Search

Oncology drug discovery and development has always been an area facing many challenges. Phase 1 oncology studies are typically small, open-label, sequential studies enrolling a small sample of adult patients (i.e., 3-6 patients/cohort) in dose escalation. Pediatric evaluations typically lag behind the adult development program. The pediatric starting dose is traditionally referenced on the recommended phase 2 dose in adults with the incorporation of body size scaling. The size of the study is also small and dependent upon the prevalence of the disease in the pediatric population. Similar to adult development, the dose is escalated or de-escalated until reaching the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) that also provides desired biological activities or efficacy. The escalation steps and identification of MTD are often rule-based and do not incorporate all the available information, such as pharmacokinetic (PK), pharmacodynamic (PD), tolerability and efficacy data. Therefore, it is doubtful if the MTD approach is optimal to determine the dosage. Hence, it is important to evaluate whether there is an optimal dosage below the MTD, especially considering the emerging complexity of combination therapies and the long-term tolerability and safety of the treatments. Identification of an optimal dosage is also vital not only for adult patients but for pediatric populations as well. Dosage-finding is much more challenging for pediatric populations due to the limited patient population and differences among the pediatric age range in terms of maturation and ontogeny that could impact PK. Many sponsors defer the pediatric strategy as they are often perplexed by the challenges presented by pediatric oncology drug development (model of action relevancy to pediatric population, budget, timeline and regulatory requirements). This leads to a limited number of approved drugs for pediatric oncology patients. This review article provides the current regulatory landscape, incentives and how they impact pediatric drug discovery and development. We also consider different pediatric cancers and potential clinical trial challenges/opportunities when designing pediatric clinical trials. An outline of how quantitative methods such as pharmacometrics/modelling & simulation can support the dosage-finding and justification is also included. Finally, we provide some reflections that we consider helpful to accelerate pediatric drug discovery and development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sodium channel blockers are used for the treatment of pain, but this is limited by the lack of selectivity for different sodium channel subtypes, which can result in central nervous system and cardiovascular side effects. As such, there is special interest in the Nav1.7 subtype, which is expressed predominantly in nociceptive and sympathetic neurons. The aim was to demonstrate analgesic properties of a potent selective Nav1.7 sodium channel blocker, PF‐05089771, alone and concomitantly with pregabalin in healthy subjects using a battery of human evoked pain models. This was a double‐blind, double‐dummy, randomized, placebo‐controlled, five‐period cross‐over study with PF‐05089771 alone and PF‐05089771 concomitantly with pregabalin as treatment arms with pregabalin, ibuprofen, and placebo as control arms (NCT02349607). A battery of human evoked pain models was used to investigate analgesic properties of PF‐05089771. Twenty‐five subjects were enrolled in the study of which 23 subjects completed all five periods. PF‐05089771 alone did not differ from placebo on the primary pain end points. The same holds when comparing PF‐05089771 concomitantly with pregabalin and pregabalin alone. Pregabalin showed significant effects relative to placebo on thermal pain on the normal skin and UVB skin (least squares means with 90% confidence interval: 0.63 (0.32–0.93) and 0.53 (0.11–0.96)), pressure stimulation (1.10 (1.04–1.18)), and cold pressor (1.22 (1.14–1.32)). Ibuprofen demonstrated significant effects on thermal pain UVB skin (1.26 (0.82–1.70)) and pressure stimulation assessment (1.08 (1.01–1.15)), consistent with historical results. This study did not demonstrate analgesic properties of PF‐05089771 alone or concomitantly with pregabalin in a battery of pain models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim Xen2174 is a synthetic 13-amino acid peptide that binds specifically to the norepinephrine transporter, which results in inhibition of norepinephrine uptake. It is being developed as a possible treatment for moderate to severe pain and is delivered intrathecally. The current study was performed to assess the pharmacodynamics (PD) and the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pharmacokinetics (PK) of Xen2174 in healthy subjects. Methods This was a randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled study in healthy subjects. The study was divided into three treatment arms. Each group consisted of eight subjects on active treatment and two or three subjects on placebo. The CSF was sampled for 32 h using an intrathecal catheter. PD assessments were performed using a battery of nociceptive tasks (electrical pain, pressure pain and cold pressor tasks). Results Twenty-five subjects were administered Xen2174. CSF PK analysis showed a higher area under the CSF concentration-time curve of Xen2174 in the highest dose group than allowed by