Considerations regarding the use of nonhuman primates in assessing safety endpoints for pharmaceuticals.

Nonhuman primates (NHP) have become a commonly used nonrodent species for general toxicity testing for pharmaceuticals reviewed by CDER. Their increased use in pharmaceutical testing appears to have been driven by both increased use in small molecule drug development programs as well as a trend for biologics making up a greater percentage of pharmaceutical development programs. While always in limited supply, the COVID-19 pandemic acutely impaired the availability of NHPs for pharmaceutical testing due to disruptions in the supply and an increased demand to support COVID-19-directed research programs. Because this disruption in the NHP supply had the potential to significantly delay the development of new medications for the treatment of diseases currently without effective treatment options, FDA issued guidance in February of 2022, under its COVID-19 Public Health Emergency authority, that was intended to help mitigate the NHP supply issue by reducing the demand for NHPs. This guidance has been withdrawn with the expiration of the public health emergency. Here we discuss what impact we expect that the withdrawal of this guidance will have on efforts to minimize NHP use.

Parallel evaluation of alternative skin barrier models and excised human skin for dermal absorption studies in vitro.

Skin permeation is a primary consideration in the safety assessment of cosmetic ingredients, topical drugs, and human users handling veterinary medicinal products. While excised human skin (EHS) remains the 'gold standard' for in vitro permeation testing (IVPT) studies, unreliable supply and high cost motivate the search for alternative skin barrier models. In this study, a standardized dermal absorption testing protocol was developed to evaluate the suitability of alternative skin barrier models to predict skin absorption in humans. Under this protocol, side-by-side assessments of a commercially available reconstructed human epidermis (RhE) model (EpiDerm-200-X, MatTek), a synthetic barrier membrane (Strat-M, Sigma-Aldrich), and EHS were performed. The skin barrier models were mounted on Franz diffusion cells and the permeation of caffeine, salicylic acid, and testosterone was quantified. Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and histology of the biological models were also compared. EpiDerm-200-X exhibited native human epidermis-like morphology, including a characteristic stratum corneum, but had an elevated TEWL as compared to EHS. The mean 6 h cumulative permeation of a finite dose (6 nmol/cm2) of caffeine and testosterone was highest in EpiDerm-200-X, followed by EHS and Strat-M. Salicylic acid permeated most in EHS, followed by EpiDerm-200-X and Strat-M. Overall, evaluating novel alternative skin barrier models in the manner outlined herein has the potential to reduce the time from basic science discovery to regulatory impact.

Gaps and challenges in nonclinical assessments of pharmaceuticals: An FDA/CDER perspective on considerations for development of new approach methodologies.

Previously, we provided an FDA/CDER perspective on nonclinical testing strategies and briefly discussed the opportunities and challenges of using new approach methodologies (NAMs) in drug development, especially for regulatory purposes. To facilitate the integration of NAMs into nonclinical regulatory testing, we surveyed the CDER Pharmacology/Toxicology community to identify the nonclinical challenges faced by CDER review staff, including gaps and areas of concern underserved by current nonclinical testing approaches, and to understand how development of NAMs with specific contexts of use (COUs) could potentially alleviate them. Survey outcomes were coalesced into CDER-identified needs for which NAMs with specific COUs could potentially be developed to address gaps and challenges in nonclinical safety assessments. We also discussed the current FDA procedure for validation and qualification of NAMs intended to inform regulatory decisions. This manuscript is intended to facilitate productive discussions and collaborations with regulatory, government, and academic stakeholders within the drug development community regarding the development and regulatory use of NAMs and their role in safety and efficacy assessment of pharmaceuticals.

IVIVE: Facilitating the Use of In Vitro Toxicity Data in Risk Assessment and Decision Making.

During the past few decades, the science of toxicology has been undergoing a transformation from observational to predictive science. New approach methodologies (NAMs), including in vitro assays, in silico models, read-across, and in vitro to in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE), are being developed to reduce, refine, or replace whole animal testing, encouraging the judicious use of time and resources. Some of these methods have advanced past the exploratory research stage and are beginning to gain acceptance for the risk assessment of chemicals. A review of the recent literature reveals a burst of IVIVE publications over the past decade. In this review, we propose operational definitions for IVIVE, present literature examples for several common toxicity endpoints, and highlight their implications in decision-making processes across various federal agencies, as well as international organizations, including those in the European Union (EU). The current challenges and future needs are also summarized for IVIVE. In addition to refining and reducing the number of animals in traditional toxicity testing protocols and being used for prioritizing chemical testing, the goal to use IVIVE to facilitate the replacement of animal models can be achieved through their continued evolution and development, including a strategic plan to qualify IVIVE methods for regulatory acceptance.

