Pink Sheet is part of Pharma Intelligence UK Limited

This site is operated by Pharma Intelligence UK Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 13787459 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. The Pharma Intelligence group is owned by Caerus Topco S.à r.l. and all copyright resides with the group.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By


External Controls: Sarepta’s DMD Gene Therapy Not In the Same Boat As Zolgensma, US FDA Says

Executive Summary

Sarepta conducted study-level and integrated-level comparison analyses of SRP-9001-treated patients and external controls. However, heterogeneous nature of DMD and potentially moderate treatment effect of SRP-9001 distinguish it from Novaritis' spinal muscular atrophy treatment, where natural history data were used to support single-arm trial results, the FDA said.

You may also be interested in...

Sarepta’s External Controls Analysis Weakened By Elevidys Placebo Data Comparison

When placebo data from the only randomized trial of the Duchenne muscular dystrophy gene therapy were compared with Sarepta’s proffered external control data, the placebo subjects numerically outperformed the external controls, ‘calling into question the comparability of the external control group,’ an FDA statistical reviewer said.

Sarepta’s DMD Gene Therapy Helped Across Accelerated Approval Finish Line By CBER’s Peter Marks

FDA clinical, clinical pharmacology and statistical review teams did not recommend approval of Elevidys, but the CBER director concluded that randomized data in a subgroup of patients ages four and five years old were ‘compelling,’ justifying accelerated approval; expansion beyond this age-restricted subgroup will hinge on data from the EMBARK confirmatory trial.

Natural History Studies: Launch With Care And Consider Alternative Evidence For Drug Approval, FDA’s Marks Says

A different evidence-generation approach may lead to a quicker approval than leveraging a natural history study, CBER Director Peter Marks says; EveryLife Foundation's Annie Kennedy says participation in natural history studies can empower patients who are not eligible for drug-specific clinical trials.

Related Content


Related Companies

Latest Headlines
See All



Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts