throbber
1
`B1.0 NL 4063 AMP
`
`GEMZAR®
`(GEMCITABINE HCl)
`FOR INJECTION
`DESCRIPTION
`Gemzar® (gemcitabine HCl) is a nucleoside analogue that exhibits antitumor activity.
`Gemcitabine HCl is 2´-deoxy-2´,2´-difluorocytidine monohydrochloride (β-isomer).
`The structural formula is as follows:
`
`NH 2•HCl
`
`N
`
`HO
`
`O
`
`N
`
`O
`
`F F
`
`H
`OH
`The empirical formula for gemcitabine HCl is C9H11F2N3O4 • HCl. It has a molecular weight
`of 299.66.
`Gemcitabine HCl is a white to off-white solid. It is soluble in water, slightly soluble in
`methanol, and practically insoluble in ethanol and polar organic solvents.
`The clinical formulation is supplied in a sterile form for intravenous use only. Vials of Gemzar
`contain either 200 mg or 1 g of gemcitabine HCl (expressed as free base) formulated with
`mannitol (200 mg or 1 g, respectively) and sodium acetate (12.5 mg or 62.5 mg, respectively) as
`a sterile lyophilized powder. Hydrochloric acid and/or sodium hydroxide may have been added
`for pH adjustment.
`
`CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
`Gemcitabine exhibits cell phase specificity, primarily killing cells undergoing DNA synthesis
`(S-phase) and also blocking the progression of cells through the G1/S-phase boundary.
`Gemcitabine is metabolized intracellularly by nucleoside kinases to the active
`diphosphate (dFdCDP) and triphosphate (dFdCTP) nucleosides. The cytotoxic effect of
`gemcitabine is attributed to a combination of two actions of the diphosphate and the triphosphate
`nucleosides, which leads to inhibition of DNA synthesis. First, gemcitabine diphosphate inhibits
`ribonucleotide reductase, which is responsible for catalyzing the reactions that generate the
`deoxynucleoside triphosphates for DNA synthesis. Inhibition of this enzyme by the diphosphate
`nucleoside causes a reduction in the concentrations of deoxynucleotides, including dCTP.
`Second, gemcitabine triphosphate competes with dCTP for incorporation into DNA. The
`reduction in the intracellular concentration of dCTP (by the action of the diphosphate) enhances
`the incorporation of gemcitabine triphosphate into DNA (self-potentiation). After the
`gemcitabine nucleotide is incorporated into DNA, only one additional nucleotide is added to the
`growing DNA strands. After this addition, there is inhibition of further DNA synthesis. DNA
`polymerase epsilon is unable to remove the gemcitabine nucleotide and repair the growing DNA
`strands (masked chain termination). In CEM T lymphoblastoid cells, gemcitabine induces
`internucleosomal DNA fragmentation, one of the characteristics of programmed cell death.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`29
`30
`31
`32
`33
`34
`35
`
`AVENTIS EXHIBIT 2208
`Mylan v. Aventis IPR2016-00712
`
`

`
`2
`
`
`
`36
`37
`38
`39
`40
`41
`42
`43
`44
`45
`46
`47
`48
`49
`50
`51
`52
`53
`54
`55
`56
`57
`58
`59
`60
`61
`
`62
`63
`64
`65
`66
`67
`68
`69
`70
`71
`72
`73
`74
`75
`
`Gemcitabine demonstrated dose-dependent synergistic activity with cisplatin in vitro. No
`effect of cisplatin on gemcitabine triphosphate accumulation or DNA double-strand breaks was
`observed. In vivo, gemcitabine showed activity in combination with cisplatin against the LX-1
`and CALU-6 human lung xenografts, but minimal activity was seen with the NCI-H460 or
`NCI-H520 xenografts. Gemcitabine was synergistic with cisplatin in the Lewis lung murine
`xenograft. Sequential exposure to gemcitabine 4 hours before cisplatin produced the greatest
`interaction.
`Human Pharmacokinetics — Gemcitabine disposition was studied in 5 patients who received a
`single 1000 mg/m2/30 minute infusion of radiolabeled drug. Within one (1) week, 92% to
`98% of the dose was recovered, almost entirely in the urine. Gemcitabine (<10%) and the
`inactive uracil metabolite, 2´-deoxy-2´,2´-difluorouridine (dFdU), accounted for 99% of the
`excreted dose. The metabolite dFdU is also found in plasma. Gemcitabine plasma protein
`binding is negligible.
