The new big is small: Leveraging knowledge from small trials for rare disease drug development: Blarcamesine for Rett syndrome.

Big data in drug development may not satisfactorily address the demands of precision medicine in a rare disease population, making the use of smaller clinical trials necessary. Consequently, the use of innovative design and analysis of these clinical trials using model-informed approaches have become indispensable. This requires informative exposure-outcome analysis, together with formal statistical analysis, which should include the strength of evidence for a study outcome. We demonstrate how knowledge can be gained, with supporting strength of evidence, from a small (data) clinical trial with a low dose of blarcamesine in the treatment of Rett syndrome. Based on a small data paradigm, pharmacometrics item response theory modelling and Bayes factor analysis were used to demonstrate the efficacy of blarcamesine in Rett syndrome.

Demographics of clinical trials participants in pivotal clinical trials for new molecular entity drugs and biologics approved by FDA From 2010 to 2012.

To fully assess the safety and efficacy of therapeutics before approval, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has encouraged adequate representation and assessment of demographic subgroups in clinical trials through guidance documents and regulations. This study aimed to survey the demographics of participants in pivotal clinical trials, as well as the presence of analyses by sex on efficacy and safety for FDA-approved new drug applications (NDAs) and biologics license applications (BLAs) from 2010 to 2012. Medical and statistical reviews for new molecular entity drugs and biological products approved during this period were obtained from Drugs@FDA. All pivotal clinical trials referenced in the FDA reviews were evaluated for the participation of different demographic subgroups (such as sex, race/ethnicity, and age). Pivotal trials were defined as those phase 2 and/or phase 3 trials described in the labeling or the FDA medical reviews in support of the drug/biological approval. Eighty-three new molecular entities (66 NDAs and 17 BLAs) were approved by the FDA from 2010 to 2012. Overall, women constituted 45% of trial participants for NDAs and 65% for BLAs. Sex analysis related to safety and efficacy was reported in 92% of the surveyed FDA medical and statistical reviews. Most NDAs and BLAs (82%) had a study population that was representative of the sex distribution for the intended patient population; however, most study participants were whites (77%), and minority racial/ethnic groups had lower participation rates in the study population than would be representative of the US racial group populations.

Population-Based Characterization of the Pharmacokinetics and Food Effect of ANAVEX3-71, a Novel Sigma-1 Receptor and Allosteric M1 Muscarinic Receptor Agonist in Development for Treatment of Frontotemporal Dementia, Schizophrenia, and Alzheimer Disease.

Pharmacokinetic (PK) data from 28 subjects who received 5-200-mg single ascending doses of ANAVEX3-71, formerly AF710B, were analyzed to characterize the PK of ANAVEX3-71 and its M8 metabolite. PK data from 12 subjects who received 160 mg ANAVEX3-71 under fed and fasted conditions were analyzed to characterize the effect of food on the PK of the drug and its M8 metabolite. PK was characterized using the standard 2-stage approach and the nonlinear mixed-effects modeling approach. Dose proportionality was determined using the power model. Two- and 3-compartment linear PK models were tested for the characterization of the PK of ANAVEX3-71 and its M8 metabolite. The PK of ANAVEX3-71 is linear, dose proportional, and time invariant. The drug is rapidly eliminated with a mean (standard deviation) apparent terminal elimination half-life of 3.56 (4.09) hours, while the M8 metabolite was eliminated with a mean (standard deviation) apparent terminal elimination half-life of 6.59 (1.64) hours. The population PK model was used to investigate the effects of covariates on the PK of ANAVEX3-71 and M8. Age, weight, and creatinine clearance were not explanatory of the variability in apparent clearance and apparent volume of the central compartment of ANAVEX3-71. Food had no effect on the PK of ANAVEX3-71 and its M8 metabolite.

TransRadial Education and Therapeutics (TREAT): shifting the balance of safety and efficacy of antithrombotic agents in percutaneous coronary intervention: a report from the Cardiac Safety Research Consortium.

