A Commentary on Fasting of Nonclinical Research Animals.

This commentary discusses the implementation of fasting in nonclinical animal experimental subjects. The short-term removal of food from cages of experimental animals is in all respects innocuous. The term "stress" is ill-defined and the statutes and regulations governing animal research laboratories that exert their authority in the performance of their operations do so without substantive grounds to base compliance. The legislative and administrative history of the implementation of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) has evolved into the development of laboratory management strategies that focus on the reduction of the biological cost of stress to the animals and the determination of when subclinical stress (eustress) becomes distress. Animal welfare is based on the tenet that in laboratories conducting animal research in compliance with Good Laboratory Practices (Title 21 USC, Chapter 13,§58), it is the study protocol and the study director that establish procedures and processes that are approved by each Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee to ensure the humane care and use of animals in research, teaching, and testing and to ensure compliance with guidelines and regulations. This approval process establishes the justification of eustress in the environment that do not rise to the threshold of distress under the AWA.

Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emission Test is Not the Test to Use in Nonclinical Safety Assessment.

Ototoxicity and ocular toxicity screening are but two examples of specialty product lines that are often employed as Tier II or III nonclinical safety/hazard screening assessments. Compared to the regulatory guidelines that govern over standard toxicology or neurotoxicology programs, there is a paucity of regulatory strategies to address these specialized product lines. With respect to ototoxicity testing, we argue for the inclusion of the "least burdensome principles" adopted by the US FDA in providing the most pragmatic, efficient, and directed identification of potential harm to auditory function in the nonclinical safety arena. We argue for the exclusive use of the auditory brainstem response and the exclusion of the distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) in these Tiered II safety assessment programs. The inclusion of both are a burden on operational staff and, due to the extended episodes of anesthesia required to conduct both assays, this strategy poses a health and welfare concern for the selected animal species to be used. The DPOAE does not provide any sufficiently valid or reliable data above and beyond the gold standard ABR data, followed by complete oto-histopathology and cytocochleogram combination designs.

De-risking in Tier I CNS safety assessments is the primary function of study design and technical training of laboratory staff observers.

Derisking is not a pharmaceutical industry strategy to reduce time, effort, or costs in drug development. Derisking strategies originated within the National Institutes of Health as a predicate to good science. There is a growing sentiment within drug development programs to diminish the importance of behavioral measures in toxicological studies and in the Tiered Safety assessment plans of the U.S. Regulatory Agencies and the International Commission on Harmonization. The validity and reliability of the Functional Observational Batter (FOB) is critically dependent on consistency and technical quality in each risk assessment plan. US Federal and International drug approval organizations have universally adopted the concept of principles of test construction rather than delineating specific behavioral assay endpoints for inclusion of the FOB in nonclinical safety protocols. The validity and reliability of behavioral observations in standardized neurotoxicity screening is critically dependent on the FOB developed by the Study Director with the Sponsor throughout all stages of testing.. The individual risk factors selected for observation to be included in the early Tier 1 safety program should be determined by the mechanism and mode of action of the test article. The results of Tier I testing are the basis for Tier II testing designs. Critical to the compliance with Good Laboratory Practices is the documentation of training of the operational staff scheduled to conduct all aspects of the established protocol.

Nonclinical evaluation of abuse liability of the dual orexin receptor antagonist lemborexant.

Lemborexant is a dual orexin receptor antagonist (DORA) approved in multiple countries including the United States, Japan, Canada and Australia for the treatment of adults with insomnia. As required for marketing approval of new compounds with central nervous system activity with sedating effects, the abuse potential of lemborexant was assessed in accordance with regulatory guidelines, which included three nonclinical studies. These assessments comprised physical dependence and drug discrimination studies in rats and a self-administration study in rhesus monkeys. There was no evidence of withdrawal signs following abrupt drug discontinuation, indicating that lemborexant does not induce physical dependence. In the drug discrimination study, lemborexant at doses up to 1000 mg/kg administered orally did not cross-generalize to the zolpidem training stimulus, although another DORA included in the same experiment, suvorexant, showed partial generalization with zolpidem. In rhesus monkeys, lemborexant treatment did not induce any gross behavioral changes, and there was no increase in self-administration rates compared with control, indicative of a lack of reinforcing effects of lemborexant. Collectively, these nonclinical studies support the position that lemborexant, which has been placed in Schedule IV by the United States Drug Enforcement Administration, has a low risk of abuse in humans.

