Review Division, Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA), Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Pharmacokinetic Sciences, Translational Medicine, Novartis Biomedical Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2024 Sep;116(3):546-562. doi: 10.1002/cpt.3316. Epub 2024 Jun 7.
Administration of a new drug candidate in a first-in-human (FIH) clinical trial is a particularly challenging phase in drug development and is especially true for immunomodulators, which are a diverse and complex class of drugs with a broad range of mechanisms of action and associated safety risks. Risk is generally greater for immunostimulators, in which safety concerns are associated with acute toxicity, compared to immunosuppressors, where the risks are related to chronic effects. Current methodologies for FIH dose selection for immunostimulators are focused primarily on identifying the minimum anticipated biological effect level (MABEL), which has often resulted in sub-therapeutic doses, leading to long and costly escalation phases. The Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI) - Immuno-Safety Technical Committee (ITC) organized a project to address this issue through two complementary approaches: (i) an industry survey on FIH dose selection strategies and (ii) detailed case studies for immunomodulators in oncology and non-oncology indications. Key messages from the industry survey responses highlighted a preference toward more dynamic PK/PD approaches as in vitro assays are seemingly not representative of true physiological conditions for immunomodulators. These principles are highlighted in case studies. To address the above themes, we have proposed a revised decision tree, which expands on the guidance by the IQ MABEL Working Group (Leach et al. 2021). This approach facilitates a more refined recommendation of FIH dose selection for immunomodulators, allowing for a nuanced consideration of their mechanisms of action (MOAs) and the associated risk-to-benefit ratio, among other factors.
在首次人体(FIH)临床试验中管理新候选药物是药物开发中特别具有挑战性的阶段,对于免疫调节剂尤其如此,免疫调节剂是一类具有广泛作用机制和相关安全风险的多样化和复杂药物。与免疫抑制剂相比,免疫刺激剂的风险通常更大,安全性问题与急性毒性有关,而免疫抑制剂的风险与慢性影响有关。目前用于免疫刺激剂 FIH 剂量选择的方法主要集中在确定预期最小生物学效应水平(MABEL)上,这通常导致治疗剂量不足,导致漫长而昂贵的递增阶段。健康与环境科学研究所(HESI)-免疫安全技术委员会(ITC)组织了一个项目,通过两种互补的方法来解决这个问题:(i)对 FIH 剂量选择策略的行业调查,以及(ii)肿瘤学和非肿瘤学适应症的免疫调节剂详细案例研究。来自行业调查答复的关键信息突出表明,人们更喜欢更具动态性的 PK/PD 方法,因为体外检测似乎不能代表免疫调节剂的真实生理状况。这些原则在案例研究中得到了强调。为了解决上述主题,我们提出了一个修订后的决策树,该决策树扩展了 IQ MABEL 工作组(Leach 等人,2021 年)的指导。这种方法促进了对免疫调节剂的 FIH 剂量选择的更精细推荐,允许在其他因素中对其作用机制(MOAs)和相关的风险-效益比进行细致考虑。