Best practice considerations for nonclinical in vivo cardiovascular telemetry studies in non-rodent species: Delivering high quality QTc data to support ICH E14/S7B Q&As

The ICH E14/S7B Questions and Answers (Q&As) guideline introduces the concept of a "double negative" nonclinical scenario (negative hERG assay and negative in vivo QTc study) to demonstrate that a drug does not produce a clinically relevant QT prolongation (i.e., no QT liability). This nonclinical "double negative" data package, along with negative Phase 1 clinical QTc data, may be sufficient to substitute for a clinical Thorough QT (TQT) study in some specific cases. While standalone GLP in vivo cardiovascular studies in non-rodent species are standard practice during nonclinical drug development for small molecule programs, a variety of approaches to the design, conduct, analysis and interpretation are utilized across pharmaceutical companies and contract research organizations (CROs) that may, in some cases, negatively impact the stringent sensitivity needed to fulfill the new Q&As. Subject matter experts from both Pharma and CROs have collaborated to recommend best practices for more robust nonclinical cardiovascular telemetry studies in non-rodent species, with input from clinical and regulatory experts. The aim was to increase consistency and harmonization across the industry and to ensure delivery of high quality nonclinical QTc data to meet the proposed sensitivities defined within the revised ICH E14/S7B Q&As guideline (Q&As 5.1 and 6.1). The detailed best practice recommendations presented here cover the design and execution of the safety pharmacology cardiovascular study, including optimal methods for acquiring, analyzing, reporting, and interpreting the resulting QTc and pharmacokinetic data to allow for direct comparison to clinical exposures and assessment of safety margin for QTc prolongation.

Testing the nonclinical Comprehensive In Vitro Proarrhythmia Assay (CiPA) paradigm with an established anti-seizure medication: Levetiracetam case study

Levetiracetam (LEV), a well-established anti-seizure medication (ASM), was launched before the original ICH S7B nonclinical guidance assessing QT prolongation potential and the introduction of the Comprehensive In Vitro Proarrhythmia Assay (CiPA) paradigm. No information was available on its effects on cardiac channels. The goal of this work was to "pressure test" the CiPA approach with LEV and check the concordance of nonclinical core and follow-up S7B assays with clinical and post-marketing data. The following experiments were conducted with LEV (0.25-7.5 mM): patch clamp assays on hERG (acute or trafficking effects), NaV 1.5, CaV 1.2, Kir 2.1, KV 7.1/mink, KV 1.5, KV 4.3, and HCN4; in silico electrophysiology modeling (Virtual Assay® software) in control, large-variability, and high-risk human ventricular cell populations; electrophysiology measurements in human induced pluripotent stem cell (hiPSC)-derived cardiomyocytes and dog Purkinje fibers; ECG measurements in conscious telemetered dogs after single oral administration (150, 300, and 600 mg/kg). Except a slight inhibition (<10%) of hERG and KV 7.1/mink at 7.5 mM, that is, 30-fold the free therapeutic plasma concentration (FTPC) at 1500 mg, LEV did not affect any other cardiac channels or hERG trafficking. In both virtual and real human cardiomyocytes, and in dog Purkinje fibers, LEV induced no relevant changes in electrophysiological parameters or arrhythmia. No QTc prolongation was noted up to 2.7 mM unbound plasma levels in conscious dogs, corresponding to 10-fold the FTPC. Nonclinical assessment integrating CiPA assays shows the absence of QT prolongation and proarrhythmic risk of LEV up to at least 10-fold the FTPC and the good concordance with clinical and postmarketing data, although this does not exclude very rare occurrence of QT prolongation cases in patients with underlying risk factors.

The New S7B/E14 Question and Answer Draft Guidance for Industry: Contents and Commentary

In August 2020, the International Council on Harmonisation (ICH) released a new draft document, which for the first time combined nonclinical (S7B) and clinical (E14) Questions and Answers (Q&As) into 1 document. FDA describes the revision as a “value proposition”: if the human ether‐à‐go‐go assay and the in vivo study are performed in a standardized way, the number of dedicated thorough QT (TQT) studies can be reduced. In this article, we describe and discuss the Q&As that relate to clinical ECG evaluation. If supported by negative standardized nonclinical assays, Q&A 5.1 will obviate the need for a TQT study in the case that a >2‐fold exposure margin vs high clinical scenario cannot be obtained. Q&A 6.1 addresses drugs that are poorly tolerated in healthy subjects and cannot be studied at high doses or in placebo‐controlled studies; it therefore mainly applies to oncology drugs. It will enable sponsors to claim that a new drug has a “low likelihood of proarrhythmic effects” in the case that the mean corrected QT effect is <10 milliseconds at the time of market application. The E14 2015 revision allowed application of concentration–corrected QT analysis on data from routinely performed clinical pharmacology studies, for example, the first‐in‐human study and the proportion of dedicated TQT studies has since steadily decreased. It can be foreseen that the proposed new revision will further reduce the number of TQT studies. To achieve harmonization across regulatory regions, it seems important to reach consensus within the International Council on Harmonisation group on the new threshold proposed in 6.1. For this purpose, the Implementation Working Group has asked for public comments.