Study design criteria for regulatory-based drug control action: Drug discrimination.

This "methods paper" focusses on one specific and limited aspect of drug safety evaluations required for all new drug entities that affect the central nervous system - the drug discrimination (DD) assay. We focus on three critical factors involved in experimental design and protocol development for the conduct of DD studies for abuse liability risk assessment that comply with the Good Laboratory Practice Guidelines (GLPs). The selection of 1) the reference drug(s) choice, 2) training dose selection, and 3) the selected route-of-administration will determine the applicability of the data to meet the regulatory expectations of the 8-factors determinative of schedule control recommendations. The study conduct and resulting data submission to the FDA are intended for drug scheduling review by the Controlled Substances Staff in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) at the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA). These animal studies are required to meet the statutory requirements of the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. The abuse liability study is conducted during Phase II and III of human clinical trials. Procedural or method-based errors this late in drug development can result in a significant economic and business threat to the program.

CNS Safety Screening Under ICH S7A Guidelines Requires Observations of Multiple Behavioral Units to Assess Motor Function.

In the adoption of behavior as a critical end point in safety pharmacology and neurotoxicity screening, federal regulatory agencies have shifted the predominating scientific perspective from pharmacology back to the experimental analysis of behavior (psychology). Nowhere is this more evident than in tier I safety assessment of the central nervous system (CNS). The CNS and peripheral nervous system have multiple behavioral units of general activity. A complete picture of the motor control neural pathways cannot be measured by any one single approach. The CNS safety protocols under International Council for Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use S7A are required to be conducted in accordance with Good Laboratory Practices by trained technical staff. The CNS safety assessments necessitate the inclusion of a thorough and detailed behavioral analysis of home cage activity, the response to handling, and transportation to and observations within an open-field apparatus with ancillary measures of basal muscle tone, muscle strength, and tremor in a functional observation battery, as well as quantitative measurements of 3-dimensional activity in an automated photobeam arena. Cost-cutting initiatives or a radical application of the "reduce use" principle of the 3 Rs only jeopardize the spirit, intent, and predictive validity of tier I safety testing assays dictated by current drug safety guidelines.

Extended recording of LMA in rats: Effects of IV catheters, "comfort jackets" and chamber lids on arterial blood gas parameters.

The standard infrared photobeam locomotor activity system has been used extensively in neurobiology and neuropharmacology to study the functional impact of direct manipulations of the nervous system. There is interest in using the activity monitors to assess the early stages of drug withdrawal in rodents. In a standard twice-daily dosing strategy animals would be dosed at 6:00 am and 5:00 pm for 15 to 30 days. There is interest in using the chambers to assess the early stages of the discontinuation syndrome. Placement of the rodents into the chambers following the scheduled sham or vehicle last dose of a 15- to 30-day subchronic dosing regimen (b.i.d., t.i.d., etc.) and monitoring overnight allows for a quantitative measure of the initial physiological homeostatic acclimation period during the lights-out period. By using the chambers there is no circadian dysrhythmia induced as an experimental confound and objectively verifiable data is generated during the period expected to correspond with the plasma drug levels approaching zero and the onset of discontinuation syndrome. We demonstrated that untreated "normal" rats showed a normal decelerating time-effect curve over the 12-hour monitoring period that was not compromised by restricted access to food and water. Arterial blood gas monitoring before and after 12 h of night-time activity chamber monitoring clearly demonstrated normal respiratory function with no clinical signs of any blood gas-based diagnosis of metabolic dysfunction.

Predicting the Need for a Tier II Ototoxicity Study From Early Renal Function Data.

