Successful Drug Development Despite Adverse Preclinical Findings Part 2: Examples

To illustrate the process of addressing adverse preclinical findings (APFs) as outlined in the first part of this review, a number of cases with unexpected APF in toxicity studies with drug candidates is discussed in this second part. The emphasis is on risk characterization, especially regarding th...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of Toxicologic Pathology 2010, Vol.23(4), pp.213-234
Hauptverfasser: Ettlin, Robert A., Kuroda, Junji, Plassmann, Stephanie, Hayashi, Makoto, Prentice, David E.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 234
container_issue 4
container_start_page 213
container_title Journal of Toxicologic Pathology
container_volume 23
creator Ettlin, Robert A.
Kuroda, Junji
Plassmann, Stephanie
Hayashi, Makoto
Prentice, David E.
description To illustrate the process of addressing adverse preclinical findings (APFs) as outlined in the first part of this review, a number of cases with unexpected APF in toxicity studies with drug candidates is discussed in this second part. The emphasis is on risk characterization, especially regarding the mode of action (MoA), and risk evaluation regarding relevance for man. While severe APFs such as retinal toxicity may turn out to be of little human relevance, minor findings particularly in early toxicity studies, such as vasculitis, may later pose a real problem. Rodents are imperfect models for endocrine APFs, non-rodents for human cardiac effects. Liver and kidney toxicities are frequent, but they can often be monitored in man and do not necessarily result in early termination of drug candidates. Novel findings such as the unusual lesions in the gastrointestinal tract and the bones presented in this review can be difficult to explain. It will be shown that well known issues such as phospholipidosis and carcinogenicity by agonists of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPAR) need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The latter is of particular interest because the new PPAR α and dual α/γ agonists resulted in a change of the safety paradigm established with the older PPAR α agonists. General toxicologists and pathologists need some understanding of the principles of genotoxicity and reproductive toxicity testing. Both types of preclinical toxicities are major APF and clinical monitoring is difficult, generally leading to permanent use restrictions.
doi_str_mv 10.1293/tox.23.213
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3234630</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>954615759</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c615t-7267b5904f776ac476921b383dfc9077e972653eddd44f053c4fcbcba15f10483</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkVtLxDAQhYMoul5e_AHSN0HYNbc2jQ_K4h0EFRV8C2k6XSPpxaRd9N8b2XXRl5mB-ThzmIPQPsETQiU77tvPCWUTStgaGpE8J2NJ0td1NMKS8DjLfAtth_COMRU4ZZtoi1IqKGZ0hB6fBmMghGpwyYUfZskFzMG1XQ1NH-fQ2R6SaTkHHyB58GCcbazRLrmyTWmbWUgetO8TepJcfuq6cxB20UalXYC9Zd9BL1eXz-c347v769vz6d3YZCTtx4Jmokgl5pUQmTZcZJKSguWsrIzEQoCMRMqgLEvOq2jb8MoUptAkrQjmOdtBpwvdbihqKE007LVTnbe19l-q1Vb93zT2Tc3auWKU8YzhKHC4FPDtxwChV7UNBpzTDbRDUDLl0alIZSSPFqTxbQgeqtUVgtVPBCpGoChTMYIIH_z1tUJ_fx6BswXwHno9gxUQ_2iNg18tviyErTbmTXsFDfsG8YWZ7w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>954615759</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Successful Drug Development Despite Adverse Preclinical Findings Part 2: Examples</title><source>J-STAGE Free</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Ettlin, Robert A. ; Kuroda, Junji ; Plassmann, Stephanie ; Hayashi, Makoto ; Prentice, David E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Ettlin, Robert A. ; Kuroda, Junji ; Plassmann, Stephanie ; Hayashi, Makoto ; Prentice, David E.</creatorcontrib><description>To illustrate the process of addressing adverse preclinical findings (APFs) as outlined in the first part of this review, a number of cases with unexpected APF in toxicity studies with drug candidates is discussed in this second part. The emphasis is on risk characterization, especially regarding the mode of action (MoA), and risk evaluation regarding relevance for man. While severe APFs such as retinal toxicity may turn out to be of little human relevance, minor findings particularly in early toxicity studies, such as vasculitis, may later pose a real problem. Rodents are imperfect models for endocrine APFs, non-rodents for human cardiac effects. Liver and kidney toxicities are frequent, but they can often be monitored in man and do not necessarily result in early termination of drug candidates. Novel findings such as the unusual lesions in the gastrointestinal tract and the bones presented in this review can be difficult to explain. It will be shown that well known issues such as phospholipidosis and carcinogenicity by agonists of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPAR) need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The