Electrophysiological characterization of drug response in hSC-derived cardiomyocytes using voltage-sensitive optical platforms

INTRODUCTION

Voltage-sensitive optical (VSO) sensors offer a minimally invasive method to study the time course of repolarization of the cardiac action potential (AP). This Comprehensive in vitro Proarrhythmia Assay (CiPA) cross-platform study investigates protocol design and measurement variability of VSO sensors for preclinical cardiac electrophysiology assays.

METHODS

Three commercial and one academic laboratory completed a limited study of the effects of 8 blinded compounds on the electrophysiology of 2 commercial lines of human induced pluripotent stem-cell derived cardiomyocytes (hSC-CMs). Acquisition technologies included CMOS camera and photometry; fluorescent voltage sensors included di-4-ANEPPS, FluoVolt and genetically encoded QuasAr2. The experimental protocol was standardized with respect to cell lines, plating and maintenance media, blinded compounds, and action potential parameters measured. Serum-free media was used to study the action of drugs, but the exact composition and the protocols for cell preparation and drug additions varied among sites.

RESULTS

Baseline AP waveforms differed across platforms and between cell types. Despite these differences, the relative responses to four selective ion channel blockers (E-4031, nifedipine, mexiletine, and JNJ 303 blocking I_Kr, I_CaL, I_Na, and I_Ks, respectively) were similar across all platforms and cell lines although the absolute changes differed. Similarly, four mixed ion channel blockers (flecainide, moxifloxacin, quinidine, and ranolazine) had comparable effects in all platforms. Differences in repolarisation time course and response to drugs could be attributed to cell type and experimental method differences such as composition of the assay media, stimulated versus spontaneous activity, and single versus cumulative compound addition.

DISCUSSION

In conclusion, VSOs represent a powerful and appropriate method to assess the electrophysiological effects of drugs on iPSC-CMs for the evaluation of proarrhythmic risk. Protocol considerations and recommendations are provided toward standardizing conditions to reduce variability of baseline AP waveform characteristics and drug responses.

QT Assessment in Early Drug Development: The Long and the Short of It

The QT interval occupies a pivotal role in drug development as a surface biomarker of ventricular repolarization. The electrophysiologic substrate for QT prolongation coupled with reports of non-cardiac drugs producing lethal arrhythmias captured worldwide attention from government regulators eventuating in a series of guidance documents that require virtually all new chemical compounds to undergo rigorous preclinical and clinical testing to profile their QT liability. While prolongation or shortening of the QT interval may herald the appearance of serious cardiac arrhythmias, the positive predictive value of an abnormal QT measurement for these arrhythmias is modest, especially in the absence of confounding clinical features or a congenital predisposition that increases the risk of syncope and sudden death. Consequently, there has been a paradigm shift to assess a compound's cardiac risk of arrhythmias centered on a mechanistic approach to arrhythmogenesis rather than focusing solely on the QT interval. This entails both robust preclinical and clinical assays along with the emergence of concentration QT modeling as a primary analysis tool to determine whether delayed ventricular repolarization is present. The purpose of this review is to provide a comprehensive understanding of the QT interval and highlight its central role in early drug development.

Early drug development: assessment of proarrhythmic risk and cardiovascular safety

INTRODUCTION

hERG assays and thorough ECG trials have been mandated since 2005 to evaluate the QT interval and potential proarrhythmic risk of new chemical entities. The high cost of these studies and the shortcomings inherent in these binary and limited approaches to drug evaluation have prompted regulators to search for more cost effective and mechanistic paradigms to assess drug liability as exemplified by the CiPA initiative and the exposure response ICH E14(R3) guidance document. Areas covered: This review profiles the changing regulatory landscape as it pertains to early drug development and outlines the analyses that can be performed to characterize preclinical and early clinical cardiovascular risk. Expert commentary: It is further acknowledged that the narrow focus on the QT interval needs to be expanded to include a more comprehensive evaluation of cardiovascular risk since unanticipated off target effects have led to the withdrawal of multiple drugs after they had been approved and marketed.

A New Perspective in the Field of Cardiac Safety Testing through the Comprehensive In Vitro Proarrhythmia Assay Paradigm

For the past decade, cardiac safety screening to evaluate the propensity of drugs to produce QT interval prolongation and Torsades de Pointes (TdP) arrhythmia has been conducted according to ICH S7B and ICH E14 guidelines. Central to the existing approach are hERG channel assays and in vivo QT measurements. Although effective, the present paradigm carries a risk of unnecessary compound attrition and high cost, especially when considering costly thorough QT (TQT) studies conducted later in drug development. The C: omprehensive I: n Vitro P: roarrhythmia A: ssay (CiPA) initiative is a public-private collaboration with the aim of updating the existing cardiac safety testing paradigm to better evaluate arrhythmia risk and remove the need for TQT studies. It is hoped that CiPA will produce a standardized ion channel assay approach, incorporating defined tests against major cardiac ion channels, the results of which then inform evaluation of proarrhythmic actions in silico, using human ventricular action potential reconstructions. Results are then to be confirmed using human (stem cell-derived) cardiomyocytes. This perspective article reviews the rationale, progress of, and challenges for the CiPA initiative, if this new paradigm is to replace existing practice and, in time, lead to improved and widely accepted cardiac safety testing guidelines.