History has established that many drugs, such as the antibiotics, chemotherapies, and loop diuretics, are capable of inducing both nephrotoxicity and ototoxicity. The exact mechanisms by which cellular damage occurs remain to be fully elucidated. Monitoring the indices of renal function conducted in the Food and Drug Administration's prescribed set of early investigational new drug (IND)-enabling studies may be the first signs of ototoxicity properties of the new drug candidate. In developing improved and efficacious new molecular entities, it is critically necessary to understand the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying the potential ototoxic effects as early in the drug development program as possible. Elucidation of these mechanisms will facilitate the development of safe and effective clinical approaches for the prevention and amelioration of drug-induced ototoxicity prior to the first dose in man. Biomarkers for nephrotoxicity in early tier I or tier II nonclinical IND-enabling studies should raise an inquiry as to the need to conduct a full auditory function assay early in the game to clear the pipeline with a safer candidate that has a higher probability of continued therapeutic compliance once approved for distribution.

NOEL and NOAEL: A retrospective analysis of mention in a sample of recently conducted safety pharmacology studies.

INTRODUCTION: The concept of characterizing adversity in relation to administered test article dose and/or exposure within toxicology studies has long been considered a normal aspect of the drug safety evaluation enterprise. The typical way this is done in drug safety investigations is by examining study data, often with focus on clinical signs, clinical pathology and histopathology, to determine a No-Observable-Effect-Level (NOEL) and/or a No-Observable-Adverse-Effect-Level (NOAEL). Once established, these, with other information, may be used to identify a safe starting dose in human clinical trials. Although safety pharmacology (SP) is concerned to identify and characterize potentially "adverse" functional effects, NOEL, and particularly NOAEL, traditionally do not have application in SP study interpretation and reporting. METHODS: An anonymized survey of a contract research laboratory master schedule was undertaken to appreciate recent usage of these concepts in GLP (Good Laboratory Practice) cardiovascular, respiratory, and neurobehavioral safety studies. RESULTS: Results across the sample of studies (N = 635) generally confirmed application of appropriate dose selection strategies, as there was a very low proportion (<1%) of observed severe adverse events (antecedent observations ultimately associated with morbidity/mortality). Data further indicated either no mention of NOEL/NOAEL (50%), or alternately, explicit identification of NOEL (28%), or NOAEL (21%). The majority of times a NOAEL was identified, it was also the case that this coincided with the highest dose administered (e.g., there may have been drug-related findings, but these were considered non-adverse across the dose range). DISCUSSION: While the concept of adversity is certainly relevant to nonclinical SP studies, actual current practices appear to reflect a history which generally avoids toxicologically-oriented classifications such as NOAEL. Questions remain regarding the applicability of NOAELs to safety pharmacology studies, including, importantly, the specific circumstances under which such designations of adversity may be considered to add value to understandings of relative risk and risk mitigation in early human clinical trials.

FOB vs modified Irwin: What are we doing?

There is a general sentiment in the nonclinical safety assessment literature and the proponents of the International Council for Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH), that the "Modified Irwin" and the Functional Observation Battery are distinct and unique assays for the nonclinical assessment of the central nervous system (CNS). We identify and defend the position that the Irwin screen was developed as an FOB and both terms refer to a single, unitary functional assay. In giving credit to one prominent contributor to any one significant discipline of science for a specific assay, orientation, or theory may have an exclusionary influence on the merits of other prominent contributors within the same research arena. Scientific organizations as well as journal and textbook editors have attempted to unify the nomenclature used within a scientific discipline to make the disciplines conform to non-attributional surname nomenclatures. For example, the Salk-Sabin immunization is simply referred to as the polio vaccine. The "Skinner box" is now the "operant chamber" and "Pavlovian conditioning" is now "respondent conditioning". In 1968, Samuel Irwin established an operational method of analysis used for measuring drug effects in purpose bred laboratory animals. We present and defend the view that the behavioral screening assay developed by Irwin is, for all intents and purposes, a functional observational battery (FOB). We take the position that in standardizing nomenclature without "surnames" the FOB is simply the contemporary name for the data collection system in use under the harmonized safety pharmacology guidelines.

Establishing performance characteristics for positive control article selection in drug self-administration studies.