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is an integral part of the treatment of coronary artery disease. The most common complication of PCI, bleeding, typically occurs at the vascular access site and is associated with short-term and long-term morbidity and mortality. Periprocedural bleeding also represents the primary safety concern of concomitant antithrombotic therapies essential for PCI success. Use of radial access for PCI reduces procedural bleeding and hence may change the risk profile and net clinical benefit of these drugs. This new drug-device safety interaction creates opportunities to advance the safe and effective use of antithrombotic agents during PCI. In June 2010 and March 2011, leaders from government, academia, professional societies, device manufacturing, and pharmaceutical industries convened for 2 think tank meetings. Titled TREAT I and II, these forums examined approaches to improve the overall safety of PCI by optimizing strategies for antithrombotic drug use and radial artery access. This article summarizes the content and proceedings of these sessions.

Concentration-QTc Relationship from a Single Ascending Dose Study of ANAVEX3-71, a Novel Sigma-1 Receptor and Allosteric M1 Muscarinic Receptor Agonist in Development for the Treatment of Frontotemporal Dementia, Schizophrenia, and Alzheimer's Disease.

This is the cardiodynamic evaluation of a single ascending dose study in healthy participants with the primary objective of assessing the effect of ANAVEX3-71, formerly AF710B, on ECG parameters. Twelve-lead ECGs were obtained at 3 time points within 1 hour prior to dosing to establish a baseline and then serially postdose. Concentration-QTc analysis of plasma concentrations of ANAVEX3-71 and metabolite M8 was conducted. ANAVEX3-71 at the studied doses did not have a clinically relevant effect on heart rate or on the PR and QRS intervals. ANAVEX3-71 alone was retained in the primary model due to small fit differences between models which included the metabolite M8. The estimated population slope of the concentration-QTcF relationship was small and slightly negative: -0.017 ms per µg/L, with a small treatment effect-specific intercept of -0.49 ms. An effect on the placebo-corrected, change-from-baseline QTc exceeding 10 ms can be excluded within the full observed ranges of plasma concentrations of ANAVEX3-71 and M8 up to ∼996 and ∼58 µg/L, respectively. The results from this cardiodynamic evaluation demonstrated that ANAVEX3-71 at single ascending doses of 5-200 mg had no clinically relevant effects on any of the studied ECG parameters.

Representation of Women and Minorities in Clinical Trials for New Molecular Entities and Original Therapeutic Biologics Approved by FDA CDER from 2013 to 2015.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has made efforts to encourage adequate assessment of women, racial/ethnic minorities, and geriatric participants in clinical trials through regulations and guidance documents. This study surveyed the demographics of clinical trial participants and the presence of efficacy and safety analyses by sex for new drugs approved between 2013 and 2015 by the FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. METHODS: New drug marketing applications submitted to FDA were surveyed for demographic data (sex, race, ethnicity, and age) and the presence of sex-based analyses for efficacy and safety. The Ratio of the Proportion of women in clinical trials for the indicated disease population relative to the estimated Proportion of women in the disease population (PPR) was calculated for new drug indications. RESULTS: Of the 102 new drugs in this cohort (defined as new molecular entity drugs and original therapeutic biologics), sex was reported for >99.9% of trial participants, and women accounted for 40.4% of these participants. An estimated 77.2% of participants were White, 6.4% were Black/African American, and 29.1% were aged ≥65 years. Sex-based analyses for both efficacy and safety were conducted for 93.1% of applications. PPR was calculated for 82 new drugs for a total of 60 indications, of which 50 indications (83.3%) had a PPR ≥0.80. CONCLUSIONS: Sex data are now collected for almost all study participants, and this study shows appropriate sex participation for most new drugs when estimated disease prevalence by sex (PPR) is considered. Therapeutic area and disease indication are important considerations when assessing the sex of participants because variation occurs depending on the disease under study. Some racial minorities, especially Blacks/African Americans, are still not well represented in most drug development programs and remain an area where improvement is needed.