`The pharmacokinetics of gemcitabine were examined in 353 patients, about 2/3 men, with
`various solid tumors. Pharmacokinetic parameters were derived using data from patients treated
`for varying durations of therapy given weekly with periodic rest weeks and using both short
`infusions (<70 minutes) and long infusions (70 to 285 minutes). The total Gemzar dose varied
`from 500 to 3600 mg/m2.
`Gemcitabine pharmacokinetics are linear and are described by a 2-compartment model.
`Population pharmacokinetic analyses of combined single and multiple dose studies showed that
`the volume of distribution of gemcitabine was significantly influenced by duration of infusion
`and gender. Clearance was affected by age and gender. Differences in either clearance or volume
`of distribution based on patient characteristics or the duration of infusion result in changes in
`half-life and plasma concentrations. Table 1 shows plasma clearance and half-life of gemcitabine
`following short infusions for typical patients by age and gender.
`
`
`Table 1: Gemcitabine Clearance and Half-Life for the “Typical” Patient
`Half-Lifea
`Half-Lifea
`Age
`Clearance
`Clearance
`Men
`Women
`Men
`Women
`(L/hr/m2)
`(L/hr/m2)
`(min)
`(min)
`92.2
`69.4
`42
`49
`29
`75.7
`57.0
`48
`57
`45
`55.1
`41.5
`61
`73
`65
`40.7
`30.7
`79
`94
`79
`a Half-life for patients receiving a short infusion (<70 min).
`
`Gemcitabine half-life for short infusions ranged from 32 to 94 minutes, and the value for long
`infusions varied from 245 to 638 minutes, depending on age and gender, reflecting a greatly
`increased volume of distribution with longer infusions. The lower clearance in women and the
`elderly results in higher concentrations of gemcitabine for any given dose.
`The volume of distribution was increased with infusion length. Volume of distribution of
`gemcitabine was 50 L/m2 following infusions lasting <70 minutes, indicating that gemcitabine,
`after short infusions, is not extensively distributed into tissues. For long infusions, the volume of
`distribution rose to 370 L/m2, reflecting slow equilibration of gemcitabine within the tissue
`compartment.
`The maximum plasma concentrations of dFdU (inactive metabolite) were achieved up to
`30 minutes after discontinuation of the infusions and the metabolite is excreted in urine without
`undergoing further biotransformation. The metabolite did not accumulate with weekly dosing,
`
`

`
`3
`
`
`
`but its elimination is dependent on renal excretion, and could accumulate with decreased renal
`function.
`The effects of significant renal or hepatic insufficiency on the disposition of gemcitabine have
`not been assessed.
`The active metabolite, gemcitabine triphosphate, can be extracted from peripheral blood
`mononuclear cells. The half-life of the terminal phase for gemcitabine triphosphate from
`mononuclear cells ranges from 1.7 to 19.4 hours.
`Drug Interactions — When Gemzar (1250 mg/m2 on Days 1 and 8) and cisplatin (75 mg/m2 on
`Day 1) were administered in NSCLC patients, the clearance of gemcitabine on Day 1 was
`128 L/hr/m2 and on Day 8 was 107 L/hr/m2. The clearance of cisplatin in the same study was
`reported to be 3.94 mL/min/m2 with a corresponding half-life of 134 hours (see Drug
`Interactions under PRECAUTIONS).
`CLINICAL STUDIES
`Breast Cancer — Data from a multi-national, randomized Phase 3 study (529 patients) support
`the use of Gemzar in combination with paclitaxel for treatment of breast cancer patients who
`have received prior adjuvant/neoadjuvant anthracycline chemotherapy unless clinically
`contraindicated. Gemzar 1250 mg/m2 was administered on Days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle with
`paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 administered prior to Gemzar on Day 1 of each cycle. Single-agent
`paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 was administered on Day 1 of each 21-day cycle as the control arm.
`The addition of Gemzar to paclitaxel resulted in statistically significant improvement in time to
`documented disease progression and overall response rate compared to monotherapy with
`paclitaxel as shown in Table 2 and Figure 1. Further, there was a strong trend toward improved
`survival for the group given Gemzar based on an interim survival analysis.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`p<0.0001
`
`
`p<0.0001
`p<0.0001
`
`
`2.9 (2.6, 3.7)
`5.2 (4.2, 5.6)
`0.650 (0.524, 0.805)
`
`Table 2: Gemzar Plus Paclitaxel Versus Paclitaxel in Breast Cancer
`
`Gemzar/Paclitaxel
`Paclitaxel
`Number of patients
`267
`262
`Median age, years
`53
`52
` Range
`26 to 83
`26 to 75
`Metastatic disease
`97.0%
`96.9%
`Baseline KPSa ≥90
`70.4%
`74.4%
`Number of tumor sites
`
`
` 1-2
`56.6%
`58.8%
` ≥3
`43.4%
`41.2%
`Visceral disease
`73.4%
`72.9%
`Prior anthracycline
`96.6%
`95.8%
`
`
`
`Time to Documented Disease
`
`
`Progressionb
` Median (95%, C.I.), months
` Hazard Ratio (95% C.I.)
