenicity

Species: carcinogenicity
Not conducted (no relevant binding to rodent VEGF-A)
“No standard rodent carcinogenicity studies have been conducted as faricimab showed no relevant binding to mouse or rat VEGF-A.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 37Source ↗
Carcinogenicity model
Not conducted; carcinogenicity assessment document (weight of evidence)
“No standard rodent carcinogenicity studies have been conducted as faricimab showed no relevant binding to mouse or rat VEGF-A.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 37Source ↗
Carcinogenicity timing
Not required; weight of evidence does not suggest carcinogenic potential
“No standard rodent carcinogenicity studies have been conducted as faricimab is not fully cross-reactive in rodents. The intended anti-angiogenic effects of faricimab and the weight of evidence do not suggest a carcinogenic potential of faricimab.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 34Source ↗

Safety marginopen answer page →

Safety margin at NOAEL
Ocular NOAEL 0.5 mg/eye (6-month monkey): exposure margin only around 1x human
“the exposure margin at the NOAEL of 0.5 mg/eye/dose (based on the animal immune mediated ocular effects in the 6 month monkey study) with mean AUC(0-72h) = 20200 ng•hr/mL and a mean Cmax = 220 ng/mL on Day 141, is only around 1 when compared to values of human exposure”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 33Source ↗
NOAEL / key findings
Ocular NOAEL 0.5 mg/eye (ADA-linked ocular inflammation at ≥1.5 mg/eye); systemic NOAEL 1.5 mg/eye; heart squamous cyst/plaque at high dose
“For ocular toxicity, the NOAEL was 0.5 mg/eye (the low dose). The LOAEL was 1.5 mg/eye (the mid-dose), due to ocular inflammation (observed by ophthalmology and confirmed by histopathology).”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 28Source ↗

Efficacy evidenceopen answer page →

Efficacy evidence
Laser-induced choroidal neovascularization (nAMD model) in cynomolgus monkeys, IVT faricimab vs ranibizumab
“In a laser-induced model of choroidal neovascularization (CNV) in cynomolgus monkeys, faricimab reduced the formation of CNV and subsequent injury to the retina due to lesion formation to a significantly greater degree compared to anti-VEGF-A monoclonal antibody (mAb) alone.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 18Source ↗
Why that model
No rodent DME model: faricimab reacts with human, not rodent, VEGF-A
“An alternative rodent model for DME was not tested because the antibody in question reacts with human VEGF-A antigen and not with rodent, so classical animal models of diabetes could not work according to the applicant.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 29Source ↗
Reviewer's view of the efficacy data
CHMP: in vivo model covered nAMD only, not DME; not a blocking issue
“The CHMP noted that the Applicant presented the in vivo experimental model only for nAMD and not for DME, in contrast with the intended indications of faricimab.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 29Source ↗

Flexibilityopen answer page →

Flexibility accepted
CarcinogenicityAccepted
No rodent carcinogenicity studies for a chronic ophthalmic product; weight-of-evidence assessment instead
Why: Not fully cross-reactive in rodents; anti-angiogenic mechanism and weight of evidence suggest no carcinogenic potential (ICH S6 (R1)) · Within the guideline · No relevant species · Weight of evidence
“No standard rodent carcinogenicity studies have been conducted as faricimab is not fully cross-reactive in rodents. The intended anti-angiogenic effects of faricimab and the weight of evidence do not suggest a carcinogenic potential of faricimab.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 34Source ↗
“Faricimab is a biotechnology-derived pharmaceutical, and the need for animal studies for carcinogenic potential of faricimab has been assessed, consistent with ICH S6 (R1) guidance.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 34Source ↗
DARTAcceptedBeyond the letter
No pre- and postnatal development study; literature on VEGF-A/ANG-2 knockouts used for risk
Why: ADA formation and exposure loss in monkeys prevent sufficient systemic exposure · Pharmacology or kinetics · Weight of evidence
“A pre- and postnatal development study could not be conducted in cynomolgus monkeys due to ADA formation and exposure loss observed in general toxicology studies preventing sufficient systemic exposure with faricimab in such a study.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 34Source ↗
“This reviewer agrees with the Applicant conclusions.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 47Source ↗
DARTAccepted with a conditionBeyond the letter
Fertility assessed only by reproductive organ weights and histopathology in the 6-month study; menstrual cycling not monitored
Why: Risk to female reproductive function already established; label states possible risk to reproductive capacity · Pharmacology or kinetics
“The Applicant explained that menstrual cycling was not explicitly monitored in the 6-month monkey study as it would not have contributed to human risk assessment in view of the already established risk of perturbation of female reproductive function.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 39Source ↗
“As the mechanism of action support a theoretical risk for effects on fertility, this reviewer agrees with including language in the proposed label that faricimab may pose a risk to reproductive capacity (Sections 8.3 and 13.1).”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 39Source ↗
Safety marginCriticised but acceptedBeyond the letter
Exposure margin at the ocular NOAEL (0.5 mg/eye/dose, 6-month monkey) only around 1x human
Why: Ocular immune-mediated effects seen in animals were not recorded in the clinical program · Human data
“the exposure margin at the NOAEL of 0.5 mg/eye/dose (based on the animal immune mediated ocular effects in the 6 month monkey study) with mean AUC(0-72h) = 20200 ng•hr/mL and a mean Cmax = 220 ng/mL on Day 141, is only around 1 when compared to values of human exposure”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 33Source ↗
“The ocular immune-mediated effects observed in animal studies were not recorded in the completed clinical development program with faricimab.”
✓ VerifiedEMA assessment report, p. 33Source ↗
First doseAccepted with a conditionBeyond the letter
At IND, nonclinical data supported the 0.5 mg/eye starting dose but not the 6.0 mg/eye high dose
Why: Unclear whether ocular inflammation is direct or ADA-mediated; clinical protocol adjustment recommended
“The proposed clinical starting dose of 0.5 mg/eye is supported by the nonclinical data but the high dose of 6.0 mg/eye is not.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 26Source ↗
“Since it is not known whether RO6867461 causes direct inflammation or indirect inflammation through an ADA response in the eye, it is recommended that the clinical protocol be adjusted to accommodate safety concern.”
✓ VerifiedFDA pharmacology/toxicology review, p. 26Source ↗

Similar precedents