How do the top 12 pharmaceutical companies operate safety pharmacology?

Integrating in vitro data and physiologically based kinetic modeling-facilitated reverse dosimetry to predict human cardiotoxicity of methadone

Development of novel testing strategies to detect adverse human health effects is of interest to replace in vivo-based drug and chemical safety testing. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether physiologically based kinetic (PBK) modeling-facilitated conversion of in vitro toxicity data is an adequate approach to predict in vivo cardiotoxicity in humans. To enable evaluation of predictions made, methadone was selected as the model compound, being a compound for which data on both kinetics and cardiotoxicity in humans are available. A PBK model for methadone in humans was developed and evaluated against available kinetic data presenting an adequate match. Use of the developed PBK model to convert concentration–response curves for the effect of methadone on human-induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes (hiPSC-CM) in the so-called multi electrode array (MEA) assay resulted in predictions for in vivo dose–response curves for methadone-induced cardiotoxicity that matched the available in vivo data. The results also revealed differences in protein plasma binding of methadone to be a potential factor underlying variation between individuals with respect to sensitivity towards the cardiotoxic effects of methadone. The present study provides a proof-of-principle of using PBK modeling-based reverse dosimetry of in vitro data for the prediction of cardiotoxicity in humans, providing a novel testing strategy in cardiac safety studies.

Use of a collaborative tool to simplify the outsourcing of preclinical safety studies: an insight into the AstraZeneca-Charles River Laboratories strategic relationship

In 2012, AstraZeneca entered into a strategic relationship with Charles River Laboratories whereby preclinical safety packages comprising safety pharmacology, toxicology, formulation analysis, in vivo ADME, bioanalysis and pharmacokinetics studies are outsourced. New processes were put in place to ensure seamless workflows with the aim of accelerating the delivery of new medicines to patients. Here, we describe in more detail the AstraZeneca preclinical safety outsourcing model and the way in which a collaborative tool has helped to translate the processes in AstraZeneca and Charles River Laboratories into simpler integrated workflows that are efficient and visible across the two companies.

Social housing of non-rodents during cardiovascular recordings in safety pharmacology and toxicology studies

INTRODUCTION

The Safety Pharmacology Society (SPS) and National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement & Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs) conducted a survey and workshop in 2015 to define current industry practices relating to housing of non-rodents during telemetry recordings in safety pharmacology and toxicology studies. The aim was to share experiences, canvas opinion on the study procedures/designs that could be used and explore the barriers to social housing.

METHODS

Thirty-nine sites, either running studies (Sponsors or Contract Research Organisations, CROs) and/or outsourcing work responded to the survey (51% from Europe; 41% from USA).

RESULTS

During safety pharmacology studies, 84, 67 and 100% of respondents socially house dogs, minipigs and non-human primates (NHPs) respectively on non-recording days. However, on recording days 20, 20 and 33% of respondents socially house the animals, respectively. The main barriers for social housing were limitations in the recording equipment used, study design and animal temperament/activity. During toxicology studies, 94, 100 and 100% of respondents socially house dogs, minipigs and NHPs respectively on non-recording days. However, on recording days 31, 25 and 50% of respondents socially house the animals, respectively. The main barriers for social housing were risk of damage to and limitations in the recording equipment used, food consumption recording and temperament/activity of the animals.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the majority of the industry does not yet socially house animals during telemetry recordings in safety pharmacology and toxicology studies, there is support to implement this refinement. Continued discussions, sharing of best practice and data from companies already socially housing, combined with technology improvements and investments in infrastructure are required to maintain the forward momentum of this refinement across the industry.

Renal studies in safety pharmacology and toxicology: A survey conducted in the top 15 pharmaceutical companies

INTRODUCTION

With the recent development of more sensitive biomarkers to assess kidney injury preclinically, a survey was designed i) to investigate what strategies are used to investigate renal toxicity in both ICH S7A compliant Safety Pharmacology (SP) studies after a single dose of a compound and within repeat-dose toxicity studies by large pharmaceutical companies today; ii) to understand whether renal SP studies have impact or utility in drug development and/or if it may be more appropriate to assess renal effects after multiple doses of compounds; iii) to ascertain how much mechanistic work is performed by the top 15 largest pharmaceutical companies (as determined by R&D revenue size); iv) to gain an insight into the impact of the validation of DIKI biomarkers and their introduction in the safety evaluation paradigm; and v) to understand the impact of renal/urinary safety study data on progression of projects.

