Advantages of toxicokinetics in new drug development

The principle of safety evaluation in medicinal drug - how can toxicology contribute to drug discovery and development as a multidisciplinary science?

Pharmaceutical (drug) safety assessment covers a diverse science-field in the drug discovery and development including the post-approval and post-marketing phases in order to evaluate safety and risk management. The principle in toxicological science is to be placed on both of pure and applied sciences that are derived from past/present scientific knowledge and coming new science and technology. In general, adverse drug reactions are presented as "biological responses to foreign substances." This is the basic concept of thinking about the manifestation of adverse drug reactions. Whether or not toxic expressions are extensions of the pharmacological effect, adverse drug reactions as seen from molecular targets are captured in the category of "on-target" or "off-target", and are normally expressed as a biological defense reaction. Accordingly, reactions induced by pharmaceuticals can be broadly said to be defensive reactions. Recent molecular biological conception is in line with the new, remarkable scientific and technological developments in the medical and pharmaceutical areas, and the viewpoints in the field of toxicology have shown that they are approaching toward the same direction as well. This paper refers to the basic concept of pharmaceutical toxicology, the differences for safety assessment in each stage of drug discovery and development, regulatory submission, and the concept of scientific considerations for risk assessment and management from the viewpoint of "how can multidisciplinary toxicology contribute to innovative drug discovery and development?" And also realistic translational research from preclinical to clinical application is required to have a significant risk management in post market by utilizing whole scientific data derived from basic and applied scientific research works. In addition, the significance for employing the systems toxicology based on AOP (Adverse Outcome Pathway) analysis is introduced, and coming challenges on precision medicine are to be addressed for the new aspect of efficacy and safety evaluation.

The impact of composite AUC estimates on the prediction of systemic exposure in toxicology experiments

Current toxicity protocols relate measures of systemic exposure (i.e. AUC, C_max) as obtained by non-compartmental analysis to observed toxicity. A complicating factor in this practice is the potential bias in the estimates defining safe drug exposure. Moreover, it prevents the assessment of variability. The objective of the current investigation was therefore (a) to demonstrate the feasibility of applying nonlinear mixed effects modelling for the evaluation of toxicokinetics and (b) to assess the bias and accuracy in summary measures of systemic exposure for each method. Here, simulation scenarios were evaluated, which mimic toxicology protocols in rodents. To ensure differences in pharmacokinetic properties are accounted for, hypothetical drugs with varying disposition properties were considered. Data analysis was performed using non-compartmental methods and nonlinear mixed effects modelling. Exposure levels were expressed as area under the concentration versus time curve (AUC), peak concentrations (C_max) and time above a predefined threshold (TAT). Results were then compared with the reference values to assess the bias and precision of parameter estimates. Higher accuracy and precision were observed for model-based estimates (i.e. AUC, C_max and TAT), irrespective of group or treatment duration, as compared with non-compartmental analysis. Despite the focus of guidelines on establishing safety thresholds for the evaluation of new molecules in humans, current methods neglect uncertainty, lack of precision and bias in parameter estimates. The use of nonlinear mixed effects modelling for the analysis of toxicokinetics provides insight into variability and should be considered for predicting safe exposure in humans.

Relationship between AUC of 5'-DFUR and toxicity of capecitabine, fluoropyrimidine carbamate analogs, and 5'-DFUR in monkeys, mice, and rats

Capecitabine is an oral fluoropyrimidine carbamate which is converted to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) via 3 enzymatic step to 5'-deoxy-5-fluorocytidine (5'-DFCR), 5'-deoxy-5-fluorouridine (5'-DFUR), and finally 5-FU. We performed 4-week toxicity studies of capecitabine (N(4)-pentyloxycarbonyl-5'-deoxy-5-fluorouridine), galocitabine (trimethoxybenzyl-5'-deoxy-5-fluorocytidine), 4 different fluoropyrimidine carbamate analogs (R=butyl, isopentyl, propyl, or phenethyl), and 5'-DFUR in cynomolgus monkeys with toxicokinetic measurements of intact molecules, 5'-DFCR, and 5'-DFUR. Four-week toxicity data for capecitabine in rats and mice were also obtained for comparison. Capecitabine, galocitabine, butyl, and isopentyl analogs showed similar toxicities in hematopoietic and intestinal organs at 1.0 mmol/kg and the AUCs of 5'-DFUR were approximately 40 to 60 microg*hr/ml. These compounds showed slight toxicity at 0.5 mmol/kg and no toxicity at 0.1 mmol/kg, and AUCs of 5'-DFUR were approximately 30 and 5 microg*hr/ml, respectively. Propyl and phenethyl analogs showed slight toxicity at 1.0 mmol/kg and no toxicity at 0.5 mmol/kg, and AUCs of 5'-DFUR were approximately 30 and 10 microg*hr/ml, respectively. On the other hand, severe and slight-to-moderate toxicity was observed at 0.5 and 0.25 mmol/kg in 5'-DFUR-treated monkeys and AUCs of 5'DFUR were 35.6 and 5.2 microg*hr/ml, respectively. In mice and rats, the toxicity of capecitabine was less than in monkeys relative to dose, but 5'-DFUR AUCs were almost the same. In conclusion, 5'-DFUR AUC correlated with toxicity following oral administration of capecitabine and its analogs in monkeys, mice, and rats, although this relationship is not seen in humans. Capecitabine was less toxic in monkeys than oral 5'-DFUR according to dose (mmol/kg) and 5'-DFUR AUC.