Drug review process advancement and required manufacturer and contract research oraganization responses.

The United States Senate passed the "FDA Modernization Act 2.0." on September 29, 2022. Although the effectiveness of this Bill, which aims to eliminate the mandatory use of laboratory animals in new drug development, is limited, it represents a significant trend that will change the shape of drug applications in the United States and other countries. However, pharmaceutical companies have not taken major steps towards the complete elimination of animal testing from the standpoint of product safety, where they prioritize patient safety. Nonetheless, society is becoming increasingly opposed to animal testing, and efforts will be made to use fewer animals and conduct fewer animal tests as a natural and reasonable response. These changes eventually alter the shape of new drug applications. Based on the assumption that fewer animal tests will be conducted or fewer animals will be used in testing, this study explored bioinformatics and new technologies as alternatives to compensate for reduced information and provide a picture of how future new drug applications may look. The authors also discuss the directions that pharmaceutical companies and nonclinical contract research organizations should adopt to promote the replacement, reduction, and refinement of animals used in research, teaching, testing, and exhibitions.

Developing a pragmatic consensus procedure supporting the ICH S1B(R1) weight of evidence carcinogenicity assessment.

The ICH S1B carcinogenicity global testing guideline has been recently revised with a novel addendum that describes a comprehensive integrated Weight of Evidence (WoE) approach to determine the need for a 2-year rat carcinogenicity study. In the present work, experts from different organizations have joined efforts to standardize as much as possible a procedural framework for the integration of evidence associated with the different ICH S1B(R1) WoE criteria. The framework uses a pragmatic consensus procedure for carcinogenicity hazard assessment to facilitate transparent, consistent, and documented decision-making and it discusses best-practices both for the organization of studies and presentation of data in a format suitable for regulatory review. First, it is acknowledged that the six WoE factors described in the addendum form an integrated network of evidence within a holistic assessment framework that is used synergistically to analyze and explain safety signals. Second, the proposed standardized procedure builds upon different considerations related to the primary sources of evidence, mechanistic analysis, alternative methodologies and novel investigative approaches, metabolites, and reliability of the data and other acquired information. Each of the six WoE factors is described highlighting how they can contribute evidence for the overall WoE assessment. A suggested reporting format to summarize the cross-integration of evidence from the different WoE factors is also presented. This work also notes that even if a 2-year rat study is ultimately required, creating a WoE assessment is valuable in understanding the specific factors and levels of human carcinogenic risk better than have been identified previously with the 2-year rat bioassay alone.

Current status and future directions for a neurotoxicity hazard assessment framework that integrates in silico approaches.

Neurotoxicology is the study of adverse effects on the structure or function of the developing or mature adult nervous system following exposure to chemical, biological, or physical agents. The development of more informative alternative methods to assess developmental (DNT) and adult (NT) neurotoxicity induced by xenobiotics is critically needed. The use of such alternative methods including in silico approaches that predict DNT or NT from chemical structure (e.g., statistical-based and expert rule-based systems) is ideally based on a comprehensive understanding of the relevant biological mechanisms. This paper discusses known mechanisms alongside the current state of the art in DNT/NT testing. In silico approaches available today that support the assessment of neurotoxicity based on knowledge of chemical structure are reviewed, and a conceptual framework for the integration of in silico methods with experimental information is presented. Establishing this framework is essential for the development of protocols, namely standardized approaches, to ensure that assessments of NT and DNT based on chemical structures are generated in a transparent, consistent, and defendable manner.

Evaluating Confidence in Toxicity Assessments Based on Experimental Data and In Silico Predictions.

Understanding the reliability and relevance of a toxicological assessment is important for gauging the overall confidence and communicating the degree of uncertainty related to it. The process involved in assessing reliability and relevance is well defined for experimental data. Similar criteria need to be established for in silico predictions, as they become increasingly more important to fill data gaps and need to be reasonably integrated as additional lines of evidence. Thus, in silico assessments could be communicated with greater confidence and in a more harmonized manner. The current work expands on previous definitions of reliability, relevance, and confidence and establishes a conceptional framework to apply those to in silico data. The approach is used in two case studies: 1) phthalic anhydride, where experimental data are readily available and 2) 4-hydroxy-3-propoxybenzaldehyde, a data poor case which relies predominantly on in silico methods, showing that reliability, relevance, and confidence of in silico assessments can be effectively communicated within Integrated approaches to testing and assessment (IATA).

Implementation of In Silico Toxicology Protocols in Leadscope.

In silico toxicology protocols help ensure the results from computational toxicology models are performed and documented in a standardized, consistent, transparent, and accepted manner. In silico toxicology protocols for skin sensitization and genetic toxicology have been previously published and have been implemented within the Leadscope software. The following chapter outlines how such protocols have been deployed in the Leadscope platform including integration with toxicology databases and a battery of computational toxicology models.