Perspectives on the evaluation and adoption of complex in vitro models in drug development: Workshop with the FDA and the pharmaceutical industry (IQ MPS Affiliate).

Complex in vitro models (CIVM) offer the potential to improve pharmaceutical clinical drug attrition due to safety and/ or efficacy concerns. For this technology to have an impact, the establishment of robust characterization and qualifi­cation plans constructed around specific contexts of use (COU) is required. This article covers the output from a workshop between the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Innovation and Quality Microphysiological Systems (IQ MPS) Affiliate. The intent of the workshop was to understand how CIVM technologies are currently being applied by pharma­ceutical companies during drug development and are being tested at the FDA through various case studies in order to identify hurdles (real or perceived) to the adoption of microphysiological systems (MPS) technologies, and to address evaluation/qualification pathways for these technologies. Output from the workshop includes the alignment on a working definition of MPS, a detailed description of the eleven CIVM case studies presented at the workshop, in-depth analysis, and key take aways from breakout sessions on ADME (absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion), pharmacology, and safety that covered topics such as qualification and performance criteria, species differences and concordance, and how industry can overcome barriers to regulatory submission of CIVM data. In conclusion, IQ MPS Affiliate and FDA scientists were able to build a general consensus on the need for animal CIVMs for preclinical species to better determine species concordance. Furthermore, there was acceptance that CIVM technologies for use in ADME, pharmacology and safety assessment will require qualification, which will vary depending on the specific COU.

Regulatory Perspectives on Juvenile Animal Toxicologic Pathology.

The Society of Toxicologic Pathology's Annual Virtual Symposium (2021) included a session on "Regulatory Perspectives on Juvenile Animal Toxicologic Pathology." The following narrative summarizes the key concepts from the four talks included in this symposium session chaired by Drs Deepa Rao and Alan Hoberman. These encompass an overview of various global regulations impacting the conduct of juvenile animal studies in pharmaceutical drug development and chemical toxicity assessments in a talk by Dr Alan Hoberman. Given the numerous regulatory guidances and legal statutes that have covered the conduct of juvenile animal studies and the recent harmonization of these guidances for pharmaceuticals, Dr Paul Brown provided an update on the harmonization of these guidances for pharmaceuticals, in the recently finalized version of the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use S11 guidance document, "Nonclinical Safety Testing in Support of Development of Pediatric Medicines." The first two talks on regulations were followed by two talks focused on an evaluation of the postnatal development of two major organ systems relevant in juvenile animals. Dr Aurore Varela covered study design and endpoints impacting the skeletal system (bone), while Dr Brad Bolon presented a talk on the study design and conduct of neuropathology evaluations for the developing nervous system.

Implementation of the principles of the 3Rs of animal testing at CDER: Past, present and future.

The safety testing of pharmaceutical candidates has traditionally relied on data gathered from studies in animals, and these sources of information remain a vital component of the safety assessment for new drug and biologic products. However, there are clearly ethical implications that attend the use of animals for safety testing, and FDA fully supports the principles of the 3Rs, as it relates to animal usage; these being to replace, reduce and refine. We provide an overview of some of the events and activities (legal and programmatic) that have had, and continue to have, the greatest impact on animal use in pharmaceutical development, and highlight some ongoing efforts to further meet the challenge of achieving our mission as humanely as possible.

3D cell culture models: Drug pharmacokinetics, safety assessment, and regulatory consideration.

