Clinical Pharmacology of RNA Interference-Based Therapeutics: A Summary Based on Food and Drug Administration-Approved Small Interfering RNAs.

RNA-based oligonucleotide therapeutics are revolutionizing drug development for disease treatment. This class of therapeutics differs from small molecules and protein therapeutics in various ways, including both its mechanism of action and clinical pharmacology characteristics. These unique characteristics, along with evolving oligonucleotide-associated conjugates allowing specific tissue targeting, have fueled interest in the evaluation of RNA-based oligonucleotide therapeutics in a rapidly increasing number of therapeutic areas. With these unique attributes as well as growing therapeutic potential, oligonucleotide therapeutics have generated significant interest from a clinical pharmacology perspective. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) previously published results of a survey that summarized clinical pharmacology studies supporting oligonucleotide therapies approved and in development between 2012 and 2018. Since the first approval of a small interfering RNA (siRNA) therapeutic in 2018, this class of modalities has gained momentum in various therapeutic areas. Hence, a comprehensive examination of the clinical pharmacology of FDA-approved siRNA therapeutics would benefit the path forward for many stakeholders. Thus, in this current review, we thoroughly examine and summarize clinical pharmacology data of the FDA-approved siRNA therapeutics approved from 2018 (year of first approval) to 2022, aimed at facilitating future drug development and regulatory decision making. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: This review systematically summarizes the clinical pharmacology information of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved small interfering RNAs (siRNA) therapeutics. SiRNAs are revolutionizing the drug development field. Unique clinical pharmacology characteristics represent a differentiating factor for this class of therapeutics. The FDArecently published a draft guidance for clinical pharmacology considerations for developing oligonucleotide therapeutics. As clinical development of this class of therapeutics is fast growing, this review will inform discovery and clinical-stage evaluation of upcoming siRNA-associated drug candidates.

Association of genetic mutations and loss of ambulation in childhood-onset dystrophinopathy.

BACKGROUND: Quantifying associations between genetic mutations and loss of ambulation (LoA) among males diagnosed with childhood-onset dystrophinopathy is important for understanding variation in disease progression and may be useful in clinical trial design. METHODS: Genetic and clinical data from the Muscular Dystrophy Surveillance, Tracking, and Research Network for 358 males born and diagnosed from 1982 to 2011 were analyzed. LoA was defined as the age at which independent ambulation ceased. Genetic mutations were defined by overall type (deletion/duplication/point mutation) and among deletions, those amenable to exon-skipping therapy (exons 8, 20, 44-46, 51-53) and another group. Cox proportional hazards regression modeling was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Mutation type did not predict time to LoA. Controlling for corticosteroids, Exons 8 (HR = 0.22; 95% CI = 0.08, 0.63) and 44 (HR = 0.30; 95% CI = 0.12, 0.78) were associated with delayed LoA compared to other exon deletions. CONCLUSIONS: Delayed LoA in males with mutations amenable to exon-skipping therapy is consistent with previous studies. These findings suggest that clinical trials including exon 8 and 44 skippable males should consider mutation information prior to randomization.

Assessment of the Immunogenicity Potential for Oligonucleotide-Based Drugs.

Therapeutic oligonucleotides (ONs) have characteristics of both small molecules and biologics. Although safety assessment of ONs largely follows guidelines established for small molecules, the unique characteristics of ONs often require incorporation of concepts from the safety assessment of biologics. The assessment of immunogenicity for ON therapeutics is one area where the approach is distinct from either established small molecule or biologic platforms. Information regarding immunogenicity of ONs is limited, but indicates that administration of ONs can result in antidrug antibody formation. In this study, we summarize the collective experience of the Oligonucleotide Safety Working Group in designing the immunogenicity assessment appropriate for this class of therapeutic, including advice on assay development, clinical monitoring, and evaluation of the impact of immunogenicity on exposure, efficacy, and safety of therapeutic ONs.

Clinical Pharmacology Studies Supporting Oligonucleotide Therapy Development: An Assessment of Therapies Approved and in Development Between 2012 and 2018.