Implementation of in silico toxicology protocols within a visual and interactive hazard assessment platform.

Mechanistically-driven alternative approaches to hazard assessment invariably require a battery of tests, including both in silico models and experimental data. The decision-making process, from selection of the methods to combining the information based on the weight-of-evidence, is ideally described in published guidelines or protocols. This ensures that the application of such approaches is defendable to reviewers within regulatory agencies and across the industry. Examples include the ICH M7 pharmaceutical impurities guideline and the published in silico toxicology protocols. To support an efficient, transparent, consistent and fully documented implementation of these protocols, a new and novel interactive software solution is described to perform such an integrated hazard assessment based on public and proprietary information.

In silico approaches in organ toxicity hazard assessment: current status and future needs in predicting liver toxicity.

Hepatotoxicity is one of the most frequently observed adverse effects resulting from exposure to a xenobiotic. For example, in pharmaceutical research and development it is one of the major reasons for drug withdrawals, clinical failures, and discontinuation of drug candidates. The development of faster and cheaper methods to assess hepatotoxicity that are both more sustainable and more informative is critically needed. The biological mechanisms and processes underpinning hepatotoxicity are summarized and experimental approaches to support the prediction of hepatotoxicity are described, including toxicokinetic considerations. The paper describes the increasingly important role of in silico approaches and highlights challenges to the adoption of these methods including the lack of a commonly agreed upon protocol for performing such an assessment and the need for in silico solutions that take dose into consideration. A proposed framework for the integration of in silico and experimental information is provided along with a case study describing how computational methods have been used to successfully respond to a regulatory question concerning non-genotoxic impurities in chemically synthesized pharmaceuticals.

In silico approaches in organ toxicity hazard assessment: Current status and future needs for predicting heart, kidney and lung toxicities.

The kidneys, heart and lungs are vital organ systems evaluated as part of acute or chronic toxicity assessments. New methodologies are being developed to predict these adverse effects based on in vitro and in silico approaches. This paper reviews the current state of the art in predicting these organ toxicities. It outlines the biological basis, processes and endpoints for kidney toxicity, pulmonary toxicity, respiratory irritation and sensitization as well as functional and structural cardiac toxicities. The review also covers current experimental approaches, including off-target panels from secondary pharmacology batteries. Current in silico approaches for prediction of these effects and mechanisms are described as well as obstacles to the use of in silico methods. Ultimately, a commonly accepted protocol for performing such assessment would be a valuable resource to expand the use of such approaches across different regulatory and industrial applications. However, a number of factors impede their widespread deployment including a lack of a comprehensive mechanistic understanding, limited in vitro testing approaches and limited in vivo databases suitable for modeling, a limited understanding of how to incorporate absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion (ADME) considerations into the overall process, a lack of in silico models designed to predict a safe dose and an accepted framework for organizing the key characteristics of these organ toxicants.

In Silico Approaches In Carcinogenicity Hazard Assessment: Current Status and Future Needs.

Historically, identifying carcinogens has relied primarily on tumor studies in rodents, which require enormous resources in both money and time. In silico models have been developed for predicting rodent carcinogens but have not yet found general regulatory acceptance, in part due to the lack of a generally accepted protocol for performing such an assessment as well as limitations in predictive performance and scope. There remains a need for additional, improved in silico carcinogenicity models, especially ones that are more human-relevant, for use in research and regulatory decision-making. As part of an international effort to develop in silico toxicological protocols, a consortium of toxicologists, computational scientists, and regulatory scientists across several industries and governmental agencies evaluated the extent to which in silico models exist for each of the recently defined 10 key characteristics (KCs) of carcinogens. This position paper summarizes the current status of in silico tools for the assessment of each KC and identifies the data gaps that need to be addressed before a comprehensive in silico carcinogenicity protocol can be developed for regulatory use.

A cross-industry collaboration to assess if acute oral toxicity (Q)SAR models are fit-for-purpose for GHS classification and labelling.

This study assesses whether currently available acute oral toxicity (AOT) in silico models, provided by the widely employed Leadscope software, are fit-for-purpose for categorization and labelling of chemicals. As part of this study, a large data set of proprietary and marketed compounds from multiple companies (pharmaceutical, plant protection products, and other chemical industries) was assembled to assess the models' performance. The absolute percentage of correct or more conservative predictions, based on a comparison of experimental and predicted GHS categories, was approximately 95%, after excluding a small percentage of inconclusive (indeterminate or out of domain) predictions. Since the frequency distribution across the experimental categories is skewed towards low toxicity chemicals, a balanced assessment was also performed. Across all compounds which could be assigned to a well-defined experimental category, the average percentage of correct or more conservative predictions was around 80%. These results indicate the potential for reliable and broad application of these models across different industrial sectors. This manuscript describes the evaluation of these models, highlights the importance of an expert review, and provides guidance on the use of AOT models to fulfill testing requirements, GHS classification/labelling, and transportation needs.