`Overall Response Rateb
` (95%, C.I.)
`a Karnofsky Performance Status.
`b These represent reconciliation of investigator and Independent Review Committee assessments according to a
`predefined algorithm.
`
`
`40.8% (34.9, 46.7)
`
`
`22.1% (17.1, 27.2)
`
`76
`77
`78
`79
`80
`81
`82
`83
`84
`85
`86
`87
`88
`89
`90
`91
`92
`93
`94
`95
`96
`97
`98
`99
`
`100
`101
`102
`
`

`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`103
`104
`
`105
`106
`107
`108
`109
`110
`111
`112
`113
`114
`115
`116
`117
`118
`119
`120
`121
`122
`123
`124
`125
`126
`127
`128
`129
`130
`131
`132
`
`
`Figure 1: Kaplan-Meier Curve of Time to Documented Disease Progression in Gemzar
`plus Paclitaxel versus Paclitaxel Breast Cancer Study (N=529).
`
`
`Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) — Data from 2 randomized clinical studies
`(657 patients) support the use of Gemzar in combination with cisplatin for the first-line treatment
`of patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC.
`Gemzar plus cisplatin versus cisplatin: This study was conducted in Europe, the US, and
`Canada in 522 patients with inoperable Stage IIIA, IIIB, or IV NSCLC who had not received
`2 was administered on Days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day
`prior chemotherapy. Gemzar 1000 mg/m
`cycle with cisplatin 100 mg/m2 administered on Day 1 of each cycle. Single-agent cisplatin
`100 mg/m2 was administered on Day 1 of each 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was survival.
`Patient demographics are shown in Table 3. An imbalance with regard to histology was observed
`with 48% of patients on the cisplatin arm and 37% of patients on the Gemzar plus cisplatin arm
`having adenocarcinoma.
`The Kaplan-Meier survival curve is shown in Figure 2. Median survival time on the Gemzar
`plus cisplatin arm was 9.0 months compared to 7.6 months on the single-agent cisplatin arm
`(Logrank p=0.008, two-sided). Median time to disease progression was 5.2 months on the
`Gemzar plus cisplatin arm compared to 3.7 months on the cisplatin arm (Logrank p=0.009,
`two-sided). The objective response rate on the Gemzar plus cisplatin arm was 26% compared to
`10% with cisplatin (Fisher’s Exact p<0.0001, two-sided). No difference between treatment arms
`with regard to duration of response was observed.
`Gemzar plus cisplatin versus etoposide plus cisplatin: A second, multi-center, study in
`2 on Days 1 and 8, and
`Stage IIIB or IV NSCLC randomized 135 patients to Gemzar 1250 mg/m
`cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on Day 1 of a 21-day cycle or to etoposide 100 mg/m2 I.V. on Days 1, 2,
`and 3 and cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on Day 1 on a 21-day cycle (Table 3).
`There was no significant difference in survival between the two treatment arms (Logrank
`p=0.18, two-sided). The median survival was 8.7 months for the Gemzar plus cisplatin arm
`
`

`
`5
`
`
`
`133
`134
`135
`136
`137
`138
`139
`140
`141
`142
`143
`144
`145
`
`versus 7.0 months for the etoposide plus cisplatin arm. Median time to disease progression for
`the Gemzar plus cisplatin arm was 5.0 months compared to 4.1 months on the etoposide plus
`cisplatin arm (Logrank p=0.015, two-sided). The objective response rate for the Gemzar plus
`cisplatin arm was 33% compared to 14% on the etoposide plus cisplatin arm (Fisher’s Exact
`p=0.01, two-sided).
`Quality of Life (QOL): QOL was a secondary endpoint in both randomized studies. In the
`Gemzar plus cisplatin versus cisplatin study, QOL was measured using the FACT-L, which
`assessed physical, social, emotional and functional well-being, and lung cancer symptoms. In the
`study of Gemzar plus cisplatin versus etoposide plus cisplatin, QOL was measured using the
`EORTC QLQ-C30 and LC13, which assessed physical and psychological functioning and
`symptoms related to both lung cancer and its treatment. In both studies no significant differences
`were observed in QOL between the Gemzar plus cisplatin arm and the comparator arm.