the predefined safety margin based on nonclinical data. The most common adverse event was post-lumbar puncture syndrome, with no difference in incidence between treatment groups. Although no statistically significant differences were observed in the PD assessments between the different dosages of Xen2174 and placebo, pain tolerability in the highest dose group was higher than in the placebo group [contrast least squares mean pressure pain tolerance threshold of Xen2174 2.5 mg-placebo (95% confidence interval), 22.2% (−5.0%, 57.1%); P = 0.1131]. Conclusions At the Xen2174 dose level of 2.5 mg, CSF concentrations exceeded the prespecified exposure limit based on the nonclinical safety margin. No statistically significant effects on evoked pain tests were observed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Caffeine induces positive effects on sustained attention, although studies assessing the acute effects of low caffeine dose (<75 mg) on sustained attention are limited and use short-term tests. Therefore, we investigated the acute effects of a 60 mg dose of caffeine on sustained attention in tests lasting up to 45 minutes using 82 low or non-caffeine-consuming healthy male ( n=41) and female ( n=41) adults aged between 40 and 60 years. Vigilance was measured using Mackworth Clock test, Rapid Visual Information Processing Test, adaptive tracking test, saccadic eye movement and attention switch test. Effects on mood and fatigue were analysed using Bond and Lader and Caffeine Research visual analogue scales, and Samn-Perelli questionnaire. Saliva sampling was performed for both compliance and caffeine pharmacokinetic analysis. Administration of a 60 mg caffeine dose resulted in a significant improvement in sustained attention compared with the placebo. Also a significantly improved peak saccadic velocity and reaction time performance was found, and decreased error rate. Significantly increased feelings of alertness, contentment and overall mood after caffeine treatment compared with placebo were observed. This study demonstrated that in healthy adult subjects oral administration of a single 60 mg caffeine dose elicited a clear enhancement of sustained attention and alertness, measured both in multiple objective performances and in subjective scales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Human evoked pain models can be used to determine the efficacy of new and existing analgesics and to aid in the identification of new targets. Aspects of neuropathic pain can be simulated by inducing hyperalgesia resulting from provoked sensitization. The present literature review aimed to provide insight into the sensitivity of different hyperalgesia and allodynia models of pharmacological treatment. Methods A literature search was performed to identify randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies that included human hyperalgesia pain models and investigated the pharmacodynamic effects of different classes of drugs. Results Three hyperalgesia models [ultraviolet B (UVB) irradiation, capsaicin and thermode burn] have been used extensively. Assessment of hyperalgesia/allodynia and pharmacological effect are measured using challenge tests, which generally comprise thermal (heat/cold) or mechanical stimulation (pin-prick, stroking or impact). The UVB model was sensitive to the antihyperalgesic effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids. The capsaicin model was partially sensitive to opioids. The burn model did not detect any antihyperalgesic effects when NSAIDs or local anaesthetics were administered but responded to the effects of N-methyl D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists by moderately reducing mechanical hyperalgesia. Conclusions Based on pharmacological sensitivity, the UVB model adequately reflects inflammatory pain and was sensitive to NSAIDs and opioids. Findings from the capsaicin and burn models raised questions about the translatability of these models to the treatment of neuropathic pain. There is a need for a reproducible and predictive model of neuropathic pain, either in healthy subjects or in patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Compounds with selectivity for GABAA receptor subtypes may differ significantly from nonselective benzodiazepines in their dopaminergic effects in vivo. To explore the exact role of the GABAA receptor subtypes in the regulation of prolactin secretion and the differential effects of selective and nonselective GABA receptor modulators, the effects of the nonselective benzodiazepine lorazepam, as well as two novel α2/α3 subunit-selective GABAA receptor modulators AZD7325 and AZD6280, on prolactin levels were measured in healthy male volunteers. Following administration of lorazepam at 2 mg doses and AZD6280 at 10 mg and 40 mg doses, prolactin levels increased significantly compared with placebo (difference 42.0%, 19.8%, and 32.8%, respectively), suggesting that the α2 and/or α3 receptor subtypes are involved in GABAergic modulation of prolactin secretion, although possible roles of the α1 and α5 receptor subtypes are not excluded. The increases in prolactin levels after administration of AZD7325 at 2 mg and 10 mg doses (difference 7.6% and 10.5%, respectively) did not reach statistical significance, suggesting that doses of AZD7325 or intrinsic efficacy at the α2 and α3 receptor subtypes may have been too low. