Drug-Induced Liver Injury in the Elderly: Consensus Statements and Recommendations from the IQ-DILI Initiative.

The elderly demographic is the fastest-growing segment of the world's population and is projected to exceed 1.5 billion people by 2050. With multimorbidity, polypharmacy, susceptibility to drug-drug interactions, and frailty as distinct risk factors, elderly patients are especially vulnerable to developing potentially life-threatening safety events such as serious forms of drug-induced liver injury (DILI). It has been a longstanding shortcoming that elderly individuals are often a vulnerable population underrepresented in clinical trials. As such, an improved understanding of DILI in the elderly is a high-priority, unmet need. This challenge is underscored by recent documents put forward by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) that encourage data collection in the elderly and recommend improved practices that will facilitate a more inclusive approach. To establish what is already known about DILI in the elderly and pinpoint key gaps of knowledge in this arena, a working definition of "elderly" is required that accounts for both chronologic and biologic ages and varying states of frailty. In addition, it is critical to characterize the biological role of aging on liver function, as well as the different epidemiological factors such as polypharmacy and inappropriate prescribing that are common practices. While data may not show that elderly people are more susceptible to DILI, DILI due to specific drugs might be more common in this population. Improved characterization of DILI in the elderly may enhance diagnostic and prognostic capabilities and improve the way in which liver safety is monitored during clinical trials. This summary of the published literature provides a framework to understand and evaluate the risk of DILI in the elderly. Consensus statements and recommendations can help to optimize medical care and catalyze collaborations between academic clinicians, drug manufacturers, and regulatory scientists to enable the generation of high-quality research data relevant to the elderly population.

Industry Review of Best Practices for Risk Management of Drug-Induced Liver Injury from Development to Real-World Use.

The relative treatment benefit of a drug for patients during development, marketing authorization review, or after approval includes an assessment of the risk of drug-induced liver injury (DILI). In this article, the Pharmacovigilance and Risk Mitigation Working Group of the IQ-DILI Initiative launched in June 2016 within the International Consortium for Innovation and Quality in Pharmaceutical Development presents and reviews three key topics for essential risk management activities to identify, characterize, monitor, mitigate, and communicate DILI risk associated with small molecules during drug development. The three topics are: (1) Current best practices for characterizing the DILI phenotype and the severity and incidence of DILI in the treatment population, including DILI identification, prediction and recovery. (2) Characterization of the relative treatment benefit for patients who will be exposed to a drug and the attendant risk of DILI in conjunction with existing global risk mitigation strategies. (3) Implementation of risk mitigation strategies during drug development highlighting patient factors, healthcare settings and site of product administration, and prescriber and healthcare provider factors. Industry guidance is provided for assessing whether the product labeling is sufficient to minimize the risk of DILI or whether a United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) or European Medicines Agency (EMA) Risk Management Plan (RMP) with additional Risk Minimization Measures (aRMM) is needed.

The relative treatment benefit of a drug for patients during development, marketing authorization review or after approval includes an assessment of the risk of drug-induced liver injury (DILI). Reported incidences of DILI range from 0.74 to 19 per 100,000, and laboratory criteria and/or clinical outcome determine the severity of DILI. At least 10% of patients who develop jaundice caused by DILI (Hy's Law cases) develop liver failure (i.e., severe DILI). A drug's liver safety profile can be assessed using Evaluation of Drug-Induced Serious Hepatotoxicity Plots. Specific recommendations for monitoring DILI in the post-marketing setting depend on characterization of the phenotype during drug development. Risk mitigation tools include additional educational mechanisms, and risk minimization measures include Elements To Assure Safe Use (ETASU) for healthcare professionals, administration sites, and patients. The overall aim of risk management is to ensure that the benefit of a particular product exceeds the risks as far as possible for the individual patient and for the target population.

Overview of Causality Assessment for Drug-Induced Liver Injury (DILI) in Clinical Trials.

Causality assessment for suspected drug-induced liver injury (DILI) during drug development and following approval is challenging. The IQ DILI Causality Working Group (CWG), in collaboration with academic and regulatory subject matter experts (SMEs), developed this manuscript with the following objectives: (1) understand and describe current practices; (2) evaluate the utility of new tools/methods/practice guidelines; (3) propose a minimal data set needed to assess causality; (4) define best practices; and (5) promote a more structured and universal approach to DILI causality assessment for clinical development. To better understand current practices, the CWG performed a literature review, took a survey of member companies, and collaborated with SMEs. Areas of focus included best practices for causality assessment during clinical development, utility of adjudication committees, and proposals for potential new avenues to improve causality assessment. The survey and literature review provided renewed understanding of the complexity and challenges of DILI causality assessment as well as the use of non-standardized approaches. Potential areas identified for consistency and standardization included role and membership of adjudication committees, standardized minimum dataset, updated assessment tools, and best practices for liver biopsy and rechallenge in the setting of DILI. Adjudication committees comprised of SMEs (i.e., utilizing expert opinion) remain the standard for DILI causality assessment. A variety of working groups continue to make progress in pursuing new tools to assist with DILI causality assessment. The minimum dataset deemed adequate for causality assessment provides a path forward for standardization of data collection in the setting of DILI. Continued progress is necessary to optimize and advance innovative tools necessary for the scientific, pharmaceutical, and regulatory community.