利用来自多个实验室和多个场合的三种阳性对照药剂的 hERG 差值分布,支持综合 QTc 风险评估。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Derek J. Leishman , Jessica Brimecombe , William Crumb , Simon Hebeisen , Steve Jenkinson , Peter J. Kilfoil , Hiroshi Matsukawa , Karim Melliti , Yusheng Qu
{"title":"利用来自多个实验室和多个场合的三种阳性对照药剂的 hERG 差值分布,支持综合 QTc 风险评估。","authors":"Derek J. Leishman ,&nbsp;Jessica Brimecombe ,&nbsp;William Crumb ,&nbsp;Simon Hebeisen ,&nbsp;Steve Jenkinson ,&nbsp;Peter J. Kilfoil ,&nbsp;Hiroshi Matsukawa ,&nbsp;Karim Melliti ,&nbsp;Yusheng Qu","doi":"10.1016/j.vascn.2024.107524","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Determination of a drug's potency in blocking the hERG channel is an established safety pharmacology study. Best practice guidelines have been published for reliable assessment of hERG potency. In addition, a set of plasma concentration and plasma protein binding fraction data were provided as denominators for margin calculations.</p><p>The aims of the current analysis were five-fold: provide data allowing creation of consistent denominators for the hERG margin distributions of the key reference agents, explore the variation in hERG margins within and across laboratories, provide a hERG margin to 10 ms QTc prolongation based on several newer studies, provide information to use these analyses for reference purposes, and provide recommended hERG margin ‘cut-off’ values.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The analyses used 12 hERG IC<sub>50</sub> ‘best practice’ data sets (for the 3 reference agents). A group of 5 data sets came from a single laboratory. The other 7 data sets were collected by 6 different laboratories.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The denominator exposure distributions were consistent with the ICH E14/S7B Training Materials. The inter-occasion and inter-laboratory variability in hERG IC<sub>50</sub> values were comparable. Inter-drug differences were most important in determining the pooled margin variability. The combined data provided a robust hERG margin reference based on best practice guidelines and consistent exposure denominators. The sensitivity of hERG margin thresholds were consistent with the sensitivity described over the course of the last two decades.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The current data provide further insight into the sensitivity of the 30-fold hERG margin ‘cut-off’ used for two decades. Using similar hERG assessments and these analyses, a future researcher can use a hERG margin threshold to support a negative QTc integrated risk assessment.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16767,"journal":{"name":"Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods","volume":"128 ","pages":"Article 107524"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Supporting an integrated QTc risk assessment using the hERG margin distributions for three positive control agents derived from multiple laboratories and on multiple occasions.\",\"authors\":\"Derek J. Leishman ,&nbsp;Jessica Brimecombe ,&nbsp;William Crumb ,&nbsp;Simon Hebeisen ,&nbsp;Steve Jenkinson ,&nbsp;Peter J. Kilfoil ,&nbsp;Hiroshi Matsukawa ,&nbsp;Karim Melliti ,&nbsp;Yusheng Qu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.vascn.2024.107524\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Determination of a drug's potency in blocking the hERG channel is an established safety pharmacology study. Best practice guidelines have been published for reliable assessment of hERG potency. In addition, a set of plasma concentration and plasma protein binding fraction data were provided as denominators for margin calculations.</p><p>The aims of the current analysis were five-fold: provide data allowing creation of consistent denominators for the hERG margin distributions of the key reference agents, explore the variation in hERG margins within and across laboratories, provide a hERG margin to 10 ms QTc prolongation based on several newer studies, provide information to use these analyses for reference purposes, and provide recommended hERG margin ‘cut-off’ values.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The analyses used 12 hERG IC<sub>50</sub> ‘best practice’ data sets (for the 3 reference agents). A group of 5 data sets came from a single laboratory. The other 7 data sets were collected by 6 different laboratories.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The denominator exposure distributions were consistent with the ICH E14/S7B Training Materials. The inter-occasion and inter-laboratory variability in hERG IC<sub>50</sub> values were comparable. Inter-drug differences were most important in determining the pooled margin variability. The combined data provided a robust hERG margin reference based on best practice guidelines and consistent exposure denominators. The sensitivity of hERG margin thresholds were consistent with the sensitivity described over the course of the last two decades.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The current data provide further insight into the sensitivity of the 30-fold hERG margin ‘cut-off’ used for two decades. Using similar hERG assessments and these analyses, a future researcher can use a hERG margin threshold to support a negative QTc integrated risk assessment.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16767,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods\",\"volume\":\"128 \",\"pages\":\"Article 107524\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1056871924000340\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1056871924000340","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:确定药物阻断 hERG 通道的效力是一项既定的安全药理学研究。已发布了可靠评估 hERG 药效的最佳实践指南。此外,还提供了一组血浆浓度和血浆蛋白结合率数据,作为计算差值的分母。本次分析的目的有五个方面:提供数据以便为主要参考药物的 hERG 边际值分布创建一致的分母;探索实验室内部和实验室之间 hERG 边际值的差异;根据几项较新的研究提供 10 毫秒 QTc 延长的 hERG 边际值;提供信息以便将这些分析用于参考目的;以及提供推荐的 hERG 边际值 "临界值":分析使用了 12 组 hERG IC50 "最佳实践 "数据(针对 3 种参考药物)。其中 5 组数据来自一家实验室。其他 7 组数据由 6 个不同的实验室收集:结果:分母暴露分布与 ICH E14/S7B 培训材料一致。hERG IC50 值的事件间差异和实验室间差异相当。药物之间的差异对确定集合边际变异性最为重要。基于最佳实践指南和一致的暴露分母,合并数据提供了可靠的 hERG 临界值参考。hERG 边界阈值的敏感性与过去二十年中描述的敏感性一致:目前的数据进一步揭示了二十年来使用的 30 倍 hERG 边界 "临界值 "的敏感性。利用类似的 hERG 评估和这些分析,未来的研究人员可以使用 hERG 边界阈值来支持负 QTc 综合风险评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Supporting an integrated QTc risk assessment using the hERG margin distributions for three positive control agents derived from multiple laboratories and on multiple occasions.