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Antagonism of both NK1 and NK3 receptors may be an effective strategy in the pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia, drug addiction or depression. GSK1144814 is a novel selective dual NK1/NK3 receptor antagonist. The potential influence of GSK1144814 on the effects of alcohol was investigated. Methods In a blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, two period crossover study, the pharmacokinetics and central nervous system ( CNS) effects of single oral doses of 200 mg GSK1144814 were evaluated in 20 healthy volunteers, using a controlled alcohol infusion paradigm to maintain stable alcohol concentrations with subsequent analysis of eye movements, adaptive tracking, body sway, visual analogue scales, Epworth sleepiness scale and the verbal visual learning test. Results Frequent adverse effects were mild somnolence, fatigue and headache. Plasma concentration of GSK1144814 in the presence of alcohol was maximal 1.5 h after dose administration. GSK1144814 did not affect alcohol pharmacokinetics. Co-administration of GSK1144814 and alcohol impaired saccadic reaction time and peak velocity, adaptive tracking, alertness, sleepiness, word recognition and recognition reaction time compared with administration of alcohol alone, but the size of the interaction was small. Conclusions Administration of GSK1144814 in the presence of alcohol was generally well tolerated and not likely to produce clinically relevant additional impairments after alcohol consumption. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the last 10 years the European Medicines Agency (EMA) organized a number of workshops on modeling and simulation, working towards greater integration of modeling and simulation (M&S) in the development and regulatory assessment of medicines. In the 2011 EMA - European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) Workshop on Modelling and Simulation, European regulators agreed to the necessity to build expertise to be able to review M&S data provided by companies in their dossier. This led to the establishment of the EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group (MSWG). Also, there was agreement reached on the need for harmonization on good M&S practices and for continuing dialog across all parties. The MSWG acknowledges the initiative of the EFPIA Model-Informed Drug Discovery and Development (MID3) group in promoting greater consistency in practice, application, and documentation of M&S and considers the paper is an important contribution towards achieving this objective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study investigated the analgesic effects of two doses (15 and 65 mg) of PF-06372865, a novel α2/α3/α5 gamma-aminobutyric acid A (GABAA) subunit selective partial positive allosteric modulator (PAM), compared with placebo and pregabalin (300 mg) as a positive control.Methods: We performed a randomised placebo-controlled crossover study (NCT02238717) in 20 healthy subjects, using a battery of pain tasks (electrical, pressure, heat, cold and inflammatory pain, including a paradigm of conditioned pain modulation). Pharmacodynamic measurements were performed at baseline and up to 10 h after dose.Results: A dose of 15 mg PF-06372865 increased pain tolerance thresholds (PTTs) for pressure pain at a ratio of 1.11 (90% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02, 1.22) compared with placebo. A dose of 65 mg PF-06372865 led to an increase in PTT for the cold pressor at a ratio of 1.17 (90% CI: 1.03, 1.32), and pressure pain task: 1.11 (90% CI: 1.01, 1.21). Pregabalin showed an increase in PTT for pressure pain at a ratio of 1.15 (95% CI: 1.06, 1.26) and cold pressor task: 1.31 (90% CI: 1.16, 1.48).Conclusion: We conclude that PF-06372865 has analgesic potential at doses that do not induce significant sedation or other intolerable adverse events limiting its clinical use. In addition, the present study established the potential role for this battery of pain tasks as a tool in the development of analgesics with a novel mechanism of action, for the treatment of various pain states including neuropathic pain and to establish proof-of-concept.Clinical Trials Registration: NCT0223871. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sodium channel blockers are used for the treatment of pain, but this is limited by the lack of selectivity for different sodium channel subtypes, which can result in central nervous system and cardiovascular side effects. As such, there is special interest in the Na v 1.7 subtype, which is expressed predominantly in nociceptive and sympathetic neurons. The aim was to demonstrate analgesic properties of a potent selective Na v 1.7 sodium channel blocker, PF-05089771, alone and concomitantly with pregabalin in healthy subjects using a battery of human evoked pain models. This was a double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, placebo-controlled, five-period cross-over study with PF-05089771 alone and PF-05089771 concomitantly with pregabalin as treatment arms with pregabalin, ibuprofen, and placebo as control arms (NCT02349607). A battery of human evoked pain models was used to investigate analgesic properties of PF-05089771. Twenty-five subjects were enrolled in the study of which 23 subjects completed all five periods. PF-05089771 alone did not differ from placebo on the primary pain end points. The same holds when comparing