The selection of a controlled substance (CS) for use as the positive control article in a nonclinical drug abuse liability (DAL) assessment study should be contemplated carefully and with full understanding of the stated intent of the study design. Any CS that can maintain day-to-day stable baseline responding of voluntary intravenous intakes in animals may be selected under the current guidelines. Schedule I - IV CNS stimulants, depressants, and sedative/hypnotics can serve as maintenance drugs in these protocols, but not all of these compounds will provide comparatively efficient, robust, and stable daily intakes. Each Sponsor is directed to select a positive control article and training dose that will provide the most balanced, predictive, and scientifically-sound comparison consistent with the mechanism of action or therapeutic target of the test article. The SA study design is not a "one-size-fits-all" assay. This is a discussion of the critical design factors to be considered in selecting the most appropriate positive control article to use for a SA study.

In further defense of nonclinical abuse liability testing of biologics.

Risk assessment is not a choice. Drug Abuse Liability (DAL) is mandated under international and national drug control statutes for all drugs targeting the CNS. Once administered to humans many biologics may have long-lived or permanent physiological effects that make DAL testing arduous. We respond to premises of a recently published position on DAL testing of biologics by de Zafra et al. (2018). We propose that, at a minimum, Sponsors submitting a Biologics Licensure Application (BLA) must think "outside the box" and include differential study designs for the same three core small NME assays detailed in the current DAL guidelines (self-administration, drug discrimination, and dependence liability). Abuse liability testing for drug scheduling decisions for marketing approval are not excluded or limited from risk assessment analysis simply because the entity is a biologic. In fact, more robust study designs may be necessary to address alterations in the reinforcing and discriminative stimulus effects of common drugs of abuse, as well as the dependence liability of the biologic, itself.

Relative equivalence of CNS safety (FOB) assessment outcomes in male and female Wistar-Han and Sprague-Dawley rats.

In 2006 the National Toxicology Program (NTP) of the FDA shifted to the preferred use of Wistar-Han rats from the more commonly used Sprague-Dawley (SD) strain - and industry followed. While European laboratories preferred the Wistar-Han line, there was a paucity of relevant historical control data in many US research institutions for the new "industry standard" rat strain. In 2010 the NTP reversed its decision and shifted back to SD rats because of reproductive issues with the Wistar strain. For post hoc comparative analyses, we report minimal practical differences in Functional Observational Battery (FOB) data from a large sample of male and female Wistar-Han and SD rats. In summarizing data from the preclinical safety evaluations of the CNS effects of new drugs using the FOB, it is crucial to understand the value of not only how the functional expression of drug effects in the rat are predictive of the human response, but also how and why they differ. What we can predict from the behavioral and physiological response of the designated test system to drug administration is the foundation of "generalizability" to the human's response. Here, we conclude that the use of either SD or WH rat strains in standard CNS safety studies provide equivalent supportive data for CNS safety assessment required for IND approval under the harmonized guidelines.

"Not Everything That Shakes Is a Seizure": Making the Determination of Test Article-Induced Convulsions in Toxicology Studies.

Spontaneous unexpected events occasionally develop during the course of rodent preclinical toxicology studies. The presentation of serious adverse events on animal studies may require notification of these events to the Food and Drug Administration if the events are most likely the direct result of test article administration. Classical conditioning of emotional responses may occur over the course of a repeat-dose study and clinical observation calls of "convulsions" are reported to the study director and/or staff veterinarians. In the current heightened environment of most research laboratories related to general animal welfare issues, it is imperative to have an action plan that will help to elucidate the potential origins of these motor events. We provide 10 factors that should be considered to help the study director determine the most likely cause of these motor attacks as being organic or psychogenic in origin.

The gold-standard in preclinical abuse liability testing: It's all relative.

All new molecular entities (NMEs) with targeted or indirect effects on the central nervous system (CNS) must be evaluated for their abuse liability as a part of their nonclinical development plan. Inherently key in the drug control review is the term "relative abuse liability". The basis for determination of drug control is critically dependent on the nonclinical assessment of the reinforcing attributes of the NME in animals (rat is the regulatory preferred species) in a standard operant conditioning paradigm. Pharmaceutical representatives without a background in behavioral analysis or operant conditioning models must weigh through conceptually-intriguing language and constructs that accurately convey and communicate the relative potential for abuse to drug regulatory experts in the field. Effective statutory language in the preclinical assessment of relative abuse liabilities for schedule control status reviews must be 1) specific; 2) concise; 3) familiar to the regulators; 4) unambiguous; 5) constructive; and 6) formalized with respect to both international and national drug control policies. In this review we attempt to define and highlight the importance of the statutory language used to report self-administration study results to both parties engaged in NDA approval process.

Discriminative stimulus effects of cocaine-levamisole combinations in Sprague-Dawley rats.

BACKGROUND: Levamisole (LVM) is a common adulterant in clandestinely manufactured cocaine (COC), with a range of well-documented deleterious health effects. Although the prevalence of LVM in COC has been widely noted, the subjective effects related to concomitant COC-LVM administration are poorly understood. AIMS: The present study sought to compare the subjective effects of LVM alone and in combination with COC in male and female Sprague-Dawley rats trained to discriminate COC from vehicle injections. METHODS: Male and female Sprague-Dawley rats were trained to discriminate COC from vehicle injections using a two-lever, food-reinforced drug discrimination procedure. Subsequent dose-effect curves were generated for COC, LVM, and a variety of COC-LVM combinations. RESULTS: No significant difference in males and females was observed on any measure of responding. LVM alone dose-dependently decreased response rates and failed to produce substitution for COC. When LVM was administered with COC, previously ineffective doses of COC engendered COC-appropriate responding. CONCLUSIONS: LVM potentiates the subjective effects of COC when administered concomitantly. These findings are consistent with the popular notion that LVM is added as an adulterant to COC to amplify the subjective effects of COC administration.

A predictive index of biomarkers for ictogenesis from tier I safety pharmacology testing that may warrant tier II EEG studies.

Three significant contributions to the field of safety pharmacology were recently published detailing the use of electroencephalography (EEG) by telemetry in a critical role in the successful evaluation of a compound during drug development (1] Authier, Delatte, Kallman, Stevens & Markgraf; JPTM 2016; 81:274-285; 2] Accardi, Pugsley, Forster, Troncy, Huang & Authier; JPTM; 81: 47-59; 3] Bassett, Troncy, Pouliot, Paquette, Ascaha, & Authier; JPTM 2016; 70: 230-240). These authors present a convincing case for monitoring neocortical biopotential waveforms (EEG, ECoG, etc) during preclinical toxicology studies as an opportunity for early identification of a central nervous system (CNS) risk during Investigational New Drug (IND) Enabling Studies. This review is about "ictogenesis" not "epileptogenesis". It is intended to characterize overt behavioral and physiological changes suggestive of drug-induced neurotoxicity/ictogenesis in experimental animals during Tier 1 safety pharmacology testing, prior to first dose administration in man. It is the presence of these predictive or comorbid biomarkers expressed during the requisite conduct of daily clinical or cage side observations, and in early ICH S7A Tier I CNS, pulmonary and cardiovascular safety study designs that should initiate an early conversation regarding Tier II inclusion of EEG monitoring. We conclude that there is no single definitive clinical marker for seizure liability but plasma exposures might add to set proper safety margins when clinical convulsions are observed. Even the observation of a study-related full tonic-clonic convulsion does not establish solid ground to require the financial and temporal investment of a full EEG study under the current regulatory standards. PREFATORY NOTE: For purposes of this review, we have adopted the FDA term "sponsor" as it refers to any person who takes the responsibility for and initiates a nonclinical investigations of new molecular entities; FDA uses the term "sponsor" primarily in relation to investigational new drug application submissions.

Ototoxicity: The Radical Drum Beat and Rhythm of Cochlear Hair Cell Life and Death.

The function and structure of the auditory information processing system establishes a unique sensory environment for the "perfect storm." The battle between life and death pits the cascade of an apoptotic storm, programmed cell death cascades, against simple cell death (necrosis) pathways. Live or die, the free radical biology of oxygen and hydroxylation, and the destruction of transition metal migration through the mechanical gate sensory processes of the hair cell lead to direct access to the cytoplasm, cytoplasmic reticulum, and mitochondria of the inner workings of the hair cells. These lead to subsequent interactions with nuclear DNA resulting in permanent hearing loss. The yin and yang of pharmaceutical product development is to document what kills, why it kills, and how do we mitigate it. This review highlights the processes of cell death within the cochlea.