Background

Determination of a drug's potency in blocking the hERG channel is an established safety pharmacology study. Best practice guidelines have been published for reliable assessment of hERG potency. In addition, a set of plasma concentration and plasma protein binding fraction data were provided as denominators for margin calculations.

The aims of the current analysis were five-fold: provide data allowing creation of consistent denominators for the hERG margin distributions of the key reference agents, explore the variation in hERG margins within and across laboratories, provide a hERG margin to 10 ms QTc prolongation based on several newer studies, provide information to use these analyses for reference purposes, and provide recommended hERG margin ‘cut-off’ values.

Methods

The analyses used 12 hERG IC50 ‘best practice’ data sets (for the 3 reference agents). A group of 5 data sets came from a single laboratory. The other 7 data sets were collected by 6 different laboratories.

Results

The denominator exposure distributions were consistent with the ICH E14/S7B Training Materials. The inter-occasion and inter-laboratory variability in hERG IC50 values were comparable. Inter-drug differences were most important in determining the pooled margin variability. The combined data provided a robust hERG margin reference based on best practice guidelines and consistent exposure denominators. The sensitivity of hERG margin thresholds were consistent with the sensitivity described over the course of the last two decades.

Conclusion

The current data provide further insight into the sensitivity of the 30-fold hERG margin ‘cut-off’ used for two decades. Using similar hERG assessments and these analyses, a future researcher can use a hERG margin threshold to support a negative QTc integrated risk assessment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods
Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-TOXICOLOGY
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
10.50%
发文量
56
审稿时长
26 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Pharmacological and Toxicological Methods publishes original articles on current methods of investigation used in pharmacology and toxicology. Pharmacology and toxicology are defined in the broadest sense, referring to actions of drugs and chemicals on all living systems. With its international editorial board and noted contributors, Journal of Pharmacological and Toxicological Methods is the leading journal devoted exclusively to experimental procedures used by pharmacologists and toxicologists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信