New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

FDA Lets Cancer Trial Resume after 3 Patient Deaths

Standard chemo blamed, experimental immune therapy cleared

leukemia cells

The Food and Drug Administration put the study on hold last week after three young leukemia patients who had received Juno’s experimental therapy developed fatal brain swelling.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Federal regulators on Tuesday gave Juno Therapeutics the all-clear to resume testing an experimental cancer treatment, just days aftershutting down the trial because of three patient deaths.

Juno is at work in a newfangled field of oncology in which scientists remove a patient’s own white blood cells and rewire them to home in on cancerous growths, part of the growing field of immunotherapy. The Food and Drug Administration put the study on hold last week after three young leukemia patients who had received Juno’s experimental therapy developed fatal brain swelling.

Juno blamed the deaths on an unforeseen interaction between those reengineered blood cells, called CAR-Ts, and a chemotherapy drug used to prepare patients for treatment. It proposed resuming the trial without using that chemotherapy drug.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The FDA completed the review with startling speed, apparently accepting Juno’s explanation for the deaths and approving the new protocol.

The deaths spurred widespread questions about the future of CAR-T therapies, which have led to lasting remissions for some seriously ill patients but have been tested only in small trials. The technology itself is only a few years old, and its long-term safety has yet to be established.

Novartis, Kite Pharma, and others are pressing forward with similar therapies, and while none has reported an issue with fatal brain swelling, each has faced increased scrutiny since Juno’s revelation.

The FDA’s speed in letting Juno restart its trial is notable for an agency that tends to be conservative when it comes to drug safety. Juno had said last week it hoped to get an answer within 30 days. It took just two.

Other companies have languished for months under FDA holds, which cannot be resolved until regulators sign off on deficiencies in clinical trials. Zafgen, a biotech company developing a treatment for obesity, has had its research suspended since December in the wake of two patient deaths.

Republished with permission from STAT. This article originally appeared on July 12, 2016.

 

STAT delivers fast, deep, and tough-minded journalism. We take you inside science labs and hospitals, biotech boardrooms, and political backrooms. We dissect crucial discoveries. We examine controversies and puncture hype. We hold individuals and institutions accountable. We introduce you to the power brokers and personalities who are driving a revolution in human health. These are the stories that matter to us all.

More by STAT

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe