Statin Drug-Drug Interactions: Pharmacokinetic Basis of FDA Labeling Recommendations and Comparison Across Common Tertiary Clinical Resources.

Statins are widely prescribed and highly susceptible to pharmacokinetic (PK)-based drug-drug interactions (DDIs). To date, there has not been a comprehensive analysis of the basis upon which statin DDI recommendations in US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) prescribing information (PI) are derived. We have conducted such an analysis. We also assessed the degree of concordance of statin DDI recommendations in FDA PI and those provided in common tertiary clinical resources. We catalogued statin DDI information, including PK data and management recommendations, for statin precipitant drugs approved from 2010 to 2021, available from FDA PI and tertiary clinical resource databases. Recommendations were categorized and mapped with associated PK data to assess consistency in the PK basis for labeling recommendations. From the 80 precipitant drugs evaluated, 180 statin DDIs were identified in FDA PI. Dedicated clinical DDI studies were conducted for 54% (n = 97) of these DDIs and 34% (n = 61) of DDI recommendations were extrapolated from clinical data with other statins. Overall, we found that PK-based statin recommendations were consistent across PI. These findings highlight regulatory precedence for translating information across statins without conducting dedicated clinical DDI studies, which may support future efforts toward streamlining the approach to investigation and labeling of statin DDIs. In addition, with the exception of some notable discrepancies, general concordance was observed between FDA and tertiary resources regarding "Dose Adjustment" and "Avoid Coadministration" recommendations. However, further analyses are warranted across other DDI pairs to determine whether discordance can routinely lead to different clinical recommendations depending on the drug information resource.

Immunomodulatory effect of Myrtenol on benzo (a) pyrene-induced lung cancer in Swiss albino mice via modulation of tumor markers, cytokines and inhibition of PCNA expression.

Lung cancer is one of the most common cancers in men. Although many diagnostic and treatment regimens have been followed in the treatment for lung cancer, increasing mortality rate due to lung cancer is depressing and hence requires alternative plant based therapeutics with with less side-effects. Myrtenol exhibits anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties. Hence we intended to study the effect of Myrtenol on B(a)P-induced lung cancer. Our study showed that B(a)P lowered hematological count, decreased phagocyte and avidity indices, nitroblue tetrazolium (NBT) reduction, levels of immunoglubulins, antioxidant levels, whereas Myrtenol treatment restored them back to normal levels. On the other hand, xenobiotic and liver dysfunction marker enzymes and pro-inflammatory cytokines were elevated on B(a)P exposure, which retuned back to normal by Myrtenol. This study thus describes the immunomodulatory and antioxidant effects of Myrtenol on B[a]P-induced immune destruction.

Inclusion of Subjects who are Obese in Drug Development: Current Status and Opportunities.

The prevalence of obesity has grown tremendously in recent years and this population has an increased risk of disease comorbidities. The presence of disease comorbidities requires treatment interventions and proper dosing guidelines. However, drug development programs often do not have adequate representation of individuals who are obese in clinical trials, leaving gaps in the understanding of treatment response leading to a lack of adequate individualization options. Based on a recent survey of approved drug product package inserts, very few approved products included specific dosing based on obesity, in both adults and pediatrics. Reasons for the limited information on patients who are obese may include the under-reporting of information regarding such patients and a lack of clinical trial diversity in enrolling patient groups in whom obesity or obesity-related comorbidities are more prevalent. An inadvertent impact of the practice of exclusion of subsets of patients with some comorbidities in clinical trials may play a role in the reduced enrollment of individuals who are obese. Recently, regulatory authorities have taken specific initiatives to promote clinical trial diversity, including engaging with stakeholders and publishing regulatory guidance. These guidance documents highlight the need to enroll diverse clinical trial populations and provide recommendations on concepts related to drug development for obese populations. Such efforts will help to address the gap in information regarding drug response and dosing in patients who are obese.

Need for Representation of Pediatric Patients with Obesity in Clinical Trials.

Clinical trials are an integral aspect of drug development. Tremendous progress has been made in ensuring drug products are effective and safe for use in the intended pediatric population, but there remains a paucity of information to guide drug dosages in pediatric patients with obesity. This is concerning because obesity may influence the disposition of drug products. When pediatric patients with obesity are not enrolled in clinical trials, dosing options for use in this subpopulation may be suboptimal. Reliance on physiological-based dosing strategies that are not informed by evaluation of the pharmacokinetics of the drug product could lead to under- or over-dosing with ensuing therapeutic failure or toxicity consequences. Thus, representation of pediatric patients with obesity in clinical trials is crucial to understand the benefit-risk profile of drug products in this subpopulation. It is important to acknowledge that this is a challenging endeavor, but not one that is insurmountable. Collective efforts from multiple stakeholders including drug developers and regulators to enhance diversity in clinical trials can help fill critical gaps in knowledge related to the influence of obesity on drug disposition.

Pediatric dosing for locally acting drugs in submissions to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration between 2002 and 2020.

Deriving pediatric doses for locally acting drugs (LADs) presents a unique challenge because limited systemic exposure hinders commonly used approaches such as pharmacokinetic matching to adults. This study systematically evaluated drug development practices used for pediatric dose selection of LADs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration from 2002 to 2020. The three study objectives were: (1) to determine the dose selection approach for the labeled pediatric dose, (2) to examine the studied pediatric dose(s), and (3) to evaluate the characteristics of the pediatric clinical programs used to support the labeled pediatric dose. A total of 187 pediatric submissions were characterized for the labeled and studied pediatric doses of LADs. The pediatric dose was predominantly labeled as a flat dose (91%) and at a single-dose level (67%) similar to adults. The majority (68.4%) of the submissions had the same labeled dose for pediatrics and adults. Independent pharmacodynamic/efficacy studies in pediatric patients commonly (64.2%) provided supportive evidence for the labeled pediatric dose. Inhalation, nasal, and injectable submissions had the highest number of clinical trials, lowest usage of an extrapolation of efficacy approach, and utilized diverse approaches in selecting the studied pediatric doses. This article highlights approaches for LAD dosing in pediatric patients and can be used to inform drug development of these products in the pediatric population.

US FDA Postmarketing Requirements and Commitments: A Systematic Assessment of Clinical Pharmacology Studies and Their Impact on US FDA Prescribing Information.

Many of the conditions for the safe and effective use of new molecular entities (NMEs) are understood at the time of initial drug approval. However, some remaining knowledge gaps can be addressed after drug approval through postmarketing requirements (PMRs) or commitments (PMCs) established by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Our objective was to conduct an assessment of clinical pharmacology-related PMRs and PMCs established at the time of approval and evaluate the impact of fulfilled PMRs and PMCs on prescription information (PI). This analysis included clinical pharmacology-related PMRs and PMCs established for NMEs approved between 2009 and 2020. Of the 1171 PMRs and PMCs, over one-third were clinical pharmacology-related. Of these, 46% were to evaluate drug interactions, 16% were to evaluate drug dosing in patients with hepatic impairment, and 10% were related to dose. The majority (57%) of PMRs and PMCs were fulfilled at the time of analysis, with a median time to fulfillment of approximately 2.3 years. The majority (94%) of the fulfilled PMRs and PMCs, either with or without a PI revision, resulted in new or modified instructions for use or supported existing instructions for use. This is the first time that clinical pharmacology-related PMRs and PMCs have been catalogued and analyzed to understand their impact on PI. An understanding of the knowledge gaps that exist at the time of drug approval could inform the most effective and efficient methods for evidence generation prior to and after new drug approval.

Promoting Clinical Trial Diversity: A Highlight of Select US FDA Initiatives.

Although the population in the United States is diverse, there are disparities in healthcare outcomes in some populations, for example, based on characteristics such as race, ethnicity, sex, gender, age, socioeconomic status, and geographic location. Despite disproportionate healthcare outcomes, certain populations are frequently under-represented in clinical trials intended to support applications requesting US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval to market a drug or biologic. Additionally, safety and efficacy of therapeutic products may vary based on intrinsic (e.g., sex, age, race, and ethnicity) and/or extrinsic (e.g., drug interactions and medical practice) factors. Enrolling diverse populations in clinical trials can aid in addressing disparities and better inform the use of medical products in all patients who will use them upon approval. Herein, we outline a few initiatives and activities, such as policy development, regulatory review, regulatory research, and stakeholder engagement, that the FDA has undertaken to promote diversity in clinical trials, to support submission of such information in marketing applications for subgroup analyses, and to communicate information to the public.

Clinical pharmacology information in regulatory submissions and labeling: A comparative analysis of orphan and non-orphan drugs approved by the FDA.

