Cargando…

The New S7B/E14 Question and Answer Draft Guidance for Industry: Contents and Commentary

In August 2020, the International Council on Harmonisation (ICH) released a new draft document, which for the first time combined nonclinical (S7B) and clinical (E14) Questions and Answers (Q&As) into 1 document. FDA describes the revision as a “value proposition”: if the human ether‐à‐go‐go ass...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Darpo, Borje, Ferber, Georg
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9290990/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33896027
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcph.1880
_version_ 1784749037562363904
author Darpo, Borje
Ferber, Georg
author_facet Darpo, Borje
Ferber, Georg
author_sort Darpo, Borje
collection PubMed
description In August 2020, the International Council on Harmonisation (ICH) released a new draft document, which for the first time combined nonclinical (S7B) and clinical (E14) Questions and Answers (Q&As) into 1 document. FDA describes the revision as a “value proposition”: if the human ether‐à‐go‐go assay and the in vivo study are performed in a standardized way, the number of dedicated thorough QT (TQT) studies can be reduced. In this article, we describe and discuss the Q&As that relate to clinical ECG evaluation. If supported by negative standardized nonclinical assays, Q&A 5.1 will obviate the need for a TQT study in the case that a >2‐fold exposure margin vs high clinical scenario cannot be obtained. Q&A 6.1 addresses drugs that are poorly tolerated in healthy subjects and cannot be studied at high doses or in placebo‐controlled studies; it therefore mainly applies to oncology drugs. It will enable sponsors to claim that a new drug has a “low likelihood of proarrhythmic effects” in the case that the mean corrected QT effect is <10 milliseconds at the time of market application. The E14 2015 revision allowed application of concentration–corrected QT analysis on data from routinely performed clinical pharmacology studies, for example, the first‐in‐human study and the proportion of dedicated TQT studies has since steadily decreased. It can be foreseen that the proposed new revision will further reduce the number of TQT studies. To achieve harmonization across regulatory regions, it seems important to reach consensus within the International Council on Harmonisation group on the new threshold proposed in 6.1. For this purpose, the Implementation Working Group has asked for public comments.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9290990
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92909902022-07-20 The New S7B/E14 Question and Answer Draft Guidance for Industry: Contents and Commentary Darpo, Borje Ferber, Georg J Clin Pharmacol Editor's Choice: Review In August 2020, the International Council on Harmonisation (ICH) released a new draft document, which for the first time combined nonclinical (S7B) and clinical (E14) Questions and Answers (Q&As) into 1 document. FDA describes the revision as a “value proposition”: if the human ether‐à‐go‐go assay and the in vivo study are performed in a standardized way, the number of dedicated thorough QT (TQT) studies can be reduced. In this article, we describe and discuss the Q&As that relate to clinical ECG evaluation. If supported by negative standardized nonclinical assays, Q&A 5.1 will obviate the need for a TQT study in the case that a >2‐fold exposure margin vs high clinical scenario cannot be obtained. Q&A 6.1 addresses drugs that are poorly tolerated in healthy subjects and cannot be studied at high doses or in placebo‐controlled studies; it therefore mainly applies to oncology drugs. It will enable sponsors to claim that a new drug has a “low likelihood of proarrhythmic effects” in the case that the mean corrected QT effect is <10 milliseconds at the time of market application. The E14 2015 revision allowed application of concentration–corrected QT analysis on data from routinely performed clinical pharmacology studies, for example, the first‐in‐human study and the proportion of dedicated TQT studies has since steadily decreased. It can be foreseen that the proposed new revision will further reduce the number of TQT studies. To achieve harmonization across regulatory regions, it seems important to reach consensus within the International Council on Harmonisation group on the new threshold proposed in 6.1. For this purpose, the Implementation Working Group has asked for public comments. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-06-08 2021-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9290990/ /pubmed/33896027 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcph.1880 Text en © 2021 The Authors. The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Clinical Pharmacology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Editor's Choice: Review
Darpo, Borje
Ferber, Georg
The New S7B/E14 Question and Answer Draft Guidance for Industry: Contents and Commentary
title The New S7B/E14 Question and Answer Draft Guidance for Industry: Contents and Commentary
title_full The New S7B/E14 Question and Answer Draft Guidance for Industry: Contents and Commentary
title_fullStr The New S7B/E14 Question and Answer Draft Guidance for Industry: Contents and Commentary
title_full_unstemmed The New S7B/E14 Question and Answer Draft Guidance for Industry: Contents and Commentary
title_short The New S7B/E14 Question and Answer Draft Guidance for Industry: Contents and Commentary
title_sort new s7b/e14 question and answer draft guidance for industry: contents and commentary
topic Editor's Choice: Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9290990/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33896027
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcph.1880
work_keys_str_mv AT darpoborje thenews7be14questionandanswerdraftguidanceforindustrycontentsandcommentary
AT ferbergeorg thenews7be14questionandanswerdraftguidanceforindustrycontentsandcommentary
AT darpoborje news7be14questionandanswerdraftguidanceforindustrycontentsandcommentary
AT ferbergeorg news7be14questionandanswerdraftguidanceforindustrycontentsandcommentary