Nonclinical testing has served as a foundation for evaluating potential risks and effectiveness of investigational new drugs in humans. However, the current two-dimensional (2D) in vitro cell culture systems cannot accurately depict and simulate the rich environment and complex processes observed in vivo, whereas animal studies present significant drawbacks with inherited species-specific differences and low throughput for increased demands. To improve the nonclinical prediction of drug safety and efficacy, researchers continue to develop novel models to evaluate and promote the use of improved cell- and organ-based assays for more accurate representation of human susceptibility to drug response. Among others, the three-dimensional (3D) cell culture models present physiologically relevant cellular microenvironment and offer great promise for assessing drug disposition and pharmacokinetics (PKs) that influence drug safety and efficacy from an early stage of drug development. Currently, there are numerous different types of 3D culture systems, from simple spheroids to more complicated organoids and organs-on-chips, and from single-cell type static 3D models to cell co-culture 3D models equipped with microfluidic flow control as well as hybrid 3D systems that combine 2D culture with biomedical microelectromechanical systems. This article reviews the current application and challenges of 3D culture systems in drug PKs, safety, and efficacy assessment, and provides a focused discussion and regulatory perspectives on the liver-, intestine-, kidney-, and neuron-based 3D cellular models.

An FDA/CDER perspective on nonclinical testing strategies: Classical toxicology approaches and new approach methodologies (NAMs).

Nonclinical testing of human pharmaceuticals is conducted to assess the safety of compounds to be studied in human clinical trials and for marketing of new drugs. Although there is no exact number and type of nonclinical studies required for safety assessments, as there is inherent flexibility for each new compound, the traditional approach is outlined in various FDA and ICH guidance documents and involves a combination of in vitro assays and whole animal testing methods. Recent advances in science have led to the emergence of numerous new approach methodologies (NAMs) for nonclinical testing that are currently being used in various aspects of drug development. Traditional nonclinical testing methods can predict clinical outcomes, although improvements in these methods that can increase predictivity of clinical outcomes are encouraged and needed. This paper discusses FDA/CDER's view on the opportunities and challenges of using NAMs in drug development especially for regulatory purposes, and also includes examples where NAMs are currently being used in nonclinical safety assessments and where they may supplement and/or enhance current testing methods. FDA/CDER also encourages communication with stakeholders regarding NAMs and is committed to exploring the use of NAMs to improve regulatory efficiency and potentially expedite drug development.

Regulatory Forum Opinion Piece*: Transgenic/Alternative Carcinogenicity Assays: A Retrospective Review of Studies Submitted to CDER/FDA 1997-2014.

The International Conference on Harmonization (ICH; S1B of 1997) allows a second species carcinogenicity study to be an alternative to one of the traditional 2-year studies. In the past 17 years, the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research's (CDER) Executive Carcinogenicity Assessment Committee received 269 alternative carcinogenicity assay protocols for review. This committee's recommendations regarding choice of animal model and dose selection are generally followed by sponsors conducting these studies to increase the acceptability of such studies. The P53(+/-) assay is generally considered appropriate for genotoxic products, and the TgRasH2 assay is appropriate for non-genotoxic or genotoxic drugs. In the United States, the TgAC assay is not used any more and the animals are no longer available. The TgAC assay can detect both tumor promoters and complete carcinogens, and consequently more than half of the dermal TgAC assays resulted in a positive assessment. Currently, more than 75% of mouse carcinogenicity studies are conducted in TgRasH2 mice. Behavior of genotoxic and non-genotoxic drugs in the various assays is reviewed.

CDER risk assessment exercise to evaluate potential risks from the use of nanomaterials in drug products.

The Nanotechnology Risk Assessment Working Group in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) within the United States Food and Drug Administration was established to assess the possible impact of nanotechnology on drug products. The group is in the process of performing risk assessment and management exercises. The task of the working group is to identify areas where CDER may need to optimize its review practices and to develop standards to ensure review consistency for drug applications that may involve the application of nanotechnology. The working group already performed risk management exercises evaluating the potential risks from administering nanomaterial active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) or nanomaterial excipients by various routes of administration. This publication outlines the risk assessment and management process used by the working group, using nanomaterial API by the oral route of administration as an example.

CDER photosafety guidance for industry.

In the Federal Register of January 10, 2000 (65 FR 1399), FDA published a draft guidance entitled "Photosafety Testing." The notice gave interested persons an opportunity to submit comments. As a result of the comments, certain sections of the guidance were reworded to improve clarity. A final guidance was published in May 2003. The final guidance further emphasizes that a flexible approach can be used to address adverse photoeffects and that specific assays are not required. Moreover, it encourages the development of methods that can efficiently be used to evaluate human safety. The guidance describes a consistent, science-based approach for testing of topically and systemically administered drug products.