`
`
`Median Survival
`Gem / Cis 9.0 months
`Cis
`7.6 months
`
`1-Year Survival
`39%
`28 %
`
`Test Statistic p-value
`Logrank 0.008
`Wilcoxon 0.018
`
`Gemcitabine/Cisplatin
`(N=260)
`
`Survival
`probability
`
`0.9
`
`0.8
`
`0.7
`
`0.6
`
`0.5
`
`0.4
`
`0.3
`
`0.2
`
`0.1
`
`0.0
`
`Cisplatin
`(N=262)
`
`0
`
`5
`
`10
`
`15
`
`20
`
`25
`
`Survival time (months)
`
`146
`
`
`
`Figure 2: Kaplan-Meier Survival Curve in Gemzar plus Cisplatin versus
`Cisplatin NSCLC Study (N=522).
`
`

`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Table 3: Randomized Trials of Combination Therapy with Gemzar plus Cisplatin in NSCLC
`21-day Scheduleb
`28-day Schedulea
`Trial
`Treatment Arm
`Gemzar/
`Cisplatin
`Gemzar/
`Cisplatin/
`Cisplatin
`Cisplatin
`Etoposide
`260
`69
`66
`182
`64
`61
`78
`5
`5
`62
`58
`60
`36 to 88
`33 to 76
`35 to 75
`7%
`N/A
`N/A
`26%
`48%
`52%
`67%
`52%
`49%
`41%
`45%
`52%
`57%
`55%
`49%
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`9.0
`8.2, 11.0
`
`
`
`7.6
`6.6, 8.8
`
`
`P=0.008
`
`
`P=0.009
`
`
`8.7
`7.8, 10.1
`
`
`
`7.0
`6.0, 9.7
`
`
`p=0.18
`
`
`p=0.015
`
`262
`186
`76
`63
`35 to 79
`7%
`23%
`70%
`44%
`55%
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Number of patients
` Male
` Female
`Median age, years
` Range
`Stage IIIA
`Stage IIIB
`Stage IV
`Baseline KPSc 70 to 80
`Baseline KPSc 90 to 100
`
`Survival
` Median, months
` (95%, C.I.) months
`Time to Disease
`Progression
`
`4.1
`5.0
`
`3.7
`5.2
` Median, months
`
`2.4, 4.5
`4.2, 6.4
`
`3.0, 4.3
`4.2, 5.7
` (95%, C.I.) months
`p=0.01d
`p<0.0001d
`14%
`33%
`10%
`26%
`Tumor Response
`a 28-day schedule — Gemzar plus cisplatin: Gemzar 1000 mg/m2 on Days 1, 8, and 15 and cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on
`Day 1 every 28 days; Single-agent cisplatin: cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on Day 1 every 28 days.
`
`
`b 21-day schedule — Gemzar plus cisplatin: Gemzar 1250 mg/m2 on Days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on
`Day 1
`every 21 days; Etoposide plus Cisplatin: cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on Day 1 and I.V. etoposide
`
`
`100 mg/m2 on Days 1, 2, and 3 every 21 days.
`
`
`c Karnofsky Performance Status.
`d p-value for tumor response was calculated using the two-sided Fisher’s exact test for difference in binomial
`proportions. All other p-values were calculated using the Logrank test for difference in overall time to an event.
`N/A Not applicable.
`
`Pancreatic Cancer — Data from 2 clinical trials evaluated the use of Gemzar in patients with
`locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. The first trial compared Gemzar to
`5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) in patients who had received no prior chemotherapy. A second trial
`studied the use of Gemzar in pancreatic cancer patients previously treated with 5-FU or a
`5-FU-containing regimen. In both studies, the first cycle of Gemzar was administered
`intravenously at a dose of 1000 mg/m2 over 30 minutes once weekly for up to 7 weeks (or until
`toxicity necessitated holding a dose) followed by a week of rest from treatment with Gemzar.
`Subsequent cycles consisted of injections once weekly for 3 consecutive weeks out of every
`4 weeks.
