{"title":"Inter-ethnic differences in drug response: Implications for drug development and complying with drug regulation","authors":"R. Shah","doi":"10.3109/10601333.2015.1064131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The two key components of the pharmacology of a drug—dose–concentration (pharmacokinetic) and/or concentration–response (pharmacodynamic) relationships—are often influenced by genetic variations. These account for a substantial fraction of variability in dose–response or drug response, not only between individuals, but also between different ethnic groups. The approval of ‘BiDil’ for the treatment of cardiac failure in self-identified black patients is a spectacular example of inter-ethnic differences in drug response and regulatory awareness of ethnicity of the study population. Drug development programs are increasingly undertaken globally to reduce costs, shorten timeframes, and address issues concerning global prescribing. Regulatory authorities have responded to this globalization of drug development by promulgating guidelines that recommend sponsors of new drugs to explore the role of genetic variations, and potential differences in drug response, between different ethnic populations. They may refuse to accept an application, or require bridging studies, when such differences are anticipated but not adequately addressed. These bridging studies may include (i) pharmacokinetic studies, (ii) pharmacodynamic studies, (iii) dose–response studies, and/or (iv) in extreme cases, pivotal phase III studies in order to extrapolate efficacy and/or safety data from one population to another.","PeriodicalId":10446,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3109/10601333.2015.1064131","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15
Abstract
Abstract The two key components of the pharmacology of a drug—dose–concentration (pharmacokinetic) and/or concentration–response (pharmacodynamic) relationships—are often influenced by genetic variations. These account for a substantial fraction of variability in dose–response or drug response, not only between individuals, but also between different ethnic groups. The approval of ‘BiDil’ for the treatment of cardiac failure in self-identified black patients is a spectacular example of inter-ethnic differences in drug response and regulatory awareness of ethnicity of the study population. Drug development programs are increasingly undertaken globally to reduce costs, shorten timeframes, and address issues concerning global prescribing. Regulatory authorities have responded to this globalization of drug development by promulgating guidelines that recommend sponsors of new drugs to explore the role of genetic variations, and potential differences in drug response, between different ethnic populations. They may refuse to accept an application, or require bridging studies, when such differences are anticipated but not adequately addressed. These bridging studies may include (i) pharmacokinetic studies, (ii) pharmacodynamic studies, (iii) dose–response studies, and/or (iv) in extreme cases, pivotal phase III studies in order to extrapolate efficacy and/or safety data from one population to another.