Time Course for Onset and Recovery from Effects of a Novel Male Reproductive Toxicant: Implications for Apical Preclinical Study Designs

Male premating treatment in FEED studies: Length is not everything

The ICH S5(R3) guideline recommends that male rodents in a FEED study are treated for ≥2 weeks before mating, which has frequently been criticized as being too short for the detection of all effects on sperm maturation, mating behavior and male fertility. In a FEED study, males generally continue for ≥5 weeks after the start of cohabitation. This review determines how often a 2-week premating treatment period for males was used in FEED studies of novel drugs approved by the FDA in 2022 and 2023. The male premating treatment duration was specified for 44 drugs. Only 16 % of these had a 2-week male premating treatment period. 52 % of drugs had a 4-week period. No examples were found in the literature of drugs for which male-mediated reproductive toxicity could have been detected using a 4-week, but not a 2-week, premating treatment period. Repeat dose studies in 2 species, with a duration of treatment at least equivalent to that in patients, are generally completed before the FEED study is planned. Providing no effects on male reproductive organs are detected in the repeat dose studies, a 2-week premating treatment period appears sufficient for the detection of effects on male mating performance. If toxic effects on spermatogenesis are detected in the repeat dose studies, a male FEED study serves little regulatory purpose. Even in the absence of effects on mating performance and fertility in the FEED study, a drug-related disruption of spermatogenesis would likely be considered pertinent to the human.

Scientific and Regulatory Policy Committee Points to Consider Review: Inclusion of Reproductive and Pathology End Points for Assessment of Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity in Pharmaceutical Drug Development

Standard components of nonclinical toxicity testing for novel pharmaceuticals include clinical and anatomic pathology, as well as separate evaluation of effects on reproduction and development to inform clinical development and labeling. General study designs in regulatory guidances do not specifically mandate use of pathology or reproductive end points across all study types; thus, inclusion and use of these end points are variable. The Scientific and Regulatory Policy Committee of the Society of Toxicologic Pathology (STP) formed a Working Group to assess the current guidelines and practices on the use of reproductive, anatomic pathology, and clinical pathology end points in general, reproductive, and developmental toxicology studies. The Working Group constructed a survey sent to pathologists and reproductive toxicologists, and responses from participating organizations were collected through the STP for evaluation by the Working Group. The regulatory context, relevant survey results, and collective experience of the Working Group are discussed and provide the basis of each assessment by study type. Overall, the current practice of including specific end points on a case-by-case basis is considered appropriate. Points to consider are summarized for inclusion of reproductive end points in general toxicity studies and for the informed use of pathology end points in reproductive and developmental toxicity studies.