Can non-clinical repolarization assays predict the results of clinical thorough QT studies? Results from a research consortium.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Translation of non-clinical markers of delayed ventricular repolarization to clinical prolongation of the QT interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) (a biomarker for torsades de pointes proarrhythmia) remains an issue in drug discovery and regulatory evaluations. We retrospectively analysed 150 drug applications in a US Food and Drug Administration database to determine the utility of established non-clinical in vitro IKr current human ether-à-go-go-related gene (hERG), action potential duration (APD) and in vivo (QTc) repolarization assays to detect and predict clinical QTc prolongation. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: The predictive performance of three non-clinical assays was compared with clinical thorough QT study outcomes based on free clinical plasma drug concentrations using sensitivity and specificity, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, positive (PPVs) and negative predictive values (NPVs) and likelihood ratios (LRs). KEY RESULTS: Non-clinical assays demonstrated robust specificity (high true negative rate) but poor sensitivity (low true positive rate) for clinical QTc prolongation at low-intermediate (1×-30×) clinical exposure multiples. The QTc assay provided the most robust PPVs and NPVs (ability to predict clinical QTc prolongation). ROC curves (overall test accuracy) and LRs (ability to influence post-test probabilities) demonstrated overall marginal performance for hERG and QTc assays (best at 30× exposures), while the APD assay demonstrated minimal value. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The predictive value of hERG, APD and QTc assays varies, with drug concentrations strongly affecting translational performance. While useful in guiding preclinical candidates without clinical QT prolongation, hERG and QTc repolarization assays provide greater value compared with the APD assay.

Current practices in preclinical drug development: gaps in hemostasis testing to assess risk of thromboembolic injury.

The Health and Environmental Sciences Institute Cardiac Biomarkers Working Group surveyed the pharmaceutical development community to investigate practices in assessing hemostasis, including detection of hypocoagulable and hypercoagulable states. Scientists involved in discovery, preclinical, and clinical research were queried on laboratory evaluation of endothelium, platelets, coagulation, and fibrinolysis during safety assessment studies. Results indicated that laboratory assessment of hemostasis is inconsistent among institutions and not harmonized between preclinical and clinical studies. Hemostasis testing in preclinical drug safety studies primarily focuses on the risk of bleeding, whereas the clinical complication of thrombosis is seldom assessed. Our results reveal the need for broader utilization of biomarkers to detect altered hemostasis (e.g., endothelial and platelet activation) to improve preclinical safety assessments early in the drug development process. Survey respondents indicated a critical lack of validated markers of hypercoagulability and subclinical thrombosis in animal testing. Additional obstacles included limited blood volume, lack of cross-reacting antibodies for hemostasis testing in laboratory species, restricted availability of specialized hemostasis analyzers, and few centers of expertise in animal hemostasis testing. Establishment of translatable biomarkers of prothrombotic states in multiple species and strategic implementation of testing on an industry-wide basis are needed to better avert untoward drug complications in patient populations.

Integrated and translational nonclinical in vivo cardiovascular risk assessment: gaps and opportunities.

Cardiovascular (CV) safety concerns are a significant source of drug development attrition in the pharmaceutical industry today. Though current nonclinical testing paradigms have largely prevented catastrophic CV events in Phase I studies, many challenges relating to the inability of current nonclinical safety testing strategies to model patient outcomes persist. Contemporary approaches include a spectrum of evaluations of CV structure and function in a variety of laboratory animal species. These approaches might be improved with a more holistic integration of these evaluations in repeat-dose studies, addition of novel endpoints with greater sensitivity and translational application, and use of more relevant animal models. Particular opportunities present with advances in imaging capabilities applicable to rodent and non-rodent species, technical capabilities for measuring CV function in repeat-dose animal studies, detection and quantitation of microRNAs and wider use of alternative animal models. Strategic application of these novel opportunities considering putative CV risk associated with the molecular drug target as well as inherent risks present in the target patient population could tailor or 'personalize' nonclinical safety assessment as a more translational evaluation. This paper is a call to action for the clinical and nonclinical drug safety communities to assess these opportunities to determine their utility in filling potential gaps in our current cardiovascular safety testing paradigms.

A HESI consortium approach to assess the human predictive value of non-clinical repolarization assays.

Drug-induced ventricular arrhythmia and Torsades de Pointes remain a serious public health issues in bringing safe new pharmaceuticals to the market place. Under the auspices of the International Life Science Institute (ILSI)-Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI), a consortium involving representatives from pharmaceutical companies, regulatory agencies and opinion leaders from the scientific and medical research communities has been initiated. The objectives are (1) to assess the concordance between signals in non-clinical repolarization assays and clinical QT interval prolongation; (2) to investigate the mechanisms for any discrepancy identified between non-clinical and clinical results and to determine viable and successful alternative approaches to identify these compounds; and (3) to assess the proarrhythmic potential of such compounds. At present, the consortium is conducting a retrospective analysis of non-clinical and clinical data from both FDA and contributing companies' databases and supplementing with a literature review. The overall objectives of these initial efforts are to establish a quantitative integrated risk assessment for each compound; to define criteria for concordance and apply them to the database in order to identify non-concordant compounds.