`The primary efficacy parameter in these studies was “clinical benefit response,” which is a
`measure of clinical improvement based on analgesic consumption, pain intensity, performance
`status, and weight change. Definitions for improvement in these variables were formulated
`prospectively during the design of the 2 trials. A patient was considered a clinical benefit
`responder if either:
`
`147
`
`148
`
`149
`150
`151
`152
`153
`154
`155
`156
`157
`158
`159
`160
`161
`162
`163
`164
`165
`166
`167
`168
`169
`170
`171
`172
`173
`
`

`
`7
`the patient showed a ≥50% reduction in pain intensity (Memorial Pain Assessment Card)
`or analgesic consumption, or a 20-point or greater improvement in performance status
`(Karnofsky Performance Scale) for a period of at least 4 consecutive weeks, without
`showing any sustained worsening in any of the other parameters. Sustained worsening
`was defined as 4 consecutive weeks with either any increase in pain intensity or analgesic
`consumption or a 20-point decrease in performance status occurring during the first
`12 weeks of therapy.
`
`i)
`
`
`
`OR:
`ii)
`
`the patient was stable on all of the aforementioned parameters, and showed a marked,
`sustained weight gain (≥7% increase maintained for ≥4 weeks) not due to fluid
`accumulation.
`The first study was a multi-center (17 sites in US and Canada), prospective, single-blinded,
`two-arm, randomized, comparison of Gemzar and 5-FU in patients with locally advanced or
`metastatic pancreatic cancer who had received no prior treatment with chemotherapy. 5-FU was
`administered intravenously at a weekly dose of 600 mg/m2 for 30 minutes. The results from this
`randomized trial are shown in Table 4. Patients treated with Gemzar had statistically significant
`increases in clinical benefit response, survival, and time to disease progression compared to
`5-FU. The Kaplan-Meier curve for survival is shown in Figure 3. No confirmed objective tumor
`responses were observed with either treatment.
`
`
`
`Number of patients
` Male
` Female
`Median age
` Range
`Stage IV disease
`Baseline KPSa ≤70
`
`
`Table 4: Gemzar Versus 5-FU in Pancreatic Cancer
`Gemzar
`5-FU
`63
`63
`34
`34
`29
`29
`62 years
`61 years
`37 to 79
`36 to 77
`71.4%
`76.2%
`69.8%
`68.3%
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`174
`175
`176
`177
`178
`179
`180
`181
`182
`183
`184
`185
`186
`187
`188
`189
`190
`191
`192
`193
`
`194
`
`

`
`
`
`Clinical benefit response
`
`195
`196
`197
`198
`199
`200
`201
`202
`203
`204
`205
`206
`207
`208
`209
`210
`211
`
`212
`
`Gemzar
`
`5-FU
`
`0
`
`4
`
`8
`12
`Survival Time (months)
`
`
`16
`
`20
`
`1.0
`
`0.9
`
`0.8
`
`0.7
`
`0.6
`
`0.5
`
`0.4
`
`0.3
`
`0.2
`
`0.1
`
`0.0
`
`Fraction Surviving
`
`22.2%
`(Nc=14)
`
`5.7 months
`(N=30) 46%
`(N=14) 24%
`(N=9) 18%
`0.2 to 18.6 months
`4.7 to 6.9 months
`
`2.1 months
`0.1+ to 9.4 months
`1.9 to 3.4 months
`
`4.8%
`(N=3)
`
`4.2 months
`(N=19) 29%
`(N=4) 5%
`(N=2) 2%
`0.4 to 15.1+ months
`3.1 to 5.1 months
`
`0.9 months
`0.1 to 12.0+ months
`0.9 to 1.1 months
`
`8
`
`p=0.004
`
`p=0.0009
`
`
`
`
`
`
`p=0.0013
`
`
`
`
`Survival
` Median
` 6-month probabilityb
` 9-month probabilityb
` 1-year probabilityb
` Range
` 95% C.I. of the median
`Time to Disease Progression
` Median
` Range
` 95% C.I. of the median
`a Karnofsky Performance Status.
`b Kaplan-Meier estimates.
`c N=number of patients.
`+ No progression at last visit; remains alive.
`The p-value for clinical benefit response was calculated using the two-sided test for difference in binomial
`proportions. All other p-values were calculated using the Logrank test for difference in overall time to an event.
`
`Clinical benefit response was achieved by 14 patients treated with Gemzar and 3 patients
`treated with 5-FU. One patient on the Gemzar arm showed improvement in all 3 primary
`parameters (pain intensity, analgesic consumption, and performance status). Eleven patients on
`the Gemzar arm and 2 patients on the 5-FU arm showed improvement in analgesic consumption
`and/or pain intensity with stable performance status. Two patients on the Gemzar arm showed
`improvement in analgesic consumption or pain intensity with improvement in performance
`status. One patient on the 5-FU arm was stable with regard to pain intensity and analgesic
`consumption with improvement in performance status. No patient on either arm achieved a
`clinical benefit response based on weight gain.
