Vincent F S Dubois1,2, Giovanni Smania3, Huixin Yu1, Ramona Graf3, Anne S Y Chain1, Meindert Danhof1, Oscar Della Pasqua3,4. 1. Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, Division of Pharmacology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands. 2. Pharmacometrics, Grunenthal GmbH, Aachen, Germany. 3. Clinical Pharmacology Modelling & Simulation, GlaxoSmithKline, Stockley Park, Uxbridge, UK. 4. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, UCL, London, UK.
Abstract
AIM: In spite of screening procedures in early drug development, uncertainty remains about the propensity of new chemical entities (NCEs) to prolong the QT/QTc interval. The evaluation of proarrhythmic activity using a comprehensive in vitro proarrhythmia assay does not fully account for pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PKPD) differences in vivo. In the present study, we evaluated the correlation between drug-specific parameters describing QT interval prolongation in dogs and in humans. METHODS: Using estimates of the drug-specific parameter, data on the slopes of the PKPD relationships of nine compounds with varying QT-prolonging effects (cisapride, sotalol, moxifloxacin, carabersat, GSK945237, SB237376 and GSK618334, and two anonymized NCEs) were analysed. Mean slope estimates varied between -0.98 ms μM-1 and 6.1 ms μM-1 in dogs and -10 ms μM-1 and 90 ms μM-1 in humans, indicating a wide range of effects on the QT interval. Linear regression techniques were then applied to characterize the correlation between the parameter estimates across species. RESULTS: For compounds without a mixed ion channel block, a correlation was observed between the drug-specific parameter in dogs and humans (y = -1.709 + 11.6x; R2 = 0.989). These results show that per unit concentration, the drug effect on the QT interval in humans is 11.6-fold larger than in dogs. CONCLUSIONS: Together with information about the expected therapeutic exposure, the evidence of a correlation between the compound-specific parameter in dogs and in humans represents an opportunity for translating preclinical safety data before progression into the clinic. Whereas further investigation is required to establish the generalizability of our findings, this approach can be used with clinical trial simulations to predict the probability of QT prolongation in humans.
AIM: In spite of screening procedures in early drug development, uncertainty remains about the propensity of new chemical entities (NCEs) to prolong the QT/QTc interval. The evaluation of proarrhythmic activity using a comprehensive in vitro proarrhythmia assay does not fully account for pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PKPD) differences in vivo. In the present study, we evaluated the correlation between drug-specific parameters describing QT interval prolongation in dogs and in humans. METHODS: Using estimates of the drug-specific parameter, data on the slopes of the PKPD relationships of nine compounds with varying QT-prolonging effects (cisapride, sotalol, moxifloxacin, carabersat, GSK945237, SB237376 and GSK618334, and two anonymized NCEs) were analysed. Mean slope estimates varied between -0.98 ms μM-1 and 6.1 ms μM-1 in dogs and -10 ms μM-1 and 90 ms μM-1 in humans, indicating a wide range of effects on the QT interval. Linear regression techniques were then applied to characterize the correlation between the parameter estimates across species. RESULTS: For compounds without a mixed ion channel block, a correlation was observed between the drug-specific parameter in dogs and humans (y = -1.709 + 11.6x; R2 = 0.989). These results show that per unit concentration, the drug effect on the QT interval in humans is 11.6-fold larger than in dogs. CONCLUSIONS: Together with information about the expected therapeutic exposure, the evidence of a correlation between the compound-specific parameter in dogs and in humans represents an opportunity for translating preclinical safety data before progression into the clinic. Whereas further investigation is required to establish the generalizability of our findings, this approach can be used with clinical trial simulations to predict the probability of QT prolongation in humans.
Authors: Kenny J Watson; William P Gorczyca; John Umland; Ying Zhang; Xian Chen; Sunny Z Sun; Bernard Fermini; Mark Holbrook; Piet H Van Der Graaf Journal: J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods Date: 2011-03-17 Impact factor: 1.950
Authors: Anna Ollerstam; Anna H Persson; Sandra A G Visser; J Magnus Fredriksson; Tomas Forsberg; Lars B Nilsson; Göran Eklund; Stig Johan Wiklund; Johan Gabrielsson; Göran Duker; Ahmad Al-Saffar Journal: J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods Date: 2006-03-03 Impact factor: 1.950
Authors: Norbert Jost; László Virág; Philippe Comtois; Balázs Ordög; Viktória Szuts; György Seprényi; Miklós Bitay; Zsófia Kohajda; István Koncz; Norbert Nagy; Tamás Szél; János Magyar; Mária Kovács; László G Puskás; Csaba Lengyel; Erich Wettwer; Ursula Ravens; Péter P Nánási; Julius Gy Papp; András Varró; Stanley Nattel Journal: J Physiol Date: 2013-07-22 Impact factor: 5.182
Authors: Stephen Ph Alexander; William A Catterall; Eamonn Kelly; Neil Marrion; John A Peters; Helen E Benson; Elena Faccenda; Adam J Pawson; Joanna L Sharman; Christopher Southan; Jamie A Davies Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 8.739
Authors: Vincent F S Dubois; Giovanni Smania; Huixin Yu; Ramona Graf; Anne S Y Chain; Meindert Danhof; Oscar Della Pasqua Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2016-10-29 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Jean-Pierre Valentin; Peter Hoffmann; Catherine Ortemann-Renon; John Koerner; Jennifer Pierson; Gary Gintant; James Willard; Christine Garnett; Matthew Skinner; Hugo M Vargas; Todd Wisialowski; Michael K Pugsley Journal: Toxicol Sci Date: 2022-04-26 Impact factor: 4.109
Authors: Ray W Chui; Joel Baublits; Fiona A Chandra; Zack W Jones; Michael J Engwall; Hugo M Vargas Journal: Clin Transl Sci Date: 2021-07-14 Impact factor: 4.689