| A reorganization at the Food and Drug Administration will 
                  soon result in the sixth relocation in the past 15 years for 
                  the ophthalmology products division. The move is certain to 
                  lead to a period of readjustment, at best. At worst, it could 
                  extend ophthalmology drug approval times and impact costs, 
                  according to some in the pharmaceutical industry.
 The 
                  General Services Administration and the FDA are working 
                  together to consolidate the FDA at a government-owned site in 
                  Montgomery Co., Md. The new buildings will replace all the 
                  existing facilities that support the Office of the 
                  Commissioner, the Office of Regulatory Affairs, the Center for 
                  Drug Evaluation and Research, the Center for Devices and 
                  Radiological Health, and the Center for Biologics Evaluation 
                  and Research.
 
 The reorganization has been under way for 
                  several years. It will entail a reduction by one in the number 
                  of offices devoted to drug evaluation, and a physical 
                  relocation to a new campus this spring. John K. Jenkins, MD, 
                  director of the Center for Drug Evaluation & Research’s 
                  Office of New Drugs (OND), described three primary goals for 
                  the effort: to better balance the allocation of available 
                  resources against workload; to improve the logical grouping of 
                  clinical indications within OND’s division and office 
                  structure (e.g., analgesics, cancer); and to complete the 
                  integration of the therapeutic biologics into OND’s 
                  indication-based structure. Among the many changes, the 
                  ophthalmology products division and staff will be added to 
                  what is designated as Office of Drug Evaluation IV, the 
                  current Division of Anti-Infective Drug Products. This will 
                  create a new Division of Anti-infective and Ophthalmology 
                  Products.
 
 Karen Mahoney, a spokesperson for the Center 
                  for Drug Evaluation and Research, says, “These are 
                  administrative changes that are not expected to have a 
                  significant impact on the development or approval of 
                  ophthalmic products. The staff involved in the review of these 
                  products will not change, but they will be shifted to another 
                  division where there is some overlap in product areas and as 
                  part of an overall effort to better balance divisional size 
                  and workload within the Office of New Drugs.”
 
 Scott 
                  Krueger, PhD, vice president for regulatory affairs at Alcon, 
                  says the impact on the ground has gone far beyond mere 
                  administrative changes. “Our experience with simple 
                  organizational changes at FDA has not been very positive,” 
                  says Dr. Krueger. “Recently, FDA made the organizational 
                  change to remove chemists from association with specific 
                  divisions and assigned them projects on an as-available basis. 
                  Because of the lack of familiarity with some of the unique 
                  attributes of ophthalmic drug products, the chemist did not 
                  understand the submission and we had to file an additional 
                  submission to try to get things cleared up. The submission, 
                  which should have been cleared within four months, has now 
                  been pending with the agency for eight months.”
 
 
 
                    
                    
                      | 
 |  
                      | 
 |  
                      | The new campus of the Food and 
                        Drug Administration in Montgomery County, 
                        MD. |  After 
                  witnessing the sixth move of the division, Dr. Krueger wonders 
                  whether it might be best to establish the group on its own. 
                  “The Ophthalmology Group is responsible for a diverse spectrum 
                  of products such as anti-infective, antiviral, glaucoma, 
                  anti-inflammatory, anti-neovascularization, anti-allergy, dry 
                  eye, etc.,” he says. “Given the uniqueness of ophthalmology 
                  and ophthalmic drug products, we believe that it would be 
                  appropriate to establish a separate division for Ophthalmic 
                  Drug and Biologic drug products.”
 
 With the expanding 
                  prospects for unique new pharmacological products to address 
                  ocular diseases, others say it’s more important than ever that 
                  the ophthalmology division maintain its level of 
                  expertise.
 
 Susan Caballa, vice president of 
                  regulatory/medical affairs at Alpharetta, Ga.’s Alimera 
                  Sciences, “There have been significant new therapies and a 
                  proliferation of different approaches in ophthalmology in 
                  recent years that we haven’t seen before. So far, the division 
                  has been able to meet that challenge. With an aging population 
                  that will be faced with diseases like age-related macular 
                  degeneration and diabetic macular edema, this is exciting new 
                  territory for most of us. Having a division dedicated to 
                  ophthalmology would only improve the process.”
 