The Food and Drug Administration Office of Women's Health: Impact of Science on Regulatory Policy: An Update.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration Office of Women's Health (FDA OWH) has supported women's health research for ∼20 years, funding more than 300 studies on women's health issues, including research on diseases/conditions that disproportionately affect women in addition to the evaluation of sex differences in the performance of and response to medical products. These important women's health issues are studied from a regulatory perspective, with a focus on improving and optimizing medical product development and the evaluation of product safety and efficacy in women. These findings have influenced industry direction, labeling, product discontinuation, safety notices, and clinical practice. In addition, OWH-funded research has addressed gaps in the knowledge about diseases and medical conditions that impact women across the life span such as cardiovascular disease, pregnancy, menopause, osteoporosis, and the safe use of numerous medical products.

Alcohol and Aldehyde Dehydrogenases Contribute to Sex-Related Differences in Clearance of Zolpidem in Rats.

OBJECTIVES: The recommended zolpidem starting dose was lowered in females (5 mg vs. 10 mg) since side effects were more frequent and severe than those of males; the mechanism underlying sex differences in pharmacokinetics (PK) is unknown. We hypothesized that such differences were caused by known sex-related variability in alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH) expression. METHODS: Male, female, and castrated male rats were administered 2.6 mg/kg zolpidem, ± disulfiram (ADH/ALDH pathway inhibitor) to compare PK changes induced by sex and gonadal hormones. PK analyses were conducted in rat plasma and rat brain. KEY FINDINGS: Sex differences in PK were evident: females had a higher C MAX (112.4 vs. 68.1 ug/L) and AUC (537.8 vs. 231.8 h(∗)ug/L) than uncastrated males. Castration induced an earlier T MAX (0.25 vs. 1 h), greater C MAX (109.1 vs. 68.1 ug/L), and a corresponding AUC increase (339.7 vs. 231.8 h(∗)ug/L). Administration of disulfiram caused more drastic C MAX and T MAX changes in male vs. female rats that mirrored the effects of castration on first-pass metabolism, suggesting that the observed PK differences may be caused by ADH/ALDH expression. Brain concentrations paralleled plasma concentrations. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that sex differences in zolpidem PK are influenced by variation in the expression of ADH/ALDH due to gonadal androgens.

The science of sex and gender in human health: online courses to create a foundation for sex and gender accountability in biomedical research and treatment.

BACKGROUND: Sex and gender differences play a significant role in the course and outcome of conditions that affect specific organ systems in the human body. Research on differences in the effects of medical intervention has helped scientists develop a number of sex- and gender-specific guidelines on the treatment and management of these conditions. An online series of courses, "The Science of Sex and Gender in Human Health," developed by the National Institutes of Health Office of Research on Women's Health and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Office of Women's Health, examines sex and gender differences and their implications. Thus far, three online courses have been generated. The first course offers an overview of the scientific and biological basis for sex- and gender-related differences. The second course is focused on disease-specific sex and gender differences in health and behavior and their implications. Finally, the third course covers the influence of sex and gender on disease manifestation, treatment, and outcome. METHODS: Data were obtained using website analytics and post-course surveys. RESULTS: To date, over 1000 individuals have completed at least one course. Additionally, 600 users have received continuing education credit for completing a course in the series. Finally, the majority of respondents to the online course survey have indicated that the courses considerably enhanced their professional effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: "The Science of Sex and Gender in Human Health" online courses are freely available sources of information that provide healthcare providers and researchers with the resources to successfully account for sex and gender in their medical practice and research programs.

Participation of women and sex analyses in late-phase clinical trials of new molecular entity drugs and biologics approved by the FDA in 2007-2009.

