Evaluation of levocetirizine in beagle dog and cynomolgus monkey telemetry assays: Defining the no QTc effect profile by timepoint and concentration-QTc analysis.

In prior clinical studies, levocetirizine (LEVO) has demonstrated no effect on ventricular repolarization (QTc intervals), therefore it is a relevant negative control to assess in nonclinical assays to define low proarrhythmic risk. LEVO was tested in beagle dog and cynomolgus monkey (nonhuman primate [NHP]) telemetry models to understand the nonclinical-clinical translation of this negative control. One oral dose of vehicle, LEVO (10 mg/kg/species) or moxifloxacin (MOXI; 30 mg/kg/dog; 80 mg/kg/NHP) was administered to instrumented animals (N = 8/species) using a cross-over dosing design; MOXI was the in-study positive control. Corrected QT interval values (QTcI) were calculated using an individual animal correction factor. Blood samples were taken for drug exposure during telemetry and for pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis (same animals; different day) for exposure-response (C-QTc) modeling. Statistical analysis of QTc-by-timepoint data showed that LEVO treatment was consistent with vehicle, thus no effect on ventricular repolarization was observed over 24 h in both species. PK analysis indicated that LEVO-maximum concentration levels in dogs (range: 12,300-20,100 ng/ml) and NHPs (range: 4090-12,700 ng/ml) were ≥4-fold higher than supratherapeutic drug levels in clinical QTc studies. Slope analysis values in dogs (0.00019 ms/ng/ml) and NHPs (0.00016 ms/ng/ml) were similar to the human C-QTc relationship and indicated no relationship between QTc intervals and plasma levels of LEVO. MOXI treatment caused QTc interval prolongation (dog: 18 ms; NHP: 29 ms). The characterization of LEVO in these non-rodent telemetry studies further demonstrates the value and impact of the in vivo QTc assay to define a "no QTc effect" profile and support clinical safety assessment.

Evaluation of moxifloxacin in canine and non-human primate telemetry assays: Comparison of QTc interval prolongation by timepoint and concentration-QTc analysis.

The in vivo correct QT (QTc) assay is used by the pharmaceutical industry to characterize the potential for delayed ventricular repolarization and is a core safety assay mentioned in International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) S7B guideline. The typical telemetry study involves a dose-response analysis of QTc intervals over time using a crossover (CO) design. This method has proven utility but does not include direct integration of pharmacokinetic (PK) data. An alternative approach has been validated and is used routinely in the clinical setting that pairs pharmacodynamic (PD) responses with PK exposure (e.g., concentration-QTc (C-QTc) analysis. The goal of our paper was to compare the QTc sensitivity of two experimental approaches in the conscious dog and non-human primate (NHP) QTc assays. For timepoint analysis, a conventional design using eight animals (8 × 4 CO) to detect moxifloxacin-induced QTc prolongation was compared to a PK/PD design in a subset (N = 4) of the same animals. The findings demonstrate that both approaches are equally sensitive in detecting threshold QTc prolongation on the order of 10 ms. Both QTc models demonstrated linearity in the QTc prolongation response to moxifloxacin dose escalation (6 to 46 ms). Further, comparison with human QTc findings with moxifloxacin showed agreement and consistent translation across the three species: C-QTc slope values were 0.7- (dog) and 1.2- (NHP) fold of the composite human value. In conclusion, our data show that dog and NHP QTc telemetry with an integrated PK arm (C-QTc) has the potential to supplement clinical evaluation and improve integrated QTc risk assessment.

The in vivo QTc core assay: An evaluation of QTc variability, detection sensitivity and implications for the improvement of conscious dog and non-human primate telemetry studies.

The ICH S7B guideline describes the requirement to conduct an in vitro IKr (hERG) and in vivo QTc assay for human risk assessment of new drug products, but the guidance is devoid of recommendations on study execution or quality. In the absence of standard practice, multiple study designs and experimental approaches have been utilized, especially with the nonclinical QTc assay. Since 2009, our approach to the in vivo QTc assay has been consistent for small molecules and yields reproducible and sensitive levels for QTc signal detection. Our database and experience indicate that nonrodent telemetry studies can achieve high sensitivity and a calculated metric of study power can be used to indicate study quality. Using a retrospective statistical power analysis of multiple studies (n = 14 dog; n = 6 NHP), the detection sensitivity for a specific study design (N = 8; double Latin square cross-over) was determined. The output of the power analysis is the minimal detectable effect at 80% power and a 95% probability level. The design provided an average sensitivity to detect a 4.7 (2.0%) and 6.5 (1.9%) msec QTcI change in dog and NHP, respectively. These findings suggest that this experimental approach has a consistent and reproducible sensitivity to enable a robust QTcI risk evaluation and can be used confidently to support an integrated nonclinical-clinical pro-arrhythmia risk assessment. The inclusion of power analysis (i.e., QTc sensitivity) data in a regulatory submission provides key information to critical stakeholders about the quality of the in vivo QTc assessment and its value for human safety testing.