 CDER’s 
                  Ms. Mahoney counters that the workload of the ophthalmology 
                  review staff “would not support it having its own division,” 
                  but would account for about one half of a division’s workload. 
                  OND looked carefully at what would be a reasonable pairing for 
                  ophthalmology, she says. “The movement to merge it with 
                  anti-infectives was thought to be logical as this was 
                  previously one of the divisions that it had been part of in 
                  the past.” In addition, the ophthalmology group often requires 
                  microbiology consults from this division. The merger of the 
                  two would facilitate this contact, she says.
 
 Ms. 
                  Caballa, who oversaw the approval of 12 drugs in her 20 years 
                  of ophthalmic regulatory experience, questions the notion that 
                  the ophthalmology could not support a full division’s 
                  workload, calling ophthalmology among the “speediest” 
                  divisions she knows of and with one the “heaviest 
                  workloads.”
 
 Another potential complication with the 
                  move, says Dr. Krueger, involves the leadership. “Since 
                  division director approval is required for New Drug Products, 
                  it is important for the division director to be familiar with 
                  the products under his/her purview,” he explains. “With each 
                  change, the division director needs to be educated on the 
                  roles of drug therapy in treating various diseases and 
                  relevant clinical end-points and formulation issues for 
                  products in development. This leads to delays in obtaining 
                  meaningful advice during development, in clearing approvals 
                  for new products, etc., until such time that the new director 
                  becomes familiar with ophthalmology and related development 
                  issues.”
 
 Ms. Mahoney acknowledges that “the points made 
                  about a new division and office director needing to be brought 
                  up to date are well taken, but the parties involved in this 
                  case know Dr. [Wiley] Chambers well and have worked with him 
                  extensively on multiple applications over many years. We 
                  expect the new organizational structure to be very 
                  effective.”
 
 Peter Kresel, senior vice president of 
                  global regulatory affairs for Allergan, agrees that the 
                  division’s performance has been exemplary, and he is confident 
                  that will continue. “This division is stellar at meeting its 
                  PDUFA [Prescription Drug User Fee Act] timelines,” says Mr. 
                  Kresel. “That starts at the top of that division and I don’t 
                  see that changing at all.”
 
 What concerns Mr. Kresel is 
                  continuity. “I want to be sure that the division maintains its 
                  institutional memory, because that’s really important as 
                  products evolve, and that the division maintain its autonomy 
                  within the office where it resides because decisions on 
                  ophthalmology and ophthalmic products need to made by 
                  ophthalmologists who understand them,” he says. “You wouldn’t 
                  want to have an infectious disease doctor deciding whether a 
                  drug for AMD should or should not be 
                  approved.”
 
 Study 
                  Will Assess Flomax and Floppy Iris 
                  Syndrome
 
 The American Society of 
                  Cataract and Refractive Surgery issued an advisory last month 
                  concerning Intraoperative Floppy Iris Syndrome (IFIS), a new 
                  small-pupil syndrome described by Drs. David Chang and John 
                  Campbell that appears to be associated with the use of Flomax 
                  (Boehringer-Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals Inc., Ridgefield, Conn.) 
                  Flomax is prescribed for the treatment of benign prostatic 
                  hypertrophy (BPH), a common condition that affects men in the 
                  same age group as those likely to develop cataracts. The drug 
                  is also prescribed off-label to women with urinary retention, 
                  whose symptoms are ameliorated by the drug, which relaxes 
                  muscles in the bladder neck.
 
 Dr. Chang is organizing a 
                  multicenter investigation of cataract surgery outcomes in 
                  patients taking Flomax. “Urologists and their patients will 
                  want to know whether Flomax can still be safely prescribed for 
                  those that may need cataract surgery,” said Dr. Chang. This 
                  prospective study, involving approximately 10 practices, will 
                  evaluate whether there is an increased complication rate with 
                  cataract surgery in patients on Flomax. The surgeons will 
                  manage the pupil using one of three methods at their own 
                  discretion—iris retractors, pupil expansion ring, or Healon 5 
                  (with low flow/low vacuum parameters). “These are methods that 
                  most practicing surgeons would be able to use. We hope to be 
                  able to report the complication rate and operative results in 
                  100 consecutive pooled Flomax cases fairly quickly,” said Dr. 
                  Chang.
 