Clinical pharmacology is an integral discipline supporting the development, regulatory evaluation, and clinical use of drugs for the treatment of both common and rare diseases. Here, we evaluated the recommendations and information available from select clinical pharmacology studies in the therapeutic product labeling of new molecular entities (NMEs) approved from 2017 to 2019 for both common and rare diseases. A total of 151 NMEs, including 72 orphan and 79 non-orphan drugs, were analyzed for recommendations and information available related to food-drug interaction, drug-drug interaction, renal impairment, hepatic impairment, QT assessment, and human radiolabeled mass balance studies using data collected from the original labeling and other regulatory documents. The analysis showed no statistically significant difference in the recommendations between orphan and non-orphan drugs except for renal impairment related recommendations in section 8 of the labeling. Although not significant, fewer hepatic impairment labeling recommendations were available for orphan drugs when compared with non-orphan drugs. At the time of initial approval, 79 postmarketing requirements (PMRs) and postmarketing commitments (PMCs) for 33 orphan drugs and 39 PMRs and PMCs for 19 non-orphan drugs were established; with most difference observed for drug-drug interaction, hepatic impairment, and QT assessment. Overall, although there was a trend for more labeling recommendations and fewer postmarketing studies and clinical trials for non-orphan drugs, there appeared to be no substantial differences in how these select clinical pharmacology studies are leveraged during the development and approval of orphan and non-orphan drugs.

Human radiolabeled mass balance studies supporting the FDA approval of new drugs.

Human radiolabeled mass balance studies are an important component of the clinical pharmacology programs supporting the development of new investigational drugs. These studies allow for understanding of the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion of the parent drug and metabolite(s) in the human body. Understanding the drug's disposition as well as metabolite profiling and abundance via mass balance studies can help inform the overall drug development program. A survey of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved new drug applications (NDAs) indicated that about 66% of the drugs had relied on findings from the mass balance studies to help understand the pharmacokinetic characteristics of the drug and to inform the overall drug development program. When such studies were not available in the original NDA, adequate justifications were routinely provided. Of the 104 mass balance studies included in this survey, most of the studies were conducted in healthy volunteers (90%) who were mostly men (>86%). The studies had at least six evaluable participants (66%) and were performed using the final route(s) of administration (98%). Eighty-five percent of the studies utilized a dose within the pharmacokinetic linearity range with 54% of the studies using a dose the same as the approved dose. Nearly all studies were performed as a single-dose (97%) study using a fit-for-purpose radiolabeled formulation. In this analysis, we summarized the current practices for conducting mass balance studies and highlighted the importance of conducting appropriately designed human radiolabeled mass balance studies and the challenges associated with inadequately designed or untimely studies.

Application of Solubility and Dissolution Profile Comparison for Prediction of Gastric pH-Mediated Drug-Drug Interactions.

The objective of this study was to assess how solubility and dissolution profile comparisons under different pH conditions can be used to predict gastric pH-mediated drug-drug interaction (DDI) potential. We collected information for new molecular entities (NMEs) approved from 2003 to 2019 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that had dedicated clinical DDI studies with acid-reducing agents (ARAs). Among these, 67 NMEs with solubility under different pHs and dissolution profiles generated in pH 1.2, 4.5, and 6.8 aqueous media were included for analysis. Similarity factor (f2) was used to compare dissolution profiles at different pHs for pH-mediated DDI prediction (e.g., f2<50 predicts positive DDI). Prediction accuracy was calculated based on the outcome comparison between predicted and observed DDIs. Based on dissolution profile comparisons and observed DDI data, weak base drugs (WBDs) (n = 49) showed 72.5% prediction accuracy under the fasted conditions, and 66.7% prediction accuracy under fed conditions. While using solubility and clinical dose for prediction, the prediction accuracy was 80% under fasted conditions and 66.7% under fed conditions, respectively. Comparison of dissolution profiles generated at pH 1.2, 4.5, and 6.8 can be used to predict gastric pH-mediated DDI potential for WBDs. It demonstrated comparable prediction accuracy under both fasted and fed conditions when compared to the prediction using solubility and clinical dose. Furthermore, dissolution profile comparison could add an additional understanding of possible impact of pH change on the release behavior of the drug product. Graphical abstract.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Drug Disposition and Response: Review of New Molecular Entities Approved Between 2014 and 2019.