METHODS

Two short anonymous surveys were submitted to SP leaders of the top 15 pharmaceutical companies, as defined by 2012 R&D portfolio size. Fourteen multiple choice questions were designed to explore the strategies used to investigate renal effects in both ICH S7A compliant SP studies and within toxicology studies.

RESULTS

A 67% and 60% response rate was obtained in the first and second surveys, respectively. Nine out of ten respondent companies conduct renal excretory measurements (eg. urine analysis) in toxicology studies whereas only five out of ten conduct specific renal SP studies; and all of those 5 also conduct the renal excretory measurements in toxicology studies. These companies measure and/or calculate a variety of parameters as part of these studies, and also on a case by case basis include regulatory qualified and non-qualified DIKI biomarkers. Finally, only one company has used renal/urinary functional data alone to stop a project, whereas the majority of respondents combine renal data with other target organ assessments to form an integrated decision-making set.

CONCLUSION

These short surveys highlighted areas of similarity: a) urinary measurements are most commonly taken on repeat-dose toxicity studies, and b) renal SP studies are less often utilised. The two major differences are a) lack of consistent use of DIKI biomarkers in urinary safety studies and b) the way large pharmaceutical companies assess renal function. Finally, suggestions were made to improve the safety assessment methods for determining the safety of compounds with potential renal liability.

Translation of off-target effects: prediction of ADRs by integrated experimental and computational approach

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are associated with most drugs, often discovered late in drug development and sometimes only during extended course of clinical use.

Translational paradigms in pharmacology and drug discovery

The translational sciences represent the core element in enabling and utilizing the output from the biomedical sciences and to improving drug discovery metrics by reducing the attrition rate as compounds move from preclinical research to clinical proof of concept. Key to understanding the basis of disease causality and to developing therapeutics is an ability to accurately diagnose the disease and to identify and develop safe and effective therapeutics for its treatment. The former requires validated biomarkers and the latter, qualified targets. Progress has been hampered by semantic issues, specifically those that define the end product, and by scientific issues that include data reliability, an overt reductionistic cultural focus and a lack of hierarchically integrated data gathering and systematic analysis. A necessary framework for these activities is represented by the discipline of pharmacology, efforts and training in which require recognition and revitalization.

Methodological innovations expand the safety pharmacology horizon

Almost uniquely in pharmacology, drug safety assessment is driven by the need for elaboration and validation of methods for detecting drug actions. This is the 9th consecutive year that the Journal of Pharmacological and Toxicological Methods (JPTM) has published themed issues arising from the annual meeting of the Safety Pharmacology Society (SPS). The SPS is now past its 10th year as a distinct (from pharmacology to toxicology) discipline that integrates safety pharmacologists from industry with those in academia and the various global regulatory authorities. The themes of the 2011 meeting were (i) the bridging of safety assessment of a new chemical entity (NCE) between all the parties involved, (ii) applied technologies and (iii) translation. This issue of JPTM reflects these themes. The content is informed by the regulatory guidance documents (S7A and S7B) that apply prior to first in human (FIH) studies, which emphasize the importance of seeking model validation. The manuscripts encompass a broad spectrum of safety pharmacology topics including application of state-of-the-art techniques for study conduct and data processing and evaluation. This includes some exciting novel integrated core battery study designs, refinements in hemodynamic assessment, arrhythmia analysis algorithms, and additionally an overview of safety immunopharmacology, and a brief survey discussing similarities and differences in business models that pharmaceutical companies employ in safety pharmacology, together with SPS recommendations on 'best practice' for the conduct of a non-clinical cardiovascular assessment of a NCE.