Requirements for safety pharmacology testing have been in place since the issue of initial regulatory guidance over 20 years ago. An evaluation of such testing, supporting first clinical entry of 105… Click to show full abstract
Requirements for safety pharmacology testing have been in place since the issue of initial regulatory guidance over 20 years ago. An evaluation of such testing, supporting first clinical entry of 105 small molecule drug candidates over the last decade, showed that a "core battery" of in vitro electrophysiological (hERG), conscious non-rodent telemetry cardiovascular, rodent central nervous system (CNS) (modified Irwin's or functional observational battery [FOB] test) and respiratory function (plethysmography) studies was performed. Routine use of the latter 2 studies appears to have limited utility, with only 21% and 28% of studies, respectively, giving findings of which none were identified as of obvious concern to moving the affected drugs into the clinic. The use of a stand-alone hERG assay does not appear to be particular sensitive in predicting proarrythmic risk as a tool by itself. Telemetry study testing had utility especially for identifying effects on QTc interval (about 10% of studies), resulting on some occasions in a lower clinical starting dose and/or increased awareness for potential effects on the cardiovascular system in the Phase I study. Overall, this investigation provides information supporting an overhaul of the current "box ticking" core battery approach used for safety pharmacology testing. However, in order to achieve a more focused examination to investigate potential undesirable pharmacodynamic effects of a new candidate drug and also support 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) thinking in performing unnecessary studies, there will not only need to be a sea change by drug developers but also a change in current regulatory guidance.
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.