Race and ethnicity can contribute to differences in drug exposure and/or response. Here, we report that about 10% of the new molecular entities (NMEs) approved between 2014 and 2019 by the US Food and Drug Administration's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research showed differences in exposure and/or response based on race/ethnicity or pharmacogenetic factors known to vary in frequency across global populations. Fewer NMEs (10%) reported differences in the labeling in 2014 to 2019 when compared to about 21% of NMEs approved between 2008 and 2013 that had differences in pharmacokinetics, safety, response, and/or pharmacogenetics. Understanding the underlying mechanisms that lead to such differences and adequate enrollment of racial and ethnic subgroups is essential to obtain sufficient information on exposure and response. Though drug development is global, when heterogeneous populations are not adequately enrolled, the risk-benefit assessments can remain incomplete for certain subgroups. Consequently, this can result in regional differences in drug approval, population-specific prescribing recommendations, or need for additional postmarketing studies to address concerns related to exposure, response, or lack of representation that lead to gaps in information.

Exploring the Relationship of Drug BCS Classification, Food Effect, and Gastric pH-Dependent Drug Interactions.

Food effect (FE) and gastric pH-dependent drug-drug interactions (DDIs) are both absorption-related. Here, we evaluated if Biopharmaceutics Classification System (BCS) classes may be correlated with FE or pH-dependent DDIs. Trends in FE data were investigated for 170 drugs with clinical FE studies from the literature and new drugs approved from 2013 to 2019 by US Food and Drug Administration. A subset of 38 drugs was also evaluated to determine whether FE results can inform the need for a gastric pH-dependent DDI study. The results of FE studies were defined as no effect (AUC ratio 0.80-1.25), increased exposure (AUC ratio ≥1.25), or decreased exposure (AUC ratio ≤0.8). Drugs with significantly increased exposure FE (AUC ratio ≥2.0; N=14) were BCS Class 2 or 4, while drugs with significantly decreased exposure FE (AUC ratio ≤0.5; N=2) were BCS Class 1/3 or 3. The lack of FE was aligned with the lack of a pH-dependent DDI for all 7 BCS Class 1 or 3 drugs as expected. For the 13 BCS Class 2 or 4 weak base drugs with an increased exposure FE, 6 had a pH-dependent DDI (AUC ratio ≤0.8). Among the 16 BCS Class 2 or 4 weak base drugs with no FE, 6 had a pH-dependent DDI (AUC ratio ≤0.8). FE appears to have limited correlation with BCS classes except for BCS Class 1 drugs, confirming that multiple physiological mechanisms can impact FE. Lack of FE does not indicate absence of pH-dependent DDI for BCS Class 2 or 4 drugs. Graphical Abstract.

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.

Expanding Access to Lung Cancer Clinical Trials by Reducing the Use of Restrictive Exclusion Criteria: Perspectives of a Multistakeholder Working Group.

Low rates of adult patient participation have been a persistent problem in cancer clinical trials and have continued to be a barrier to efficient drug development. The routine use of significant exclusion criteria has contributed to this problem by limiting participation in studies and creating significant clinical differences between the study cohorts and the real-world cancer patient populations. These routine exclusions also unnecessarily restrict opportunities for many patients to access potentially promising new therapies during clinical development. Multiple efforts are underway to broaden eligibility criteria, allowing more patients to enroll in studies and generating more robust data regarding the effect of novel therapies in the population at large. Focusing specifically on lung cancer as an example, a multistakeholder working group empaneled by the LUNGevity Foundation identified 14 restrictive and potentially outdated exclusion criteria that appear frequently in lung cancer clinical trials. As a part of the project, the group evaluated data from multiple recent lung cancer studies to ascertain the extent to which these 14 criteria appeared in study protocols and played a role in excluding patients (screen failures). The present report describes the working group's efforts to limit the use of these routine exclusions and presents clinical justifications for reducing the use of 14 criteria as routine exclusions in lung cancer studies, potentially expanding trial eligibility and improving the generalizability of the results from lung cancer trials.

An Overview of Genomic Biomarker Use in Cardiovascular Disease Clinical Trials.

Clinical trial designs targeting patient subgroups with certain genetic characteristics may enhance the efficiency of developing drugs for cardiovascular disease (CVD). To evaluate the extent to which genetic knowledge translates to the CVD pipeline, we analyzed how genomic biomarkers are utilized in trials. Phase II and III trial protocols for investigational new drugs for CVD and risk factors were evaluated for prospective and exploratory genomic biomarker use; drug targets were evaluated for the presence of evidence that genetic variations can impact CVD risk or drug response. We identified 134 programs (73 unique drug targets) and 147 clinical trials. Less than 1% (n = 1/147) trials used a genomic biomarker prospectively for in-trial enrichment despite 32% (n = 23/73) of the drug targets having evidence of genetic variations. Additionally, 46% (n = 68/147) of the trials specified exploratory biomarker use. The results highlight an opportunity for more targeted CVD drug development by leveraging genomic biomarker knowledge.