Giving patients choices: AstraZeneca's evolving approach to patient-centric sampling.

This paper shares experiences and learning from introducing patient-centric sampling (PCS) into AstraZeneca trials. Through two case studies we show how modeling approaches can assist pharmacokinetic (PK) bridging studies accounting for blood partitioning and hematocrit and how reduced PK sampling schedules, profiles constructed from composite data (plasma & dry blood) and combined assays (PK & pharmacodynamic) can all reduce patient sampling burden without impacting study outcomes. Following sharing some clinical operational challenges, we finally highlight some key requirements for implementing a patient-centric sampling strategy such as collaborative working across organizational silos, continuous patient engagement throughout the study life cycle and accepting that if the aim is to give patient choice, then one solution (device, procedure and design) will not fit all.

Assessment of the within- and between-lot variability of Whatman™ FTA(®) DMPK and 903(®) DBS papers and their suitability for the quantitative bioanalysis of small molecules.

BACKGROUND: To ensure that PK data generated from DBS samples are of the highest quality, it is important that the paper substrate is uniform and does not unduly contribute to variability. This study investigated any within and between lot variations for four cellulose paper types: Whatman™ FTA(®) DMPK-A, -B and -C, and 903(®) (GE Healthcare, Buckinghamshire, UK). The substrates were tested to demonstrate manufacturing reproducibility (thickness, weight, chemical coating concentration) and its effect on the size of the DBS produced, and the quantitative data derived from the bioanalysis of human DBS samples containing six compounds of varying physicochemical properties. RESULTS & DISCUSSION: Within and between lot variations in paper thickness, mass and chemical coating concentration were within acceptable manufacturing limits. No variation in the spot size or bioanalytical data was observed. CONCLUSION: Bioanalytical results obtained for DBS samples containing a number of analytes spanning a range of chemical space are not affected by the lot used or by the location within a lot.

Effect of ambient humidity on the rate at which blood spots dry and the size of the spot produced.

BACKGROUND: For shipping and storage, dried blood spot (DBS) samples must be sufficiently dry to protect the integrity of the sample. When the blood is spotted the humidity has the potential to affect the size of the spot created and the speed at which it dries. RESULTS: The area of DBS produced on three types of substrates were not affected by the humidity under which they were generated. DBS samples reached a steady moisture content 150 min after spotting and 90 min for humidities less than 60% relative humidity. All packaging materials examined provided some degree of protection from external extreme conditions. However, none of the packaging examined provided a total moisture barrier to extreme environmental conditions. CONCLUSION: Humidity was shown not to affect the spot area and DBS samples were ready for shipping and storage 2 h after spotting. The packing solutions examined all provided good protection from external high humidity conditions.