PF-05089771 concomitantly with pregabalin and pregabalin alone. Pregabalin showed significant effects relative to placebo on thermal pain on the normal skin and UVB skin (least squares means with 90% confidence interval: 0.63 (0.32-0.93) and 0.53 (0.11-0.96)), pressure stimulation (1.10 (1.04-1.18)), and cold pressor (1.22 (1.14-1.32)). Ibuprofen demonstrated significant effects on thermal pain UVB skin (1.26 (0.82-1.70)) and pressure stimulation assessment (1.08 (1.01-1.15)), consistent with historical results. This study did not demonstrate analgesic properties of PF-05089771 alone or concomitantly with pregabalin in a battery of pain models., (© 2019 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Aim: Subjects with increasing age are more sensitive to the effects of the anti-muscarinic agent scopolamine, which is used (among other indications) to induce temporary cognitive dysfunction in early phase drug studies with cognition enhancing compounds. The enhanced sensitivity has always been attributed to incipient cholinergic neuronal dysfunction, as a part of the normal aging process. The aim of the study was to correlate age-dependent pharmacodynamic neuro-physiologic effects of scopolamine after correcting for differences in individual exposure., Methods: We applied a pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modelling approach to describe individual exposure and neurocognitive effects of intravenous scopolamine administration in healthy subjects., Results: A two-compartment linear kinetics model best described the plasma concentrations of scopolamine. The estimated scopolamine population mean apparent central and peripheral volume of distribution was 2.66 ± 1.050 l and 62.10 ± 10.100 l, respectively and the clearance was 1.09 ± 0.096 l min(-1) . Age was not related to a decrease of performance in the tests following scopolamine administration in older subjects. Only the saccadic peak velocity showed a positive correlation between age and sensitivity to scopolamine. Age was, however, correlated at baseline with an estimated slower reaction time while performing the cognitive tests and to higher global δ and frontal θ frequency bands measured with the surface EEG., Conclusions: Most of the differences in response to scopolamine administration between young and older subjects could be explained by pharmacokinetic differences (lower clearance) and not to an enhanced sensitivity when corrected for exposure levels., (© 2016 The British Pharmacological Society.)

Compounds with selectivity for GABAA receptor subtypes may differ significantly from nonselective benzodiazepines in their dopaminergic effects in vivo. To explore the exact role of the GABAA receptor subtypes in the regulation of prolactin secretion and the differential effects of selective and nonselective GABA receptor modulators, the effects of the nonselective benzodiazepine lorazepam, as well as two novel α2 /α3 subunit-selective GABAA receptor modulators AZD7325 and AZD6280, on prolactin levels were measured in healthy male volunteers. Following administration of lorazepam at 2 mg doses and AZD6280 at 10 mg and 40 mg doses, prolactin levels increased significantly compared with placebo (difference 42.0%, 19.8%, and 32.8%, respectively), suggesting that the α2 and/or α3 receptor subtypes are involved in GABAergic modulation of prolactin secretion, although possible roles of the α1 and α5 receptor subtypes are not excluded. The increases in prolactin levels after administration of AZD7325 at 2 mg and 10 mg doses (difference 7.6% and 10.5%, respectively) did not reach statistical significance, suggesting that doses of AZD7325 or intrinsic efficacy at the α2 and α3 receptor subtypes may have been too low., (© 2014, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Aims: Antagonism of both NK1 and NK3 receptors may be an effective strategy in the pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia, drug addiction or depression. GSK1144814 is a novel selective dual NK1 /NK3 receptor antagonist. The potential influence of GSK1144814 on the effects of alcohol was investigated., Methods: In a blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, two period crossover study, the pharmacokinetics and central nervous system (CNS) effects of single oral doses of 200 mg GSK1144814 were evaluated in 20 healthy volunteers, using a controlled alcohol infusion paradigm to maintain stable alcohol concentrations with subsequent analysis of eye movements, adaptive tracking, body sway, visual analogue scales, Epworth sleepiness scale and the verbal visual learning test., Results: Frequent adverse effects were mild somnolence, fatigue and headache. Plasma concentration of GSK1144814 in the presence of alcohol was maximal 1.5 h after dose administration. GSK1144814 did not affect alcohol pharmacokinetics. Co-administration of GSK1144814 and alcohol impaired saccadic reaction time and peak velocity, adaptive tracking, alertness, sleepiness, word recognition and recognition reaction time compared with administration of alcohol alone, but the size of the interaction was small., Conclusions: Administration of GSK1144814 in the presence of alcohol was generally well tolerated and not likely to produce clinically relevant additional impairments after alcohol consumption., (© 2012 The Authors. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology © 2012 The British Pharmacological Society.)