latter is of particular interest because the new PPAR α and dual α/γ agonists resulted in a change of the safety paradigm established with the older PPAR α agonists. General toxicologists and pathologists need some understanding of the principles of genotoxicity and reproductive toxicity testing. Both types of preclinical toxicities are major APF and clinical monitoring is difficult, generally leading to permanent use restrictions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0914-9198</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1881-915X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1881-915X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1293/tox.23.213</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22272032</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Japan: JAPANESE SOCIETY OF TOXICOLOGIC PATHOLOGY</publisher><subject>adverse preclinical finding ; carcinogenicity ; genotoxicity ; morphologic toxicity ; reproductive toxicity ; Review ; weight-of-evidence approach</subject><ispartof>Journal of Toxicologic Pathology, 2010, Vol.23(4), pp.213-234</ispartof><rights>2010 The Japanese Society of Toxicologic Pathology</rights><rights>2010 The Japanese Society of Toxicologic Pathology</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c615t-7267b5904f776ac476921b383dfc9077e972653eddd44f053c4fcbcba15f10483</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c615t-7267b5904f776ac476921b383dfc9077e972653eddd44f053c4fcbcba15f10483</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3234630/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3234630/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,725,778,782,883,1879,27907,27908,53774,53776</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22272032$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ettlin, Robert A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuroda, Junji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Plassmann, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hayashi, Makoto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Prentice, David E.</creatorcontrib><title>Successful Drug Development Despite Adverse Preclinical Findings Part 2: Examples</title><title>Journal of Toxicologic Pathology</title><addtitle>J Toxicol Pathol</addtitle><description>To illustrate the process of addressing adverse preclinical findings (APFs) as outlined in the first part of this review, a number of cases with unexpected APF in toxicity studies with drug candidates is discussed in this second part. The emphasis is on risk characterization, especially regarding the mode of action (MoA), and risk evaluation regarding relevance for man. While severe APFs such as retinal toxicity may turn out to be of little human relevance, minor findings particularly in early toxicity studies, such as vasculitis, may later pose a real problem. Rodents are imperfect models for endocrine APFs, non-rodents for human cardiac effects. Liver and kidney toxicities are frequent, but they can often be monitored in man and do not necessarily result in early termination of drug candidates. Novel findings such as the unusual lesions in the gastrointestinal tract and the bones presented in this review can be difficult to explain. It will be shown that well known issues such as phospholipidosis and carcinogenicity by agonists of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPAR) need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The latter is of particular interest because the new PPAR α and dual α/γ agonists resulted in a change of the safety paradigm established with the older PPAR α agonists. General toxicologists and pathologists need some understanding of the principles of genotoxicity and reproductive toxicity testing. Both types of preclinical toxicities are major APF and clinical monitoring is difficult, generally leading to permanent use restrictions.</description><subject>adverse preclinical finding</subject><subject>carcinogenicity</subject><subject>genotoxicity</subject><subject>morphologic toxicity</subject><subject>reproductive toxicity</subject><subject>Review</subject><subject>weight-of-evidence approach</subject><issn>0914-9198</issn><issn>1881-915X</issn><issn>1881-915X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpVkVtLxDAQhYMoul5e_AHSN0HYNbc2jQ_K4h0EFRV8C2k6XSPpxaRd9N8b2XXRl5mB-ThzmIPQPsETQiU77tvPCWUTStgaGpE8J2NJ0td1NMKS8DjLfAtth_COMRU4ZZtoi1IqKGZ0hB6fBmMghGpwyYUfZskFzMG1XQ1NH-fQ2R6SaTkHHyB58GCcbazRLrmyTWmbWUgetO8TepJcfuq6cxB20UalXYC9Zd9BL1eXz-c347v769vz6d3YZCTtx4Jmokgl5pUQmTZcZJKSguWsrIzEQoCMRMqgLEvOq2jb8MoUptAkrQjmOdtBpwvdbihqKE007LVTnbe19l-q1Vb93zT2Tc3auWKU8YzhKHC4FPDtxwChV7UNBpzTDbRDUDLl0alIZSSPFqTxbQgeqtUVgtVPBCpGoChTMYIIH_z1tUJ_fx6BswXwHno9gxUQ_2iNg18tviyErTbmTXsFDfsG8YWZ7w</recordid><startdate>20100101</startdate><enddate>20100101</enddate><creator>Ettlin, Robert A.