 ASCRS is not recommending a change in 
                  prescribing patterns at this time. “We will look to Dr. 
                  Chang’s multicenter study to provide us with sound data from 
                  which we will then consider an appropriate course of action 
                  with regard to potential recommendations—if appropriate—to 
                  ophthalmologists, other physician groups, and the FDA,” said 
                  ASCRS President Priscilla Arnold, MD.
 ASCRS is urging its 
                  members to file reports on IFIS on the FDA’s MedWatch website, 
                  and the agency would also like to receive reports directly 
                  from physicians to expedite its consideration of the issue. 
                  The best way to submit cases to the FDA would be to use the 
                  online form at http://www.fda.gov/medwatch/%20report.htm. 
                  Surgeons can file multiple patient experiences on a single 
                  form. Physicians would usually report an adverse drug affect 
                  to a drug manufacturer, which, by law, must transmitted to the 
                  FDA within 15 days.
 
 For further information on the 
                  ASRCS advisory, visit http://www.revophth.com/www.ascrs.%20org/advocacy/pressrelease011305.htm.
 
 Alimera Partners With CDS to Develop DME 
                  Drug
 
 Alimera Sciences Inc., the 
                  Atlanta-based ophthalmic pharmaceutical company, and Control 
                  Delivery Systems Inc., of Watertown, Mass., which develops 
                  sustained-release, drug–delivery products to treat severe and 
                  chronic diseases, announced a worldwide agreement to 
                  co-develop and market a new pharmacologic treatment indicated 
                  for diabetic macular edema. Alimera Sciences also has the 
                  option to develop three additional products using CDS’ drug 
                  delivery technology.
 
 “The prospect of offering patients 
                  with diabetes, their caregivers and ophthalmology 
                  professionals the convenience of an outpatient injection with 
                  the potential for three-year drug delivery is truly exciting,” 
                  said Dan Myers, CEO of Alimera Sciences. “We are confident 
                  that our collaboration and joint expertise will successfully 
                  deliver this invaluable option to diabetic 
                  patients.”
 
 Alimera Sciences and CDS are in discussions 
                  with the FDA to initiate clinical trials to determine the 
                  effectiveness of injecting an implantable form of CDS’ 
                  technology into the vitreous of the eye to treat DME. The 
                  miniscule implant is small enough to be injected into the eye 
                  via a 25-ga. needle and is expected to provide delivery of 
                  drug to the back of the eye for up to three years.
 
 Cells Become 
                  Light-Sensitive in British 
                  Research
 
 Scientists have discovered how 
                  to make cells sensitive to light in what may lead to a new 
                  approach to treating certain forms of blindness. The research, 
                  published in the January 27 issue of Nature, shows 
                  that the gene melanopsin causes nerve cells to become 
                  photoreceptive. The team of experts from the University of 
                  Manchester and Imperial College London found that activating 
                  melanopsin in cells that don’t normally use the gene makes 
                  them sensitive to light. “The melanopsin made the cells 
                  photoreceptive, which tells us that this protein is able to 
                  absorb light,” said Dr. Rob Lucas, who led the team in 
                  Manchester. “This discovery might provide food for thought for 
                  scientists looking for ways of treating visual 
                  loss.”
 
 Dr. Lucas said the classical view of how the eye 
                  sees is through photoreceptive cells in the rods and cones. 
                  But there is a recently discovered third type of 
                  photoreceptor, although the mechanisms of how it works was not 
                  fully understood. “Over the last few years it has become 
                  increasingly accepted that we have a third system that uses 
                  melanopsin and has lain undetected during years of vigorous 
                  scientific investigation,” said Dr. Lucas. His research 
                  introduced melanopsin to cells that do not normally use it. 
                  They found that the cell becomes photosensitized and is able 
                  to produce a biological signal. “The discovery that melanopsin 
                  is capable of making cells photosensitive has given us a 
                  unique opportunity to study the characteristics of this 
                  interesting protein.” One implication of this research is that 
                  using melanopsin to make nerve cells in the eye photoreceptive 
                  may represent an entirely new approach to this problem.
 