Synthetic nucleotides that utilize RNA-centric pharmacology can target diseases at the RNA level, thus altering protein expression in ways previously inaccessible to small molecules and therapeutic biologics. Recognizing that the unique pharmacology of oligonucleotides may require specific considerations in pre-approval assessment, clinical and nonclinical pharmacology studies being conducted for a selected set of oligonucleotide therapies in a 6-year period were assessed. This investigation focused primarily on the four following areas: (i) drug-drug interaction (DDI) potential, (ii) organ impairment (i.e., renal and hepatic impairment), (iii) immunogenicity, and (iv) cardiac safety. Data were summarized and assessed from 14 Investigational New Drug programs and 7 New Drug Applications submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from the period of January 2012 to August 2018, encompassing 152 unique studies. The assessment of DDI potential was largely consistent with the recommendations of current DDI-relevant guidances. Limited data were available to provide recommendations across organ impairment categories. Limited data on immunogenicity indicate impact on pharmacokinetic, the impact on safety and efficacy, although not extensively evaluated, appeared negligible. Cardiac safety evaluation indicated a potential for discordant translation of risk from nonclinical studies to clinical findings. Continued experience with synthetic oligonucleotide therapies will help inform the development of best practices to support their development and regulatory approval.

A randomized, controlled trial of the renal effects of ultrafiltration as compared to furosemide in patients with acute decompensated heart failure.

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to evaluate the consequences of ultrafiltration (UF) and standard intravenous diuretic (furosemide) therapy on glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and renal plasma flow in patients with acute decompensated heart failure. BACKGROUND: It has been hypothesized that treatment with diuretics may worsen renal function as the result of systemic neurohormonal activation and direct renal vascular effects. UF also removes fluid, but its actions on intrarenal hemodynamics, and therefore renal function, are unknown. METHODS: Patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure with an ejection fraction less than 40% and two or more signs of hypervolemia were randomized to receive UF or intravenous diuretics. Urine output, GFR (as measured by iothalamate), and renal plasma flow (as measured by para-aminohippurate) were assessed before fluid removal and after 48 hours. RESULTS: Nineteen patients (59 +/- 16 years, 68% were male) were randomized to receive UF (n = 9) or intravenous diuretics (n = 10). The change in GFR (-3.4 +/- 7.7 mL/min vs. -3.6 +/- 11.5 mL/min; P = .966), renal plasma flow (26.6 +/- 62.7 mL/min vs. 16.1 +/- 42.0 mL/min; P = .669), and filtration fraction (-6.9 +/- 13.6 mL/min vs. -3.9 +/- 13.6 mL/min; P = .644) after treatment were not significantly different between the UF and furosemide treatment groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in net 48-hour fluid removal between the groups (-3211 +/- 2345 mL for UF and -2725 +/- 2330 mL for furosemide, P = .682). UF removed 3666 +/- 2402 mL. Urine output during 48 hours was significantly greater in the furosemide group (5786 +/- 2587 mL) compared with the UF group (2286 +/- 915 mL, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: During a 48-hour period, UF did not cause any significant differences in renal hemodynamics compared with the standard treatment of intravenous diuretics.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Experience with Ivacaftor in Cystic Fibrosis. Establishing Efficacy Using In Vitro Data in Lieu of a Clinical Trial.

On May 17, 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration expanded the patient population for use of ivacaftor to include patients with cystic fibrosis with relatively rare mutations in the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator gene. The label expansion is unique in that clinical efficacy was not based on clinical data but on in vitro assay data demonstrating increased chloride ion transport across cells in response to ivacaftor. Such an approach provides a pathway for adding difficult-to-study mutation-based cystic fibrosis subpopulations to the indication as well as defining mutations unresponsive to ivacaftor and has important implications for cystic fibrosis drug development and other rare genetic diseases whose genetics and disease pathophysiology are well understood.

Considerations for Developing Targeted Therapies in Low-Frequency Molecular Subsets of a Disease.