Extending (Q)SARs to incorporate proprietary knowledge for regulatory purposes: is aromatic N-oxide a structural alert for predicting DNA-reactive mutagenicity?

(Quantitative) structure-activity relationship or (Q)SAR predictions of DNA-reactive mutagenicity are important to support both the design of new chemicals and the assessment of impurities, degradants, metabolites, extractables and leachables, as well as existing chemicals. Aromatic N-oxides represent a class of compounds that are often considered alerting for mutagenicity yet the scientific rationale of this structural alert is not clear and has been questioned. Because aromatic N-oxide-containing compounds may be encountered as impurities, degradants and metabolites, it is important to accurately predict mutagenicity of this chemical class. This article analysed a series of publicly available aromatic N-oxide data in search of supporting information. The article also used a previously developed structure-activity relationship (SAR) fingerprint methodology where a series of aromatic N-oxide substructures was generated and matched against public and proprietary databases, including pharmaceutical data. An assessment of the number of mutagenic and non-mutagenic compounds matching each substructure across all sources was used to understand whether the general class or any specific subclasses appear to lead to mutagenicity. This analysis resulted in a downgrade of the general aromatic N-oxide alert. However, it was determined there were enough public and proprietary data to assign the quindioxin and related chemicals as well as benzo[c][1,2,5]oxadiazole 1-oxide subclasses as alerts. The overall results of this analysis were incorporated into Leadscope's expert-rule-based model to enhance its predictive accuracy.

Improvement of quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) tools for predicting Ames mutagenicity: outcomes of the Ames/QSAR International Challenge Project.

The International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) M7 guideline allows the use of in silico approaches for predicting Ames mutagenicity for the initial assessment of impurities in pharmaceuticals. This is the first international guideline that addresses the use of quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) models in lieu of actual toxicological studies for human health assessment. Therefore, QSAR models for Ames mutagenicity now require higher predictive power for identifying mutagenic chemicals. To increase the predictive power of QSAR models, larger experimental datasets from reliable sources are required. The Division of Genetics and Mutagenesis, National Institute of Health Sciences (DGM/NIHS) of Japan recently established a unique proprietary Ames mutagenicity database containing 12140 new chemicals that have not been previously used for developing QSAR models. The DGM/NIHS provided this Ames database to QSAR vendors to validate and improve their QSAR tools. The Ames/QSAR International Challenge Project was initiated in 2014 with 12 QSAR vendors testing 17 QSAR tools against these compounds in three phases. We now present the final results. All tools were considerably improved by participation in this project. Most tools achieved >50% sensitivity (positive prediction among all Ames positives) and predictive power (accuracy) was as high as 80%, almost equivalent to the inter-laboratory reproducibility of Ames tests. To further increase the predictive power of QSAR tools, accumulation of additional Ames test data is required as well as re-evaluation of some previous Ames test results. Indeed, some Ames-positive or Ames-negative chemicals may have previously been incorrectly classified because of methodological weakness, resulting in false-positive or false-negative predictions by QSAR tools. These incorrect data hamper prediction and are a source of noise in the development of QSAR models. It is thus essential to establish a large benchmark database consisting only of well-validated Ames test results to build more accurate QSAR models.

Principles and procedures for handling out-of-domain and indeterminate results as part of ICH M7 recommended (Q)SAR analyses.

The International Council for Harmonization (ICH) M7 guideline describes a hazard assessment process for impurities that have the potential to be present in a drug substance or drug product. In the absence of adequate experimental bacterial mutagenicity data, (Q)SAR analysis may be used as a test to predict impurities' DNA reactive (mutagenic) potential. However, in certain situations, (Q)SAR software is unable to generate a positive or negative prediction either because of conflicting information or because the impurity is outside the applicability domain of the model. Such results present challenges in generating an overall mutagenicity prediction and highlight the importance of performing a thorough expert review. The following paper reviews pharmaceutical and regulatory experiences handling such situations. The paper also presents an analysis of proprietary data to help understand the likelihood of misclassifying a mutagenic impurity as non-mutagenic based on different combinations of (Q)SAR results. This information may be taken into consideration when supporting the (Q)SAR results with an expert review, especially when out-of-domain results are generated during a (Q)SAR evaluation.

Computational Toxicology and Drug Discovery.

