Why Drugs Fail in Late Stages of Development: Case Study Analyses from the Last Decade and Recommendations

被引:0
作者
Dolly A. Parasrampuria
Leslie Z. Benet
Amarnath Sharma
机构
[1] Global Clinical Pharmacology,Department of Bioengineering & Therapeutic Sciences
[2] Janssen R&D,undefined
[3] Schools of Pharmacy & Medicine University of California San Francisco (UCSF),undefined
来源
The AAPS Journal | / 20卷
关键词
biomarker; clinical trial; drug development; efficacy; pharmacokinetics; safety;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
New drug development is both resource and time intensive, where later clinical stages result in significant costs. We analyze recent late-stage failures to identify drugs where failures result from inadequate scientific advances as well as drugs where we believe pitfalls could have been avoided. These can be broadly classified into two categories: 1) where science is mature and the failures can be avoided through rigorous and prospectively determined decision-making criteria, scientific curiosity, and discipline to follow up on emerging findings; and 2) where problems encountered in Phase 3 failures cannot be explained at this time, as the science is not sufficiently advanced and companies/investigators need to recognize the possibility of deficiency of our knowledge. Through these case studies, key themes critical for successful drug development emerge—understanding the therapeutic pathway including receptor and signaling biology, pharmacological responses related to safety and efficacy, pharmacokinetics of the drug and exposure at target site, optimum dose, and dosing regimen; and identification of patient sub-populations likely to respond and will have a favorable benefit-risk profile, design of clinical trials, and a quantitative framework that can guide data-driven decision making. It is essential that the right studies are conducted early in the development process to answer the key questions, with the emphasis on learning in the early stages of development, whereas Phase 3 should be reserved for confirming the safety and efficacy. Utilization of innovative technology in identifying patients based on molecular signature of their disease, rapid assessment of pharmacological response, mechanistic modeling of emerging data, seamless operational processes to reduce start-up and wind-down time for clinical trials through use of electronic health records and data mining, and development of novel and objective clinical efficacy endpoints are some concepts for improving the success rate.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 164 条
[1]  
Stockbridge N(2013)Dealing with global safety issues Drug Saf 36 167-182
[2]  
Morganroth J(2016)Evolving regulatory paradigm for proarrhythmic risk assessment for new drugs J Electrocardiol 49 837-842
[3]  
Shah RR(2016)An evaluation of 30 clinical drugs against the comprehensive in vitro proarrhythmia assay (CiPA) proposed ion channel panel J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods 81 251-262
[4]  
Garnett C(2013)Bapineuzumab, an investigational agent for Alzheimer’s disease P T 38 89-91
[5]  
Vicente J(2013)Successes and failures for drugs in late-stage development for Alzheimer’s disease Drugs Aging 30 783-792
[6]  
Stockbridge N(2017)BACE inhibitor bust in Alzheimer trial Nat Rev Drug Discov 16 155-1681
[7]  
Strauss DG(2010)Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170 000 participants in 26 randomised trials Lancet 376 1670-259
[8]  
Crumb WJ(2012)Cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors for dyslipidemia: focus on dalcetrapib Drug Des Devel Ther 6 251-295
[9]  
Vicente J(2011)Different effects of compounds decreasing cholesteryl ester transfer protein activity on lipoprotein metabolism Curr Opin Lipidol 22 288-1770
[10]  
Johannesen L(2009)Dalcetrapib: no off-target toxicity on blood pressure or on genes related to the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in rats Br J Pharmacol 158 1763-382