Advances in our understanding of the molecular underpinnings of disease have spurred the development of targeted therapies and the use of precision medicine approaches in patient care. While targeted therapies have improved our capability to provide effective treatments to patients, they also present additional challenges to drug development and benefit-risk assessment such as identifying the subset(s) of patients likely to respond to the drug, assessing heterogeneity in response across molecular subsets of a disease, and developing diagnostic tests to identify patients for treatment. These challenges are particularly difficult to address when targeted therapies are developed to treat diseases with multiple molecular subtypes that occur at low frequencies. To help address these challenges, the US Food and Drug Administration recently published a draft guidance entitled "Developing Targeted Therapies in Low-Frequency Molecular Subsets of a Disease." Here we provide additional information on specific aspects of targeted therapy development in diseases with low-frequency molecular subsets.

Clinical and regulatory considerations in pharmacogenetic testing.

PURPOSE: Both regulatory science and clinical practice rely on best available scientific data to guide decision-making. However, changes in clinical practice may be driven by numerous other factors such as cost. In this review, we reexamine noteworthy examples where pharmacogenetic testing information was added to drug labeling to explore how the available evidence, potential public health impact, and predictive utility of each pharmacogenetic biomarker impacts clinical uptake. SUMMARY: Advances in the field of pharmacogenetics have led to new discoveries about the genetic basis for variability in drug response. The Food and Drug Administration recognizes the value of pharmacogenetic testing strategies and has been proactive about incorporating pharmacogenetic information into the labeling of both new drugs and drugs already on the market. Although some examples have readily translated to routine clinical practice, clinical uptake of genetic testing for many drugs has been limited. CONCLUSION: Both regulatory science and clinical practice rely on data-driven approaches to guide decision making; however, additional factors are also important in clinical practice that do not impact regulatory decision making, and these considerations may result in heterogeneity in clinical uptake of pharmacogenetic testing.

How Informative Are Drug-Drug Interactions of Gene-Drug Interactions?

FDA recommendations to manage polymorphic CYP-mediated drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and gene-drug interactions (GDIs) are typically similar. However, DDIs may not always reliably predict GDIs because the victim drug may have multiple metabolic pathways and the perpetrator drug may affect multiple enzymes or transporters. Consequently, it is of great interest to both the pharmaceutical industry and regulatory agencies to determine if DDI studies can be leveraged to inform GDIs or vice versa for dose adjustment and labeling. The objective of this study was to investigate under what circumstances DDIs can be used to predict GDIs for prototypical CYP2C9, CYP2C19, and CYP2D6 substrates. We investigated model substrates for CYP2D6 (metoprolol, dextromethorphan, atomoxetine, and vortioxetine), CYP2C9 (warfarin, flurbiprofen, and celecoxib), and CYP2C19 (omeprazole and clopidogrel). Data on drug exposure for poor metabolizers (GDI) and for DDIs mediated by strong/moderate inhibitors in extensive metabolizers were collected. The impact of DDIs and GDIs on drug exposure was compared using: (1) a descriptive and (2) a physiologically based pharmacokinetic convergence analysis. Results from both approaches indicate that information on DDIs can be used to reliably predict GDIs for CYP2D6 substrates. The situation is more complex for CYP2C9 and CYP2C19 substrates because dose of the inhibitor (CYP2C9) and potency of the inhibitor (CYP2C19) impact the extent to which perpetrator drugs phenotypically convert extensive metabolizers to poor(er) metabolizers.

Consistency of drug-drug and gene-drug interaction information in US FDA-approved drug labels.