`
`
`

`
`9
`
`
`
`213
`214
`215
`216
`217
`218
`219
`220
`221
`222
`223
`224
`225
`226
`227
`228
`229
`230
`231
`232
`233
`234
`235
`236
`237
`238
`239
`240
`241
`242
`243
`244
`245
`246
`247
`248
`249
`250
`251
`252
`253
`254
`255
`256
`257
`258
`259
`
`Figure 3: Kaplan-Meier Survival Curve.
`
`
`The second trial was a multi-center (17 US and Canadian centers), open-label study of Gemzar
`in 63 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer previously treated with 5-FU or a
`5-FU-containing regimen. The study showed a clinical benefit response rate of 27% and median
`survival of 3.9 months.
`Other Clinical Studies — When Gemzar was administered more frequently than once weekly
`or with infusions longer than 60 minutes, increased toxicity was observed. Results of a Phase 1
`study of Gemzar to assess the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) on a daily x 5 schedule showed
`that patients developed significant hypotension and severe flu-like symptoms that were
`intolerable at doses above 10 mg/m2. The incidence and severity of these events were
`dose-related. Other Phase 1 studies using a twice-weekly schedule reached MTDs of only
`65 mg/m2 (30-minute infusion) and 150 mg/m2 (5-minute bolus). The dose-limiting toxicities
`were thrombocytopenia and flu-like symptoms, particularly asthenia. In a Phase 1 study to assess
`the maximum tolerated infusion time, clinically significant toxicity, defined as
`myelosuppression, was seen with weekly doses of 300 mg/m2 at or above a 270-minute infusion
`time. The half-life of gemcitabine is influenced by the length of the infusion (see CLINICAL
`PHARMACOLOGY) and the toxicity appears to be increased if Gemzar is administered more
`frequently than once weekly or with infusions longer than 60 minutes (see WARNINGS).
`INDICATIONS AND USAGE
`
`Therapeutic Indications
`Breast Cancer — Gemzar in combination with paclitaxel is indicated for the first-line
`treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer after failure of prior anthracycline-containing
`adjuvant chemotherapy, unless anthracyclines were clinically contraindicated.
`Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer — Gemzar is indicated in combination with cisplatin for the
`first-line treatment of patients with inoperable, locally advanced (Stage IIIA or IIIB), or
`metastatic (Stage IV) non-small cell lung cancer.
`Pancreatic Cancer — Gemzar is indicated as first-line treatment for patients with locally
`advanced (nonresectable Stage II or Stage III) or metastatic (Stage IV) adenocarcinoma of the
`pancreas. Gemzar is indicated for patients previously treated with 5-FU.
`CONTRAINDICATION
`Gemzar is contraindicated in those patients with a known hypersensitivity to the drug (see
`Allergic under ADVERSE REACTIONS).
`WARNINGS
`Caution — Prolongation of the infusion time beyond 60 minutes and more frequent than
`weekly dosing have been shown to increase toxicity (see CLINICAL STUDIES).
`Hematology — Gemzar can suppress bone marrow function as manifested by leukopenia,
`thrombocytopenia, and anemia (see ADVERSE REACTIONS), and myelosuppression is
`usually the dose-limiting toxicity. Patients should be monitored for myelosuppression during
`therapy. See DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION for recommended dose adjustments.
`Pulmonary — Pulmonary toxicity has been reported with the use of Gemzar. In cases of severe
`lung toxicity, Gemzar therapy should be discontinued immediately and appropriate supportive
`care measures instituted (see Pulmonary under Single-Agent Use and under Post-marketing
`experience in ADVERSE REACTIONS section).
`Renal — Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS) and/or renal failure have been reported
`following one or more doses of Gemzar. Renal failure leading to death or requiring dialysis,
`despite discontinuation of therapy, has been rarely reported. The majority of the cases of renal
`
`

`
`10
`
`
`
`260
`261
`262
`263
`264
`265
`266
`267
`268
`269
`270
`271
`272
`273
`274
`275
`276
`277
`278
`279
`280
`281
`282
`283
`284
`285
`286
`287
`288
`289
`290
`291
`292
`293
`294
`295
`296
`297
`298
`299
`300
`301
`302
`303
`304
`305
`306
`307
`308
`309
`
`failure leading to death were due to HUS (see Renal under Single-Agent Use and under
`Post-marketing experience in ADVERSE REACTIONS section).
