The use of weight-of-evidence approaches to characterize developmental toxicity risk for therapeutic monoclonal antibodies in humans without in vivo studies.

Regulatory guidance for global drug development relies on animal studies to evaluate safety risks for humans, including risk of reproductive toxicity. Weight-of-evidence approaches (WoE) are increasingly becoming acceptable to evaluate risk. A WoE for developmental risk of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) was evaluated for its ability to retrospectively characterize risk and to determine the need for further in vivo testing based on the remaining uncertainty. Reproductive toxicity studies of 65 mAbs were reviewed and compared to the WoE. Developmental toxicities were absent in 52/65 (80%) mAbs. Lack of toxicity was correctly predicted in 29/52 (56%) cases. False positive and equivocal predictions were made in 9/52 (17%) and 14/52 (27%) cases. For 3/65 (5%) mAbs, the findings were equivocal. Of mAbs with developmental toxicity findings (10/65, 15%), the WoE correctly anticipated pharmacology based reproductive toxicity without any false negative predictions in 9/10 (90%) cases, and in the remaining case ( 1/10, 10%) an in vivo study was recommended due to equivocal WoE outcome. Therefore, this WoE approach could characterize presence and absence of developmental risk without animal studies. The current WoE could have reduced the need for developmental toxicity studies by 42% without loss of important patient information in the label.

A roadmap towards a human-centric safety assessment of advanced therapy medicinal products.

Advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) are among the most complex pharmaceuticals with high human specificity. Species differences severely limit the clinical relevance of in vivo data. We conducted interviews with stakeholders involved in ATMP development about their perspective on the use of in vivo studies, the perceived hurdles and associated potential solutions regarding non-clinical development of ATMPs. In total, 17 stakeholders from 9 different countries were interviewed. A workshop was held with key stakeholders to further discuss major topics identified from the interviews. Conducting in vivo studies remains the status quo for ATMPs development. The hurdles identified included determining the amount of information required before clinical entry and effective use of limited human samples to understand a treatment or for clinical monitoring. A number of key points defined the need for future in vivo studies as well as improved application and implementation of New Approach Methodology (NAM)-based approach for products within a well-known modality or technology platform. These included data transparency, understanding of the added value of in vivo studies, and continuous advancement, evaluation, and qualification of NAMs. Based on the outcome of the discussions, a roadmap with practical steps towards a human-centric safety assessment of ATMPs was established.

Re-evaluating the need for chronic toxicity studies with therapeutic monoclonal antibodies, using a weight of evidence approach.

To support registration of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for chronic indications, 6-month toxicity studies have historically been conducted. Experience with mAb development has shown a relatively benign and well-understood safety profile for this class, with most toxicity findings anticipated based on pharmacology. We evaluated whether a 6-month toxicity study is necessary to assess the long-term safety of mAbs. Data on First-in-Human (FIH)-enabling and chronic toxicity studies were shared for 142 mAbs submitted by 11 companies. Opportunities to further optimize study designs to reduce animal usage were identified. For 71% of mAbs, no toxicities or no new toxicities were noted in chronic studies compared to FIH-enabling study findings. New toxicities of potential concern for human safety or that changed trial design were identified in 13.5% of cases, with 7% being considered critical and 2% leading to program termination. An iterative, weight-of-evidence model which considers factors that influence the overall risk for a mAb to cause toxicity was developed. This model enables an evidence-based justification, suggesting when 3-month toxicity studies are likely sufficient to support late-stage clinical development and registration for some mAbs.