The use of computational toxicology methods within drug discovery began in the early 2000s with applications such as predicting bacterial mutagenicity and hERG inhibition. The field has been continuously expanding ever since and the tasks at hand have become more complex. These approaches are now strategically integrated into the risk assessment process, as a complement to in vitro and in vivo methods. Today, computational toxicology can be used in every phase of drug discovery and development, from profiling large libraries early on, to predicting off-target effects in the mid-discovery phase, to assessing potential mutagenic impurities in development and degradants as part of life-cycle management. This chapter provides an overview of the field and describes the application of computational toxicology throughout the entire discovery and development process.

In silico toxicology protocols.

The present publication surveys several applications of in silico (i.e., computational) toxicology approaches across different industries and institutions. It highlights the need to develop standardized protocols when conducting toxicity-related predictions. This contribution articulates the information needed for protocols to support in silico predictions for major toxicological endpoints of concern (e.g., genetic toxicity, carcinogenicity, acute toxicity, reproductive toxicity, developmental toxicity) across several industries and regulatory bodies. Such novel in silico toxicology (IST) protocols, when fully developed and implemented, will ensure in silico toxicological assessments are performed and evaluated in a consistent, reproducible, and well-documented manner across industries and regulatory bodies to support wider uptake and acceptance of the approaches. The development of IST protocols is an initiative developed through a collaboration among an international consortium to reflect the state-of-the-art in in silico toxicology for hazard identification and characterization. A general outline for describing the development of such protocols is included and it is based on in silico predictions and/or available experimental data for a defined series of relevant toxicological effects or mechanisms. The publication presents a novel approach for determining the reliability of in silico predictions alongside experimental data. In addition, we discuss how to determine the level of confidence in the assessment based on the relevance and reliability of the information.

Taking Advantage of Databases.

Toxicity databases are a useful resource to support hazard and risk assessment. They are used to retrieve historical studies for compounds of interest and to support toxicity predictions where no data exists. Toxicity predictions are either based upon study results from similar chemicals or prediction models built from these databases.

Principles and procedures for implementation of ICH M7 recommended (Q)SAR analyses.

The ICH M7 guideline describes a consistent approach to identify, categorize, and control DNA reactive, mutagenic, impurities in pharmaceutical products to limit the potential carcinogenic risk related to such impurities. This paper outlines a series of principles and procedures to consider when generating (Q)SAR assessments aligned with the ICH M7 guideline to be included in a regulatory submission. In the absence of adequate experimental data, the results from two complementary (Q)SAR methodologies may be combined to support an initial hazard classification. This may be followed by an assessment of additional information that serves as the basis for an expert review to support or refute the predictions. This paper elucidates scenarios where additional expert knowledge may be beneficial, what such an expert review may contain, and how the results and accompanying considerations may be documented. Furthermore, the use of these principles and procedures to yield a consistent and robust (Q)SAR-based argument to support impurity qualification for regulatory purposes is described in this manuscript.

Extending (Q)SARs to incorporate proprietary knowledge for regulatory purposes: A case study using aromatic amine mutagenicity.

Statistical-based and expert rule-based models built using public domain mutagenicity knowledge and data are routinely used for computational (Q)SAR assessments of pharmaceutical impurities in line with the approach recommended in the ICH M7 guideline. Knowledge from proprietary corporate mutagenicity databases could be used to increase the predictive performance for selected chemical classes as well as expand the applicability domain of these (Q)SAR models. This paper outlines a mechanism for sharing knowledge without the release of proprietary data. Primary aromatic amine mutagenicity was selected as a case study because this chemical class is often encountered in pharmaceutical impurity analysis and mutagenicity of aromatic amines is currently difficult to predict. As part of this analysis, a series of aromatic amine substructures were defined and the number of mutagenic and non-mutagenic examples for each chemical substructure calculated across a series of public and proprietary mutagenicity databases. This information was pooled across all sources to identify structural classes that activate or deactivate aromatic amine mutagenicity. This structure activity knowledge, in combination with newly released primary aromatic amine data, was incorporated into Leadscope's expert rule-based and statistical-based (Q)SAR models where increased predictive performance was demonstrated.

Comparison of methods for sequential screening of large compound sets.

Sequential screening is an iterative procedure that can greatly increase hit rates over random screening or non-iterative procedures. We studied the effects of three factors on enrichment rates: the method used to rank compounds, the molecular descriptor set and the selection of initial training set. The primary factor influencing recovery rates was the method of selecting the initial training set. Rates for recovering active compounds were substantially lower with the diverse training sets than they were with training sets selected by other methods. Because structure-activity information is incrementally enhanced in intermediate training sets, sequential screening provides significant improvement in the average rate of recovery of active compounds when compared with non-iterative selection procedures.