The use of recovery animals in nonclinical safety assessment studies with monoclonal antibodies: further 3Rs opportunities remain.

Assessment of reversibility from nonclinical toxicity findings in animals with potential adverse clinical impact is required during pharmaceutical development, but there is flexibility around how and when this is performed and if recovery animals are necessary. For monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and in accordance with ICH S6(R1) if inclusion of recovery animals is warranted, this need only occur in one study. Data on study designs for first-in-human (FIH)-enabling and later-development toxicity studies were shared from a recent collaboration between the NC3Rs, EPAA, Netherlands Medicines Evaluation Board (MEB) and 14 pharmaceutical companies. This enabled a review of practices on recovery animal use during mAb development and identification of opportunities to reduce research animal use. Recovery animals were included in 68% of FIH-enabling and 69% of later-development studies, often in multiple studies in the same program. Recovery groups were commonly in control plus one test article-dosed group or in all dose groups (45% of studies, each design). Based on the shared data review and conclusions, limiting inclusion of recovery to a single nonclinical toxicology study and species, study design optimisation and use of existing knowledge instead of additional recovery groups provide opportunities to further reduce animal use within mAb development programs.

The Use of Minipigs for Preclinical Safety Assessment by the Pharmaceutical Industry: Results of an IQ DruSafe Minipig Survey.

The use of minipigs in preclinical safety testing of pharmaceuticals is considered an alternative to the more traditional dog and nonhuman primate (NHP) nonrodent species. Substantial evidence exists to suggest that the anatomy, physiology, and biochemistry of minipigs are similar enough to humans to consider them as valid nonrodent models for pharmaceutical safety testing. Since the utilization of minipigs was last assessed over 5 years ago, the Preclinical Safety Leadership Group (DruSafe) of the International Consortium for Innovation and Quality in Pharmaceutical Development conducted this survey to provide an updated assessment of the utility, perceived value, and impediments to the use of minipigs in preclinical safety testing. Of the 32 participating members of DruSafe, 15 responded to the survey representing both large and small companies. Respondents indicated that the minipig has been utilized mostly for short-term safety assessment studies with dermal, oral, and parenteral routes of administration. Minipigs are widely accepted as appropriate models for cardiovascular assessments and have been used to a limited extent for reproductive toxicology testing. Overall responses indicated that safety testing for large molecules using this species is relatively low due to a lack of background data, reagents or biomarkers, concerns regarding immune system characterization and poor suitability for developmental toxicity assessments. Most companies utilized contract research organizations for definitive safety toxicity assessment studies. Conclusions of this survey indicate that minipig is an acceptable nonrodent species largely limited to studies using small molecules, primarily dermal products, and results are comparable to those reported 5 years ago.