`Hepatic — Serious hepatotoxicity, including liver failure and death, has been reported very
`rarely in patients receiving Gemzar alone or in combination with other potentially hepatotoxic
`drugs (see Hepatic under Single-Agent Use and under Post-marketing experience in
`ADVERSE REACTIONS section).
`Pregnancy — Pregnancy Category D. Gemzar can cause fetal harm when administered to a
`pregnant woman. Gemcitabine is embryotoxic causing fetal malformations (cleft palate,
`incomplete ossification) at doses of 1.5 mg/kg/day in mice (about 1/200 the recommended
`human dose on a mg/m2 basis). Gemcitabine is fetotoxic causing fetal malformations (fused
`pulmonary artery, absence of gall bladder) at doses of 0.1 mg/kg/day in rabbits (about 1/600 the
`recommended human dose on a mg/m2 basis). Embryotoxicity was characterized by decreased
`fetal viability, reduced live litter sizes, and developmental delays. There are no studies of
`Gemzar in pregnant women. If Gemzar is used during pregnancy, or if the patient becomes
`pregnant while taking Gemzar, the patient should be apprised of the potential hazard to the fetus.
`PRECAUTIONS
`General — Patients receiving therapy with Gemzar should be monitored closely by a
`physician experienced in the use of cancer chemotherapeutic agents. Most adverse events are
`reversible and do not need to result in discontinuation, although doses may need to be withheld
`or reduced. There was a greater tendency in women, especially older women, not to proceed to
`the next cycle.
`Laboratory Tests — Patients receiving Gemzar should be monitored prior to each dose with a
`complete blood count (CBC), including differential and platelet count. Suspension or
`modification of therapy should be considered when marrow suppression is detected (see
`DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION).
`Laboratory evaluation of renal and hepatic function should be performed prior to initiation of
`therapy and periodically thereafter (see WARNINGS).
`Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, Impairment of Fertility — Long-term animal studies to evaluate
`the carcinogenic potential of Gemzar have not been conducted. Gemcitabine induced forward
`mutations in vitro in a mouse lymphoma (L5178Y) assay and was clastogenic in an in vivo
`mouse micronucleus assay. Gemcitabine was negative when tested using the Ames, in vivo sister
`chromatid exchange, and in vitro chromosomal aberration assays, and did not cause unscheduled
`DNA synthesis in vitro. Gemcitabine I.P. doses of 0.5 mg/kg/day (about 1/700 the human dose
`on a mg/m2 basis) in male mice had an effect on fertility with moderate to severe
`hypospermatogenesis, decreased fertility, and decreased implantations. In female mice, fertility
`was not affected but maternal toxicities were observed at 1.5 mg/kg/day I.V. (about 1/200 the
`human dose on a mg/m2 basis) and fetotoxicity or embryolethality was observed at
`0.25 mg/kg/day I.V. (about 1/1300 the human dose on a mg/m2 basis).
`Pregnancy — Category D. See WARNINGS.
`Nursing Mothers — It is not known whether Gemzar or its metabolites are excreted in human
`milk. Because many drugs are excreted in human milk and because of the potential for serious
`adverse reactions from Gemzar in nursing infants, the mother should be warned and a decision
`should be made whether to discontinue nursing or to discontinue the drug, taking into account
`the importance of the drug to the mother and the potential risk to the infant.
`Elderly Patients — Gemzar clearance is affected by age (see CLINICAL
`PHARMACOLOGY). There is no evidence, however, that unusual dose adjustments,
`(i.e., other than those already recommended in the DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION
`section) are necessary in patients over 65, and in general, adverse reaction rates in the
`single-agent safety database of 979 patients were similar in patients above and below 65.
`Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia was more common in the elderly.
`
`

`
`11
`
`
`
`310
`311
`312
`313
`314
`315
`316
`317
`318
`319
`320
`321
`322
`323
`324
`325
`326
`327
`328
`329
`330
`331
`332
`333
`334
`335
`336
`337
`338
`339
`340
`341
`342
`343
`344
`345
`346
`347
`348
`349
`350
`351
`352
`353
`354
`355
`356
`
`Gender — Gemzar clearance is affected by gender (see CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY).
`In the single-agent safety database (N=979 patients), however, there is no evidence that unusual
`dose adjustments (i.e., other than those already recommended in the DOSAGE AND
`ADMINISTRATION section) are necessary in women. In general, in single-agent studies of
`Gemzar, adverse reaction rates were similar in men and women, but women, especially older
`women, were more likely not to proceed to a subsequent cycle and to experience Grade 3/4
`neutropenia and thrombocytopenia.