AIM: To characterize concordance between clinically relevant drug-drug interactions (DDIs) related to CYP2C19, CYP2D6 and CYP2C9 and their analogous gene-drug interactions (GDIs) in US FDA-approved drug labeling. METHODS: We selected prototypical CYP2C19, CYP2D6 and CYP2C9 inhibitors and abstracted all respective interacting drugs via a tertiary resource used in the clinical setting. We then selected only CYP2C19, CYP2D6 and CYP2C9 metabolism-related DDIs requiring enhanced clinical monitoring, dose adjustment or use of alternative drugs. Labeling and management strategies on DDIs and GDIs were compared. RESULTS: Among the drug labels with DDI information, 73% of them describe the analogous GDI. Of the 65 drug labels, 43 and 17% had specific management recommendations for DDIs and GDIs, respectively. In general, GDI management recommendations were concordant with DDI management recommendations in terms of specific dose adjustments or use of alternative drugs. CONCLUSION: The FDA has recognized genetic differences in drug metabolism where clinically relevant DDIs trigger dose adjustment or use of alternative drugs.

An integrated clinical pharmacology approach for deriving dosing recommendations in a regulatory setting: review of recent cases in psychiatry drugs.

Clinical pharmacology as an interdisciplinary science is unique in its capacity and the diversity of the methods and approaches it can provide to derive dosing recommendations in various subpopulations. This article illustrates cases where an integrated clinical pharmacology approach was used to derive dosing recommendations for psychiatry drugs within regulatory settings. The integrated approach is based on the view that once a drug is shown to be effective in the general population, it is reasonable to take into consideration other relevant findings and the use of alternative scientific tools and analysis to derive dosing recommendations in specific populations. The method provides useful means to solve the challenges of the paucity of available data and lead to clear dosing instructions. This in turn expands the benefits of any given drug to all individuals in which the drug is likely to be effective.

CYP2D6 genotype information to guide pimozide treatment in adult and pediatric patients: basis for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's new dosing recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: The occurrence of pimozide-induced arrhythmias is concentration dependent. Hence, it is important for prescribers to consider causes of increased pimozide exposure. This article summarizes the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) review of drug interaction and pharmacogenomic studies and discusses pharmacokinetic simulations we performed to develop new cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) genotype-guided dosing recommendations for pimozide. METHOD: Pharmacokinetic parameters by CYP2D6 genotype were derived from a published single-dose pharmacogenomic study of pimozide. We simulated what pimozide exposures would result from a multiple-dose scenario in different CYP2D6 genotype groups: extensive, intermediate, and poor metabolizers. The maximum dose for poor metabolizers was defined as the dose that would not exceed pimozide concentrations following 10 mg daily in extensive metabolizers and intermediate metabolizers (the current maximum dose in an unselected population). RESULTS: Dose-ranging analyses revealed that 4 mg daily in CYP2D6 poor metabolizers was the maximum dose that would not result in plasma concentrations in excess of those observed in extensive metabolizer and intermediate metabolizer patients receiving 10 mg daily. CYP2D6 genotyping is now consequently recommended in the pimozide product label before exceeding 4 mg of pimozide daily in adults or 0.05 mg/kg/d in children. Previously, dose adjustment was recommended every 3 days to achieve the desired clinical response for all patients. The label was modified to subsequently reflect that pimozide doses should not be increased earlier than 14 days in patients who are known CYP2D6 poor metabolizers. CONCLUSIONS: Given the risk of increased pimozide concentrations and longer time to steady state in CYP2D6 poor metabolizers, the FDA has revised the pimozide label to provide clinicians with clearer dosing, titration, and genotype testing recommendations. The new information is intended to enhance therapeutic individualization of pimozide in pediatric and adult patients.

Allopurinol pharmacogenetics: assessment of potential clinical usefulness.

Use of pharmacogenetics to inform treatment decisions remains a priority for clinicians, patients and public health agencies. We previously developed a framework for systematically assessing whether pharmacogenetic test information would likely bring value to clinical decision-making and enjoy practical uptake. We applied this tool to allopurinol to determine potential usefulness of HLA genetic information in assessing risk for allopurinol-induced severe cutaneous adverse reactions. We quantified allopurinol use data and the magnitude of adverse event signals using US FDA databases, reviewed reported cases of allopurinol-associated severe cutaneous adverse reactions to assess whether clinical subtypes of patients could be identified, performed pooled analyses of associations between HLA variation and allopurinol-induced severe cutaneous adverse reactions and described considerations in clinical implementation of allopurinol pharmacogenetics.