 Researchers also believe that defects in melanopsin 
                  action could be responsible for other human conditions, 
                  including some sorts of depression and insomnia. “We just 
                  don’t know what else melanopsin could be responsible for,” 
                  said Dr. Lucas. “But now that we understand the role of this 
                  gene we can further investigate its influence in such areas as 
                  mood and sleep patterns.” The research team is collaborating 
                  with engineers at Imperial to develop a functional retinal 
                  prosthesis that would allow information from the 
                  light-responsive cells to be used by the brain to form 
                  images.
 
 Can Eyedrops 
                  Detect Parkinson’s?
 
 Japanese 
                  researchers are exploring a novel means of diagnosing 
                  Parkinson’s disease using eyedrops, according to a report in 
                  Health Day News. By comparing the amount of pupil dilation 
                  caused by phenylephrine solution to dilation caused a cocaine 
                  eye drop, researchers in Japan said they could accurately 
                  identify people with Parkinson’s.
 
 The current findings 
                  are far from definitive, however, and the size of the study 
                  was small. The trial involved 38 patients with Parkinson’s 
                  disease, 20 controls and 10 individuals with multiple system 
                  atrophy (MSA), a neurodegenerative disease with various 
                  symptoms involving movement, blood pressure and 
                  more.
 
 Researchers recorded a baseline pupil diameter 
                  for all participants using an infrared video camera in fixed 
                  daylight brightness. Each participant was then giving 
                  phenylephrine solution in both eyes. Pupil diameter was 
                  recorded 60 minutes later.
 
 After a minimum of 72 hours, 
                  the same amount of a 5% cocaine solution was placed in each 
                  participant’s eyes, with the pupil diameter recorded one hour 
                  later. The researchers then calculated the difference between 
                  dilation caused by phenylephrine and that caused by the 
                  cocaine.
 
 There was no statistically significant 
                  difference in phenylephrine dilation between people with 
                  Parkinson’s and people with MSA. However, cocaine-induced 
                  dilation was significantly less in the Parkinson’s group than 
                  in the other two groups, with little difference between the 
                  controls and those with MSA. And the difference between 
                  phenylephrine-induced and cocaine-induced dilation was greater 
                  in the Parkinson’s group than in the control or MSA 
                  groups.
 
 Cocaine blocks the uptake of the 
                  neurotransmitter norepinephrine, whose build-up at the nerve 
                  receptors causes dilation. Less cocaine-induced dilation means 
                  that sympathetic nerve terminals have been lost, according to 
                  the report. The side effects of the procedure appear to be 
                  minimal.
 
 Trials 
                  Proceed on PDT Agent
 
 Miravant Medical 
                  Technologies, developers of PhotoPoint photodynamic therapy, 
                  will conduct a Phase III confirmatory clinical trial of 
                  Photrex (rostaporfin, formerly known as SnET2) for wet 
                  age-related macular degeneration, based on a Special Protocol 
                  Assessment by the FDA.
 
 The FDA requested this single 
                  confirmatory study in its Approvable Letter issued September 
                  2004, after reviewing the company’s New Drug Application. The 
                  placebo-controlled trial, to be conducted outside of the 
                  United States, is designed to enroll a broad range of wet AMD 
                  patients, including patients with predominantly classic, 
                  minimally classic and occult lesions. Each study patient will 
                  receive Photrex (or placebo) treatments over the course of 
                  nine months. Miravant plans to conduct a primary efficacy 
                  endpoint analysis at 12 months (one year after initial 
                  treatment) which, pending positive results, will be submitted 
                  for FDA review and subsequent marketing approval. Patients 
                  will continue to be evaluated for a second year to confirm the 
                  longer-term results established in previous Photrex phase III 
                  studies. Miravant expects to commence patient enrollment in 
                  mid-2005.
 For more information visit miravant.com.
 |