Regulatory Science - An Underappreciated Component of Translational Research

"Appraisal of state-of-the-art" The 2021 Distinguished Service Award of the Safety Pharmacology Society: Reflecting on the past to tackle challenges ahead

This appraisal of state-of-the-art manuscript highlights and expands upon the thoughts conveyed in the lecture of Dr. Jean-Pierre Valentin, recipient of the 2021 Distinguished Service Award of the Safety Pharmacology Society, given on the 2nd December 2021. The article reflects on the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats that surrounded the evolution of safety and secondary pharmacology over the last 3 decades with a particular emphasis on pharmaceutical drug development delivery, scientific and technological innovation, complexities of regulatory framework and people leadership and development. The article further built on learnings from past experiences to tackle constantly emerging issues and evolving landscape whilst being cognizant of the challenges facing these disciplines in the broader drug development and societal context.

2000-2023 over two decades of ICH S7A: has the time come for a revamp?

The ICH S7A guideline on safety pharmacology studies released over 20 years ago largely achieved its objective "to help protect clinical trial participants and patients receiving marketed products from potential adverse effects of pharmaceuticals". Although, Phase I clinical trials are generally very safe, the incidence and severity of adverse events, the safety related attrition and product withdrawal remain elevated during late-stage clinical development and post approval, a proportion of which can be attributed at least in part to safety pharmacology related issues. Considering the latest scientific and technological advancements in drug safety science, the paradigm shift of the drug discovery and development process and the continuously evolving regulatory landscape, we recommend revisiting, adapting and evolving the ICH S7A guideline. This might offer opportunities i) to select and progress optimized drugs with increased confidence in success, ii) to refine and adapt the clinical monitoring at all stages of clinical development resulting in an optimized benefit/risk assessment, iii) to increase likelihood of regulatory acceptance in a way compatible with an expedited and streamlined drug discovery and development process to benefit patients and iv) to avoid the unnecessary use of animals in 'tick-the-box' studies and encourage alternative approaches. As presented in the article, several options could be envisioned to revisit and adapt the ICH S7A taking into consideration several key features.

Advancing UK Regulatory Science Strategy in the Context of Global Regulation: a Stakeholder Survey

BACKGROUND

The UK's transition from the European Union creates both an urgent need and key opportunity for the UK and its global collaborators to consider new approaches to the regulation of emerging technologies, underpinned by regulatory science. This survey aimed to identify the most accurate definition of regulatory science, to define strategic areas of the regulation of healthcare innovation which can be informed through regulatory science and to explore the training and infrastructure needed to advance UK and international regulatory science.

METHODS

A survey was distributed to UK healthcare professionals, academics, patients, health technology assessment agencies, ethicists and trade associations, as well as international regulators, pharmaceutical companies and small or medium enterprises which have expertise in regulatory science and in developing or applying regulation in healthcare. Subsequently, a descriptive quantitative analyses of survey results and directed thematic analysis of free-text comments were applied.

RESULTS

Priority areas for UK regulatory science identified by 145 participants included the following: flexibility: the capability of regulations to adapt to novel products and target patient outcomes; co-development: collaboration across sectors, e.g. patients, manufacturers, regulators, and educators working together to develop appropriate training for novel product deployment; responsiveness: the preparation of frameworks which enable timely innovation required by emerging events; speed: the rate at which new products can reach the market; reimbursement: developing effective tools to track and evaluate outcomes for "pay for performance" products; and education and professional development.

CONCLUSIONS

The UK has a time-critical opportunity to establish its national and international strategy for regulatory science leadership by harnessing broader academic input, developing strategic cross-sector collaborations, incorporating patients' experiences and perspectives, and investing in a skilled workforce.

Today's Challenges to De-Risk and Predict Drug Safety in Human "Mind-the-Gap"

Current gaps in drug safety sciences can result from the inability (1) to identify hazard across multiple target organs, (2) to predict and risk assess with certainty against drug safety liabilities for the major target organs, (3) to optimally manage and mitigate against drug safety liabilities, and (4) to apply principles of governance on the generation, integration, and use of experimental data. Translational safety assessment to evaluate several target-organ drug toxicities can only be partially achieved by use of current in vitro and in vivo test systems. What remains to be tackled necessitates the deployment of in vitro-human-relevant test systems to address human specific or selective forms of toxicities. Nevertheless, such models may only address in part some of the requirements in today's armament of biomedical tools essential for improving the discovery of drug candidates. Refinement of in silico tools, Target Safety Assessment and a greater understanding of mechanistic insights of toxicities might provide future opportunities to better identify drug safety liabilities. The increasing diversity of drug modalities present further challenges for nonclinical and clinical development requiring further research to develop suitable test systems and technologies. Our ability to optimally manage and mitigate safety risk will come from the greater refinement of safety margin estimates, provision and use of human-relevant safety biomarkers, and understanding of the translation from in silico, in vitro, and in vivo studies to human. An improvement of governance frameworks and standards at all levels within organizations, national, and international, can only help facilitate drug discovery and development programs.

Response of safety pharmacologists to challenges arising from the rapidly evolving changes in the pharmaceutical industry

This commentary highlights and expands upon the thoughts conveyed in the lecture by Dr. Alan S. Bass, recipient of the 2017 Distinguished Service Award from the Safety Pharmacology Society, given on 27 September 2017 in Berlin, Germany. The lecture discussed the societal, scientific, technological, regulatory and economic events that dramatically impacted the pharmaceutical industry and ultimately led to significant changes in the strategic operations and practices of safety pharmacology. It focused on the emerging challenges and opportunities, and considered the lessons learned from drug failures and the influences of world events, including the financial crisis that ultimately led to a collapse of the world economies from which we are now recovering. Events such as these, which continue to today, challenge the assumptions that form the foundation of our discipline and dramatically affect the way that safety pharmacology is practiced. These include the latest scientific and technological developments contributing to the design and advancement of safe medicines. More broadly, they reflect the philosophical mission of safety pharmacology and the roles and responsibilities served by safety pharmacologists. As the discipline of Safety Pharmacology continues to evolve, develop and mature, the reader is invited to reflect on past experiences as a framework towards a vision of the future of the field.

The use of human tissue in safety assessment

INTRODUCTION

The safety-related failure of drugs during clinical phases of development is a significant contributor to drug attrition, wasting resources and preventing treatments from reaching patients. A lack of concordance between results from animal models and adverse events in the clinic has been identified as one potential cause of attrition. In vitro models using human tissue or cells have the potential to replace some animal models and improve predictivity to humans.

METHODS

To gauge the current use of human tissue models in safety pharmacology and the barriers to greater uptake, an electronic survey of the international safety assessment community was carried out and a Safety Pharmacology Society European Regional Meeting was organised entitled 'The Use of Human Tissue in Safety Assessment'.

RESULTS

A greater range of human tissue models is in use in safety assessment now than four years ago, although data is still not routinely included in regulatory submissions. The barriers to increased uptake of the models have not changed over that time, with inadequate supply and characterisation of tissue being the most cited blocks.

DISCUSSION

Supporting biobanking, the development of new human tissue modelling technology, and raising awareness in the scientific and regulatory communities are key ways in which the barriers to greater uptake of human tissue models can be overcome. The development of infrastructure and legislation in the UK to support the use of post-mortem or surgical discard tissue will allow scientists to locally source tissue for research.