Nonclinical safety evaluation of a novel ionizable lipid for mRNA delivery.

mRNA vaccines hold tremendous potential in disease control and prevention for their flexibility with respect to production, application, and design. Recent breakthroughs in mRNA vaccination would have not been possible without major advances in lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) technologies. We developed an LNP containing a novel ionizable cationic lipid, Lipid-1, and three well known excipients. An in silico toxicity hazard assessment for genotoxicity, a genotoxicity assessment, and a dose range finding toxicity study were performed to characterize the safety profile of Lipid-1. The in silico toxicity hazard assessment, utilizing two prediction systems DEREK and Leadscope, did not find any structural alert for mutagenicity and clastogenicity, and prediction in the statistical models were all negative. In addition, applying a read-across approach a structurally very similar compound was tested negative in two in vitro assays confirming the low genotoxicity potential of Lipid-1. A dose range finding toxicity study in rabbits, receiving a single intramuscular injection of either different doses of an mRNA encoding Influenza Hemagglutinin H3 antigen encapsulated in the LNP containing Lipid-1 or the empty LNP, evaluated local tolerance and systemic toxicity during a 2-week observation period. Only rabbits exposed to the vaccine were able to develop a specific IgG response, indicating an appropriate vaccine take. The vaccine was well tolerated up to 250 µg mRNA/injection, which was defined as the No Observed Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL). These results support the use of the LNP containing Lipid-1 as an mRNA delivery system for different vaccine formulations and its deployment into clinical trials.

Computational Models for Human and Animal Hepatotoxicity with a Global Application Scope.

Hepatic toxicity is a key concern for novel pharmaceutical drugs since it is difficult to anticipate in preclinical models, and it can originate from pharmacologically unrelated drug effects, such as pathway interference, metabolism, and drug accumulation. Because liver toxicity still ranks among the top reasons for drug attrition, the reliable prediction of adverse hepatic effects is a substantial challenge in drug discovery and development. To this end, more effort needs to be focused on the development of improved predictive in-vitro and in-silico approaches. Current computational models often lack applicability to novel pharmaceutical candidates, typically due to insufficient coverage of the chemical space of interest, which is either imposed by size or diversity of the training data. Hence, there is an urgent need for better computational models to allow for the identification of safe drug candidates and to support experimental design. In this context, a large data set comprising 3712 compounds with liver related toxicity findings in humans and animals was collected from various sources. The complex pathology was clustered into 21 preclinical and human hepatotoxicity endpoints, which were organized into three levels of detail. Support vector machine models were trained for each endpoint, using optimized descriptor sets from chemometrics software. The optimized global human hepatotoxicity model has high sensitivity (68%) and excellent specificity (95%) in an internal validation set of 221 compounds. Models for preclinical endpoints performed similarly. To allow for reliable prediction of "truly external" novel compounds, all predictions are tagged with confidence parameters. These parameters are derived from a statistical analysis of the predictive probability densities. The whole approach was validated for an external validation set of 269 proprietary compounds. The models are fully integrated into our early safety in-silico workflow.

Evaluation of a statistics-based Ames mutagenicity QSAR model and interpretation of the results obtained.

The relative wealth of bacterial mutagenicity data available in the public literature means that in silico quantitative/qualitative structure activity relationship (QSAR) systems can readily be built for this endpoint. A good means of evaluating the performance of such systems is to use private unpublished data sets, which generally represent a more distinct chemical space than publicly available test sets and, as a result, provide a greater challenge to the model. However, raw performance metrics should not be the only factor considered when judging this type of software since expert interpretation of the results obtained may allow for further improvements in predictivity. Enough information should be provided by a QSAR to allow the user to make general, scientifically-based arguments in order to assess and overrule predictions when necessary. With all this in mind, we sought to validate the performance of the statistics-based in vitro bacterial mutagenicity prediction system Sarah Nexus (version 1.1) against private test data sets supplied by nine different pharmaceutical companies. The results of these evaluations were then analysed in order to identify findings presented by the model which would be useful for the user to take into consideration when interpreting the results and making their final decision about the mutagenic potential of a given compound.

It's difficult, but important, to make negative predictions.

At the confluence of predictive and regulatory toxicologies, negative predictions may be the thin green line that prevents populations from being exposed to harm. Here, two novel approaches to making confident and robust negative in silico predictions for mutagenicity (as defined by the Ames test) have been evaluated. Analyses of 12 data sets containing >13,000 compounds, showed that negative predictivity is high (∼90%) for the best approach and features that either reduce the accuracy or certainty of negative predictions are identified as misclassified or unclassified respectively. However, negative predictivity remains high (and in excess of the prevalence of non-mutagens) even in the presence of these features, indicating that they are not flags for mutagenicity.

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.

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.