Analysis of secondary pharmacology assays received by the US Food and Drug Administration

Next generation risk assessment for occupational chemical safety - A real world example with sodium-2-hydroxyethane sulfonate

Next Generation Risk Assessment (NGRA) is an exposure-led approach to safety assessment that uses New Approach Methodologies (NAMs). Application of NGRA has been largely restricted to assessments of consumer use of cosmetics and is not currently implemented in occupational safety assessments, e.g. under EU REACH. By contrast, a large proportion of regulatory worker safety assessments are underpinned by toxicological studies using experimental animals. Consequently, occupational safety assessment represents an area that would benefit from increasing application of NGRA to safety decision making. Here, a workflow for conducting NGRA under an occupational safety context was developed, which is illustrated with a case study chemical; sodium 2-hydroxyethane sulphonate (sodium isethionate or SI). Exposures were estimated using a standard occupational exposure model following a comprehensive life cycle assessment of SI and considering factory-specific data. Outputs of this model were then used to estimate internal exposures using a Physiologically Based Kinetic (PBK) model, which was constructed with SI specific Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism and Excretion (ADME) data. PBK modelling indicated a worst-case plasma maximum concentration (Cmax) of 0.8 μM across the SI life cycle. SI bioactivity was assessed in a battery of NAMs relevant to systemic, reproductive, and developmental toxicity; a cell stress panel, high throughput transcriptomics in three cell lines (HepG2, HepaRG and MCF-7 cells), pharmacological profiling and specific assays relating to developmental toxicity (Reprotracker and devTOX quickPredict). Points of Departure (PoDs) for SI ranged from 104 to 5044 µM. Cmax values obtained from PBK modelling of occupational exposures to SI were compared with PoDs from the bioactivity assays to derive Bioactivity Exposure Ratios (BERs) which demonstrated the safety for workers exposed to SI under current levels of factory specific risk management. In summary, the tiered and iterative workflow developed here represents an opportunity for integrating non animal approaches for a large subset of substances for which systemic worker safety assessment is required. Such an approach could be followed to ensure that animal testing is only conducted as a "last resort" e.g. under EU REACH.

The state of the art in secondary pharmacology and its impact on the safety of new medicines

Secondary pharmacology screening of investigational small-molecule drugs for potentially adverse off-target activities has become standard practice in pharmaceutical research and development, and regulatory agencies are increasingly requesting data on activity against targets with recognized adverse effect relationships. However, the screening strategies and target panels used by pharmaceutical companies may vary substantially. To help identify commonalities and differences, as well as to highlight opportunities for further optimization of secondary pharmacology assessment, we conducted a broad-ranging survey across 18 companies under the auspices of the DruSafe leadership group of the International Consortium for Innovation and Quality in Pharmaceutical Development. Based on our analysis of this survey and discussions and additional research within the group, we present here an overview of the current state of the art in secondary pharmacology screening. We discuss best practices, including additional safety-associated targets not covered by most current screening panels, and present approaches for interpreting and reporting off-target activities. We also provide an assessment of the safety impact of secondary pharmacology screening, and a perspective on opportunities and challenges in this rapidly developing field.

Next-generation risk assessment read-across case study: application of a 10-step framework to derive a safe concentration of daidzein in a body lotion

Introduction: We performed an exposure-based Next Generation Risk Assessment case read-across study using New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) to determine the highest safe concentration of daidzein in a body lotion, based on its similarities with its structural analogue, genistein. Two assumptions were: (1) daidzein is a new chemical and its dietary intake omitted; (2) only in vitro data were used for daidzein, while in vitro and legacy in vivo data for genistein were considered. Methods: The 10-step tiered approach evaluating systemic toxicity included toxicokinetics NAMs: PBPK models and in vitro biokinetics measurements in cells used for toxicogenomics and toxicodynamic NAMs: pharmacology profiling (i.e., interaction with molecular targets), toxicogenomics and EATS assays (endocrine disruption endpoints). Whole body rat and human PBPK models were used to convert external doses of genistein to plasma concentrations and in vitro Points of Departure (PoD) to external doses. The PBPK human dermal module was refined using in vitro human skin metabolism and penetration data. Results: The most relevant endpoint for daidzein was from the ERα assay (Lowest Observed Effective Concentration was 100 ± 0.0 nM), which was converted to an in vitro PoD of 33 nM. After application of a safety factor of 3.3 for intra-individual variability, the safe concentration of daidzein was estimated to be 10 nM. This was extrapolated to an external dose of 0.5 μg/cm2 for a body lotion and face cream, equating to a concentration of 0.1%. Discussion: When in vitro PoD of 33 nM for daidzein was converted to an external oral dose in rats, the value correlated with the in vivo NOAEL. This increased confidence that the rat oral PBPK model provided accurate estimates of internal and external exposure and that the in vitro PoD was relevant in the safety assessment of both chemicals. When plasma concentrations estimated from applications of 0.1% and 0.02% daidzein were used to calculate bioactivity exposure ratios, values were >1, indicating a good margin between exposure and concentrations causing adverse effects. In conclusion, this case study highlights the use of NAMs in a 10-step tiered workflow to conclude that the highest safe concentration of daidzein in a body lotion is 0.1%.