`Pediatric Patients — The effectiveness of Gemzar in pediatric patients has not been
`demonstrated. Gemzar was evaluated in a Phase 1 trial in pediatric patients with refractory
`leukemia and determined that the maximum tolerated dose was 10 mg/m2/min for 360 minutes
`three times weekly followed by a one week rest period. Gemzar was also evaluated in a Phase 2
`trial in patients with relapsed acute lymphoblastic leukemia (22 patients) and acute myelogenous
`leukemia (10 patients) using 10 mg/m2/min for 360 minutes three times weekly followed by a
`one week rest period. Toxicities observed included bone marrow suppression, febrile
`neutropenia, elevation of serum transaminases, nausea, and rash/desquamation, which were
`similar to those reported in adults. No meaningful clinical activity was observed in this Phase 2
`trial.
`Patients with Renal or Hepatic Impairment — Gemzar should be used with caution in patients
`with preexisting renal impairment or hepatic insufficiency. Gemzar has not been studied in
`patients with significant renal or hepatic impairment.
`Drug Interactions — No specific drug interaction studies have been conducted. For
`information on the pharmacokinetics of Gemzar and cisplatin in combination, see Drug
`Interactions under CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY section.
`Radiation Therapy — Safe and effective regimens for the administration of Gemzar with
`therapeutic doses of radiation have not yet been determined.
`ADVERSE REACTIONS
`Gemzar has been used in a wide variety of malignancies, both as a single-agent and in
`combination with other cytotoxic drugs.
`Single-Agent Use: Myelosuppression is the principal dose-limiting toxicity with Gemzar
`therapy. Dosage adjustments for hematologic toxicity are frequently needed and are described in
`the DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION section.
`The data in Table 5 are based on 979 patients receiving Gemzar as a single-agent administered
`weekly as a 30-minute infusion for treatment of a wide variety of malignancies. The Gemzar
`starting doses ranged from 800 to 1250 mg/m2. Data are also shown for the subset of patients
`with pancreatic cancer treated in 5 clinical studies. The frequency of all grades and severe (WHO
`Grade 3 or 4) adverse events were generally similar in the single-agent safety database of
`979 patients and the subset of patients with pancreatic cancer. Adverse reactions reported in the
`single-agent safety database resulted in discontinuation of Gemzar therapy in about 10% of
`patients. In the comparative trial in pancreatic cancer, the discontinuation rate for adverse
`reactions was 14.3% for the gemcitabine arm and 4.8% for the 5-FU arm.
`All WHO-graded laboratory events are listed in Table 5, regardless of causality.
`Non-laboratory adverse events listed in Table 5 or discussed below were those reported,
`regardless of causality, for at least 10% of all patients, except the categories of Extravasation,
`Allergic, and Cardiovascular and certain specific events under the Renal, Pulmonary, and
`Infection categories. Table 6 presents the data from the comparative trial of Gemzar and 5-FU in
`pancreatic cancer for the same adverse events as those in Table 5, regardless of incidence.
`
`
`

`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`Discontinuations
`(%)c
`All
`Patients
`
`
`<1
`<1
`-
`<1
`<1
`
`
`
`
`<1
`
`
`
`
`
`<1
`<1
`<1
`<1
`<1
`0
`0
`<1
`<1
`0
`<1
`<1
`0
`
`Table 5: Selected WHO-Graded Adverse Events in Patients Receiving Single-Agent Gemzar
`WHO Grades (% incidence)
`All Patientsa
`Pancreatic Cancer
`Patientsb
`Grade
`3
`
`
`8
`8
`17
`7
`
`10
`12
`16
`6
`
`<1
`0
`0
`0
`
`10
`6
`2
`<1
`0
`3
`3
`2
`2
`0
`<1
`2
`<1
`
`All
`Grade
`Grade
`All
`Grades
`4
`3
`Grades
`Laboratoryd
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Hematologic
`73
`1
`7
`68
` Anemia
`64
`<1
`9
`62
` Leukopenia
`61
`6
`19
`63
` Neutropenia
`36
`1
`4
`24
` Thrombocytopenia
`
`
`
`
` Hepatic
`72
`2
`8
`68
` ALT
`78
`2
`6
`67
` AST
`77
`2
`7
`55
` Alkaline Phosphatase
`26
`<1
`2
`13
` Bilirubin
`
`
`
`
` Renal
`32
`0
`<

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket