Unintended drug exposure during pregnancy in clinical trials - a survey in early drug development.

PURPOSE: To collect information on unintended drug exposure during pregnancy in early clinical drug development. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Questionnaire mailed in autumn 2015 to members of human pharmacology societies in Europe for anonymous responses via the online tool SurveyMonkey. RESULTS: 53 of the ~ 700 addressees participated in the survey. 23 female trial participants and 11 female partners of male trial participants were exposed to investigational medicinal products during unintended pregnancies in a clinical trial. Most survey respondents confirmed adequate contraceptive methods by in/exclusion criteria and the use of pregnancy tests in female trial participants at screening and before the first dose. The last menstrual period was documented less frequently (at screening: 28 of 44, before first dose: 5 of 44 respondents). A considerable proportion of respondents denied the routine use of compliance checks about the appropriate use of contraceptive methods, had no procedures in place if contraceptive methods failed, and did not train physicians in instructing trial participants about the appropriate use of contraceptive methods. CONCLUSION: The methods to avoid unintended pregnancies during participation in a clinical trial need improvement and should include (i) pregnancy tests, (ii) documentation of last menstrual period before the first dose, (iii) compliance checks of the appropriate use of contraceptive methods, and (iv) training of trial physicians. Procedures should be in place for what to do if contraceptive methods fail.

Use of integrated clinical trial protocols - A survey in early medicines development
.

PURPOSE: To collect information on the use of integrated protocols in early clinical medicines development. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The questionnaire was mailed in fall 2014 to members of human pharmacology societies in Europe for anonymous responses via the online tool SurveyMonkey®. RESULTS: 97 respondents reported on 164 integrated protocols overall. In general, integrated protocols comprised 2 or 3 trial elements. One third of integrated protocols involved patients. The most frequent trial elements were single dose, multiple dose, and food effect. Drug-drug interaction, age, gender, and relative/absolute bioavailability were less common elements. Ethnic bridging and mass balance were mentioned in single cases. Out of the entire spectrum of reported trial element combinations, single (ascending) dose plus multiple (ascending) dose was most frequent (90/164 protocols, 55%); 84% of integrated protocols used adaptive elements. 29%, 17%, and 8% of integrated protocols required 1, 2, or 3 substantial amendments, respectively. Based on 118 protocols, competent authority approval was granted to 100, deficiency letters were issued 15 times and approval was refused in 3 cases. CONCLUSION: The use of integrated protocols is common practice in early medicines development. Most often single ascending dose and multiple ascending dose were the trial elements combined in one integrated protocol. Perceived main advantages were gain in time and reduced costs. Perceived main disadvantage was increased complexity.
.

Who is a 'healthy subject'?-consensus results on pivotal eligibility criteria for clinical trials.

INTRODUCTION/METHODS: A discussion forum was hosted by the German not-for-profit Association for Applied Human Pharmacology (AGAH e.V.) to critically review key eligibility criteria and stopping rules for clinical trials with healthy subjects, enrolling stakeholders from the pharmaceutical industry, contract research organisations, academia, ethics committees and competent authority. RESULTS: Pivotal eligibility criteria were defined for trials with new investigational medicinal products (IMPs) or with clinically established IMPs. In general, a pulse rate ranging between 50 and 90 beats/min is recommended for first-in-human (FIH) trials, while wider ranges seem acceptable for trials with clinically established IMPs, provided there are no indications of thyroid dysfunction. Hepatic laboratory parameters not to exceed the upper limit of normal (ULN) comprise ALT (alanine aminotransferase) and AST (aspartate aminotransferase) in FIH trials, whereas slight elevations (10% above ULN) seem acceptable in trials with clinically established IMPs without known hepatotoxicity. A normal renal function is required for any clinical trial in healthy subjects. A risk-adapted approach for stopping rules was adopted. Stopping rules for an individual subject are one adverse event of severe intensity or one serious adverse event. In case of a severe adverse event, some stakeholders demand a causal relationship with the IMP (i.e. an adverse reaction). Stopping rules for a cohort are one serious adverse reaction or ≥50% of subjects experiencing any adverse reaction of moderate or severe intensity. CONSEQUENCES: The application of this consensus resulted in a reduction in protocol deficiencies issued by the competent authority.

The sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor empagliflozin does not prolong QT interval in a thorough QT (TQT) study.

BACKGROUND: Empagliflozin is a potent, selective sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor in development as an oral antidiabetic treatment. This QT interval study assessed potential effects of empagliflozin on ventricular repolarisation and other electrocardiogram (ECG) parameters. METHODS: A randomised, placebo-controlled, single-dose, double-blind, five-period crossover study incorporating a novel double-placebo period design to reduce sample size, while maintaining full statistical power. TREATMENTS: single empagliflozin doses of 25 mg (therapeutic) and 200 mg (supratherapeutic), matching placebo and open-label moxifloxacin 400 mg (positive control). Triplicate 12-lead ECGs of 10 second duration were recorded at baseline and during the first 24 hours after dosing. The primary endpoint was mean change from baseline (MCfB) in the population heart rate-corrected QT interval (QTcN) between 1-4 hours after dosing. RESULTS: Thirty volunteers (16 male, 14 female, mean [range] age: 34.5 [18-52] years) were randomised. The placebo-corrected MCfB in QTcN 1-4 hours after dosing was 0.6 (90% CI: -0.7, 1.9) ms and -0.2 (-1.4, 0.9) ms for empagliflozin 25 mg and 200 mg, respectively, below the ICH E14 defined threshold of regulatory concern 10 ms. Assay sensitivity was confirmed by a placebo-corrected MCfB in QTcN 2-4 hours post-dose of 12.4 (10.7, 14.1) ms with moxifloxacin 400 mg. Empagliflozin tolerability was good for all volunteers; 23.3% experienced adverse events (AEs) with empagliflozin and 27.6% with placebo. The most frequent AE was nasopharyngitis. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Single doses of empagliflozin 25 mg and 200 mg were not associated with QTcN prolongation and were well tolerated in healthy volunteers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01195675.

How to Interpret an Investigator's Brochure for Meaningful Risk Assessment: Results of an AGAH Discussion Forum.

PURPOSE: A discussion forum was hosted by the Association for Applied Human Pharmacology (AGAH e.V.) to critically debate how to interpret and optimise the Investigator's Brochure (IB) for meaningful risk assessment of early clinical trials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four topics were specifically discussed: deficiencies/uncertainties in IBs, guidance for the investigator, reference safety information, and potential risks for human subjects associated with inadequate non-clinical safety assessment in the IB. In each case, 43 participants took part in a real-time online survey with pre-defined questions to capture the audience's opinion. RESULTS: The 'Summary of Data and Guidance for the Investigator' was considered as the section of the IB with the highest need for improvement with emphasis on readability, comprehensibility, timeliness of data, and appropriateness for risk assessment. It was suggested that the IB should at least be signed by the sponsor's scientist responsible for the content on pharmacology and toxicology. It was agreed that sponsors should consider thoroughly whether changes to an IB constitute a substantial amendment, and that the IB should include a section on the change history. Non-clinical pharmacology studies with negative outcomes should be reported in the IB in order to avoid assessment bias. The reference safety information for expectedness assessment of suspected serious adverse reactions should be provided as a stand-alone section of the IB. CONCLUSION: The overall consensus was that an optimised presentation of data will ensure the best possible understanding of a compound's characteristics and an optimal benefit-risk assessment which will safeguard the participants in clinical trials.