ICH S1 prospective evaluation study and weight of evidence assessments: commentary from industry representatives

Industry representatives on the ICH S1B(R1) Expert Working Group (EWG) worked closely with colleagues from the Drug Regulatory Authorities to develop an addendum to the ICH S1B guideline on carcinogenicity studies that allows for a weight-of-evidence (WoE) carcinogenicity assessment in some cases, rather than conducting a 2-year rat carcinogenicity study. A subgroup of the EWG composed of regulators have published in this issue a detailed analysis of the Prospective Evaluation Study (PES) conducted under the auspices of the ICH S1B(R1) EWG. Based on the experience gained through the Prospective Evaluation Study (PES) process, industry members of the EWG have prepared the following commentary to aid sponsors in assessing the standard WoE factors, considering how novel investigative approaches may be used to support a WoE assessment, and preparing appropriate documentation of the WoE assessment for presentation to regulatory authorities. The commentary also reviews some of the implementation challenges sponsors must consider in developing a carcinogenicity assessment strategy. Finally, case examples drawn from previously marketed products are provided as a supplement to this commentary to provide additional examples of how WoE criteria may be applied. The information and opinions expressed in this commentary are aimed at increasing the quality of WoE assessments to ensure the successful implementation of this approach.

Electrophysiological Changes in the Rabbit Ventricular Wedge and Human-Induced Pluripotent Stem-Cell Derived (IPSC) Cardiomyocytes Translate to Severe Arrhythmia Observed in a Canine Toxicology Study, Not Predicted by Standard In Vitro Ion Channel Assays

During drug discovery, small molecules are typically assayed in vitro for secondary pharmacology effects, which include ion channels relevant to cardiac electrophysiology. Compound A was an irreversible inhibitor of myeloperoxidase investigated for the treatment of peripheral artery disease. Oral doses in dogs at ≥5 mg/kg resulted in cardiac arrhythmias in a dose-dependent manner (at Cmax, free ≥1.53 μM) that progressed in severity with time. Nevertheless, a panel of 13 different cardiac ion channel (K, Na, and Ca) assays, including hERG, failed to identify pharmacologic risks of the molecule. Compound A and a related Compound B were evaluated for electrophysiological effects in the isolated rabbit ventricular wedge assay. Compounds A and B prolonged QT and Tp-e intervals at ≥1 and ≥.3 μM, respectively, and both prolonged QRS at ≥5 μM. Compound A produced early after depolarizations and premature ventricular complexes at ≥5 μM. These data indicate both compounds may be modulating hERG (Ikr) and Nav1.5 ion channels. In human IPSC cardiomyocytes, Compounds A and B prolonged field potential duration at ≥3 μM and induced cellular dysrhythmia at ≥10 and ≥3 μM, respectively. In a rat toxicology study, heart tissue: plasma concentration ratios for Compound A were ≥19X at 24 hours post-dose, indicating significant tissue distribution. In conclusion, in vitro ion channel assays may not always identify cardiovascular electrophysiological risks observed in vivo, which can be affected by tissue drug distribution. Risk for arrhythmia may increase with a "trappable" ion channel inhibitor, particularly if cardiac tissue drug levels achieve a critical threshold for pharmacologic effects.

New science, drug regulation, and emergent public health issues: The work of FDA's division of applied regulatory science

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Division of Applied Regulatory Science (DARS) moves new science into the drug review process and addresses emergent regulatory and public health questions for the Agency. By forming interdisciplinary teams, DARS conducts mission-critical research to provide answers to scientific questions and solutions to regulatory challenges. Staffed by experts across the translational research spectrum, DARS forms synergies by pulling together scientists and experts from diverse backgrounds to collaborate in tackling some of the most complex challenges facing FDA. This includes (but is not limited to) assessing the systemic absorption of sunscreens, evaluating whether certain drugs can convert to carcinogens in people, studying drug interactions with opioids, optimizing opioid antagonist dosing in community settings, removing barriers to biosimilar and generic drug development, and advancing therapeutic development for rare diseases. FDA tasks DARS with wide ranging issues that encompass regulatory science; DARS, in turn, helps the Agency solve these challenges. The impact of DARS research is felt by patients, the pharmaceutical industry, and fellow regulators. This article reviews applied research projects and initiatives led by DARS and conducts a deeper dive into select examples illustrating the impactful work of the Division.

Safety pharmacology in 2022: Taking one small step for cardiovascular safety assay development but one giant leap for regulatory drug safety assessment

The 2021 Annual Safety Pharmacology (SP) Society (SPS) meeting was held virtually October 4–8, 2021 due to the continuing COVID-19 global pandemic. This themed issue of J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods comprises articles arising from the meeting. As in previous years the manuscripts reflect various areas of innovation in SP including a perspective on aging and its impact on drug attrition during safety assessments, an integrated assessment of respiratory, cardiovascular and animal activity of in vivo nonclinical studies, development of a dynamic QT-rate correction method in primates, evaluation of the “comprehensive in vitro proarrhythmia assay” (CiPA) ion channel protocol to the automated patch clamp, and best practices regarding the conduct of hERG electrophysiology studies and an analysis of secondary pharmacology assays by the FDA. The meeting also generated 85 abstracts (reproduced in the current volume of J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods). It appears that the validation of methods remains a challenge in SP. Nevertheless, the continued efforts to mine approaches to detection of proarrhythmia liability remains a baffling obsession given the ability of Industry to completely prevent drugs entering into clinical study only to be found to have proarrhythmic properties, with no reports of such for at least ten years. Perhaps it is time to move on from CiPA and find genuine problems to solve?