BACKGROUND: Biological sex differences may contribute to differential treatment outcomes for therapeutic products. This study tracks women's participation in late-phase clinical trials (LPCTs), where efficacy and safety of drugs and biologics are evaluated, of new molecular entity (NME) drugs and biologics approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2007-2009. Furthermore, presentations of sex-based analyses were assessed from the FDA reviews. METHODS: New drug applications (NDAs) and biologics license applications (BLAs) were accessed from the U.S. FDA database and evaluated for women's participation in LPCTs. Sex-based analyses for efficacy and safety contained in FDA reviews were surveyed. Ratios for women's LPCT participation (PROPORTION OF STUDY SUBJECTS) to their proportion in the disease population were calculated for each approved therapeutic product and grouped into therapeutic categories. RESULTS: Sex-specific (n=5) and pediatric (n=3) drug applications were excluded. Women's participation in LPCTs was 39%, 48%, and 42% in NDAs (n=50) and 49%, 62%, and 58% in BLAs (n=11) for 2007, 2008, and 2009, respectively. Sixty-four percent of NDAs and 91% of BLAs had participation to proportion ratios of ≥0.80. Seventy-four percent of NDA reviews and 64% of BLA reviews included safety and efficacy sex analysis. Ninety-six percent of NDA reviews and 100% of BLA reviews included efficacy sex analysis. CONCLUSION: Women's participation in LPCTs averaged 43% for NDAs and 57% for BLAs in 2007-2009 and varied widely by indication. As a comparison, the 2001 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported 52% of women's participation for drug clinical trials in1998-2000 and an FDA study reported 45% for BLAs approved from 1995 to 1999. This study showed that sex-analysis of both safety and efficacy in NDA has increased to 74% since the GAO report of 72%, while those for BLAs increased to 64% from 37% reported for therapeutic biologics approved in 1995-1999. Knowledge of disease prevalence and participation in clinical trials provides an understanding of recruitment and retention patterns of patients in these trials.

Dialogues on diversifying clinical trials: successful strategies for engaging women and minorities in clinical trials.

There is mounting scientific evidence pointing to genetic or physiologic distinctions between genders and among racial and ethnic groups that influence disease risk and severity and response to treatment. The diverse enrollment of subjects engaged in clinical trials research is, thus, critical to developing safer and more effective drugs and medical devices. However, in the United States, there are striking disparities in clinical trial participation. To address this problem, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Office of Women's Health and the Society for Women's Health Research (SWHR) together convened the 2-day meeting, Dialogues on Diversifying Clinical Trials. The conference was held in Washington, DC, on September 22-23, 2011, and brought together a wide range of speakers from clinical research, industry, and regulatory agencies. Here, we present the major findings discussed at this meeting about female and minority patients and physicians and their willingness to participate in clinical trials and the barriers that sponsors face in recruiting a diverse trial population. We also discuss some recommendations for improving trial diversity through new technologies and greater efficiency in trial regulation and review.

Adverse effects in women: implications for drug development and regulatory policies.

The requirement to establish safety of drugs prior to marketing has been in place since 1938 by the US Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and is by no means a new concept. The efficacy regulations were enacted in 1962 via the Kefauver-Harris Amendment and the drug approval process has evolved thereafter. The assessment of safety and efficacy of drug products is made by pharmaceutical companies during drug development, which then goes through a regulatory review by the US FDA for the determination of market approval or nonapproval. The drug development and regulatory approval processes have endured close ongoing scrutiny by regulatory bodies, the public, US Congress and academic and private organizations and, as a result, have ensured continual refinement. Over the years, evidence has been emerging on varied drug responses in subgroup populations, and the underlying biology associated with age, race and sex as demographic variables have been examined. The resulting growing knowledge of disease burden, treatment response and disparate outcomes has generated opportunities to streamline and improve treatment outcomes in these populations. This article discusses the historical context of women's participation in clinical drug trials submitted to the FDA for regulatory review and approval purposes. The inadvertent consequences of women's exclusion or inadequate representation in past clinical trials and the evidentiary basis for understanding sex differences are also evaluated. Advances in the US regulatory processes to address treatment outcomes that are tied to the topic of this paper, specifically, adverse drug effects in women, are also discussed.