</creator><creator>Kuroda, Junji</creator><creator>Plassmann, Stephanie</creator><creator>Hayashi, Makoto</creator><creator>Prentice, David E.</creator><general>JAPANESE SOCIETY OF TOXICOLOGIC PATHOLOGY</general><general>The Japanese Society of Toxicologic Pathology</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20100101</creationdate><title>Successful Drug Development Despite Adverse Preclinical Findings Part 2: Examples</title><author>Ettlin, Robert A. ; Kuroda, Junji ; Plassmann, Stephanie ; Hayashi, Makoto ; Prentice, David E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c615t-7267b5904f776ac476921b383dfc9077e972653eddd44f053c4fcbcba15f10483</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>adverse preclinical finding</topic><topic>carcinogenicity</topic><topic>genotoxicity</topic><topic>morphologic toxicity</topic><topic>reproductive toxicity</topic><topic>Review</topic><topic>weight-of-evidence approach</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ettlin, Robert A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kuroda, Junji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Plassmann, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hayashi, Makoto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Prentice, David E.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of Toxicologic Pathology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ettlin, Robert A.</au><au>Kuroda, Junji</au><au>Plassmann, Stephanie</au><au>Hayashi, Makoto</au><au>Prentice, David E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Successful Drug Development Despite Adverse Preclinical Findings Part 2: Examples</atitle><jtitle>Journal of Toxicologic Pathology</jtitle><addtitle>J Toxicol Pathol</addtitle><date>2010-01-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>23</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>213</spage><epage>234</epage><pages>213-234</pages><issn>0914-9198</issn><issn>1881-915X</issn><eissn>1881-915X</eissn><abstract>To illustrate the process of addressing adverse preclinical findings (APFs) as outlined in the first part of this review, a number of cases with unexpected APF in toxicity studies with drug candidates is discussed in this second part. The emphasis is on risk characterization, especially regarding the mode of action (MoA), and risk evaluation regarding relevance for man. While severe APFs such as retinal toxicity may turn out to be of little human relevance, minor findings particularly in early toxicity studies, such as vasculitis, may later pose a real problem. Rodents are imperfect models for endocrine APFs, non-rodents for human cardiac effects. Liver and kidney toxicities are frequent, but they can often be monitored in man and do not necessarily result in early termination of drug candidates. Novel findings such as the unusual lesions in the gastrointestinal tract and the bones presented in this review can be difficult to explain. It will be shown that well known issues such as phospholipidosis and carcinogenicity by agonists of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPAR) need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The latter is of particular interest because the new PPAR α and dual α/γ agonists resulted in a change of the safety paradigm established with the older PPAR α agonists. General toxicologists and pathologists need some understanding of the principles of genotoxicity and reproductive toxicity testing. Both types of preclinical toxicities are major APF and clinical monitoring is difficult, generally leading to permanent use restrictions.</abstract><cop>Japan</cop><pub>JAPANESE SOCIETY OF TOXICOLOGIC PATHOLOGY</pub><pmid>22272032</pmid><doi>10.1293/tox.23.213</doi><tpages>22</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0914-9198
ispartof Journal of Toxicologic Pathology, 2010, Vol.23(4), pp.213-234
issn 0914-9198
1881-915X
1881-915X
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3234630
source J-STAGE Free; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central Open Access; PubMed Central
subjects adverse preclinical finding
carcinogenicity
genotoxicity
morphologic toxicity
reproductive toxicity
Review
weight-of-evidence approach
title Successful Drug Development Despite Adverse Preclinical Findings Part 2: Examples
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T21%3A33%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Successful%20Drug%20Development%20Despite%20Adverse%20Preclinical%20Findings%20Part%202:%20Examples&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20Toxicologic%20Pathology&rft.au=Ettlin,%20Robert%20A.&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=213&rft.epage=234&rft.pages=213-234&rft.issn=0914-9198&rft.eissn=1881-915X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1293/tox.23.213&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E954615759%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=954615759&rft_id=info:pmid/22272032&rfr_iscdi=true