The 10th GCC Closed Forum: rejected data, GCP in bioanalysis, extract stability, BAV, processed batch acceptance, matrix stability, critical reagents, ELN and data integrity and counteracting fraud.

The 10th Global CRO Council (GCC) Closed Forum was held in Orlando, FL, USA on 18 April 2016. In attendance were decision makers from international CRO member companies offering bioanalytical services. The objective of this meeting was for GCC members to meet and discuss scientific and regulatory issues specific to bioanalysis. The issues discussed at this closed forum included reporting data from failed method validation runs, GCP for clinical sample bioanalysis, extracted sample stability, biomarker assay validation, processed batch acceptance criteria, electronic laboratory notebooks and data integrity, Health Canada's Notice regarding replicates in matrix stability evaluations, critical reagents and regulatory approaches to counteract fraud. In order to obtain the pharma perspectives on some of these topics, the first joint CRO-Pharma Scientific Interchange Meeting was held on 12 November 2016, in Denver, Colorado, USA. The five topics discussed at this Interchange meeting were reporting data from failed method validation runs, GCP for clinical sample bioanalysis, extracted sample stability, processed batch acceptance criteria and electronic laboratory notebooks and data integrity. The conclusions from the discussions of these topics at both meetings are included in this report.

Isolation and evaluation of the enantiospecific antitubercular activity of a novel triazole compound.

Cyclohex-3-enyl(5-phenyl-4H-1,2,4-triazol-3-yl)methanol (MSDRT 12) is a novel triazole-based antitubercular compound with two chiral centers. To evaluate the enantiospecific antitubercular activity, the four stereoisomers were isolated using preparative chiral chromatography and the individual stereoisomers were evaluated using the resazurin microtiter assay method (REMA) and a microbroth dilution technique against the Mycobacterium tuberculosis H37Rv strain. Isomer III of MSDRT 12 was found to be the most potent with a minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of 0.78 µg/mL, Isomer II had a MIC of 12.5 µg/mL, and isomers I and IV showed no activity. The diastereomeric mixture of MSDRT 12 showed a MIC of 3.125 µg/mL and isoniazid, used as the standard drug, showed a MIC of 0.4 µg/mL. This confirms the necessity of screening individual enantiomers for their pharmacological activity early in the discovery phase to identify the most potent isomer for further development efforts.

Differential outcomes from metabolic ratios in the identification of CYP2D6 phenotypes--focus on venlafaxine and O-desmethylvenlafaxine.

BACKGROUND: Venlafaxine (VEN), a well accepted anti-depressant, is metabolized through the cytochrome P 450 (CYP) 2D6 isozyme to form O-desmethyvenlafaxine (ODV). Due to the involvement of CYP2D6, the formation of ODV is influenced by genetic polymorphism. We used standard tools of assessment to explore the phenotypic distribution in a retrospective manner using the pharmacokinetic (PK) data of VEN and ODV obtained from several bioavailability/bioequivalence (BA/BE) studies in healthy subjects using the reference formulation. METHODS: Four single oral dose, open-label, randomized crossover BA/BE studies of VEN (doses: 37.5-150 mg) were performed in 141 healthy subjects. Plasma samples were collected over a period 72 h post VEN administration. The samples were analyzed for VEN and ODV using a validated LC/MS/MS assay with a limit of quantification 2.073 ng/mL for VEN and 3.973 ng/mL for ODV. PK parameters (C(max), T(max), AUC (0-t), AUC(0-infinity), t(1/2)) were computed using the noncompartmental approach. AUC metabolic ratios of VEN/ODV and ODV/VEN were computed for all subjects and were subjected to normality test procedures to tease out phenotypic distribution. RESULTS: ODV/VEN and VEN/ODV AUC metabolic ratios were evaluated for standard normal distribution and outliers to determine phenotypic distribution. Use of the VEN/ODV AUC metabolic ratio, arranged in a rank order, resulted in a distribution that distinguished poor metabolizers (PM) and extensive metabolizers (EM). The application of the ODV/VEN AUC metabolic ratio showed a unique distribution that distinguished ultra metabolizers (UM) and extensive metabolizers. By using both metabolic ratios, 141 healthy subjects were classified as follows: PMs = 18, EMs = 118, UMs = 5. Regardless of the formulation or dose size used, the plasma concentration-time profiles for both VEN and ODV were distinct amongst the three phenotypes identified in this work. CONCLUSIONS: The use of VEN/ODV and ODV/VEN AUC metabolic ratios suggested quantitative differences. The data support the use of ODV/VEN but not VEN/ODV metabolic ratio for the identification of UM phenotypes of VEN. The derived metabolic ratios of ODV/VEN from this work were in line with other studies that used both phenotypic and genotypic correlation strategies for VEN.

Influence of number of calibration standards within a defined range on pharmacokinetic disposition-case studies with omeprazole and clopidogrel carboxylic acid.

While the practice of using a smaller number of non-zero standards (typically seven to eight) has not been entertained in routine bioanalytical work, it is important to innovate and be pragmatic about minimizing the number of calibration standards to promote cost-effective and speedy assessment. In this exercise, two important compounds, omeprazole and clopidogrel carboxylic acid, were considered. Additionally, both analytes offered a 1000-fold calibration curve range with eight non-zero standards to permit a systematic evaluation. Accordingly various scenarios of post-hoc analysis of the calibration data were formulated which included step-wise reduction of the number of calibration standards from a maximum of n = 8 to a minimum of n = 3. In all the scenarios evaluated in this exercise, a calibration curve was reconstructed and both quality control samples and in vivo pharmacokinetics were calculated in each instance. Based on the data generated in this exercise, a minimum of three non-zero calibration standards were adequate to predict the quality control samples with the predefined accuracy and precision estimates for both omeprazole and clopidogrel carboxylic acid. Additionally, the in vivo pharmacokinetic characterization of the chosen compounds was not hampered by the reduction of calibration standards (from n = 8 to n = 3). Hence, consideration for reducing number of calibration standards in bioanalytical work may provide a viable alternative in several situations such as formulation screening strategies, routine therapeutic drug monitoring and sparse sample analyses.