The low productivity and escalating costs of drug development have been well documented over the past several years. Less than 10% of new compounds that enter clinical trials ultimately make it to the market, and many more fail in the preclinical stages of development. These challenges in the "critical path" of drug development are discussed in a 2004 publication by the US Food and Drug Administration. The document emphasizes new tools and various opportunities to improve drug development. One of the opportunities recommended is the application of "model-based drug development (MBDD)." This paper discusses what constitutes the key elements of MBDD and how these elements should fit together to inform drug development strategy and decision-making.

Purpose: Sunitinib malate is an oral multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for advanced renal cell carcinoma and imatinib-resistant or imatinib-intolerant gastrointestinal stromal tumor. Following administration, sunitinib is metabolized by cytochrome P450 3A4 to an active metabolite (SU12662). The objective of this analysis was to assess sunitinib and SU12662 pharmacokinetics and to identify covariates that might explain variability in exposure following oral administration. Experimental Design: Data from 590 subjects (73 volunteers and 517 patients) in 14 studies were analyzed. Plasma concentration-time data were analyzed using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling to estimate population pharmacokinetic parameters, as well as relationships between these parameters and gender, race, age, weight, creatinine clearance, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score, and tumor type. Simulations were done to determine the predicted effect of these covariates on exposure.Results: Separate models were developed for sunitinib and SU12662 (each a two-compartment model with first-order absorption and elimination). Sunitinib parameters were estimated as CL/F, 51.8 L/h andVd/F central , 2,030 liters. SU12662 parameters were estimated as CL/F, 29.6 L/h and Vd/F central , 3,080 liters. Tumor type (except acute myeloid leukemia), Asian race, gender, body weight, and elevated Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score described a portion of the variability in CL/F for sunitinib and metabolite; gender and body weight explained some of the variability in Vd/F central for sunitinib and metabolite. Among patients, the predicted changes in sunitinib and metabolite AUC and C max as a result of the individual covariates ranged up to 17%. Conclusion: The magnitude of the predicted changes in exposure with the covariates studied minimizes the necessity for dose adjustment in any of these subpopulations.

A study of the plasma pharmacokinetics, tumor localization, and safety of a single dose of doxorubicin encapsulated in liposomes containing surface-bound polyethylene glycol (PEG-liposomal doxorubicin) was conducted in patients with Kaposi's sarcoma (KS) as a manifestation of acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). Eighteen patients with AIDS-KS diagnosed by examination of biopsy specimens were randomly assigned to receive either standard doxorubicin or PEG-liposomal doxorubicin. Consecutive participants were entered at three dose levels (10, 20, and 40 mg/m2) in ascending fashion. Clearance of PEG-liposomal doxorubicin was 0.034 L/h/m2 to 0.108 L/h/m2, volume of distribution (Vd) was 2.2 L/m2 to 4.4 L/m2, and half-lives (t1/2) of the initial decline in the plasma concentration-time curve and of the terminal decline were 3.77 hours and 41.3 hours, respectively. Seventy-two hours after administration, doxorubicin levels observed in lesions of patients receiving PEG-liposomal doxorubicin were 5.2 to 11.4 times greater than those found in patients given comparable doses of standard doxorubicin. PEG-liposomal doxorubicin and standard doxorubicin were roughly equipotent in producing toxicity. Encapsulation in liposomes containing surface-bound PEG significantly limits the distribution and elimination of doxorubicin, results in greater accumulation of the drug in KS lesions 72 hours after dosing than does standard doxorubicin, and may improve drug efficacy and therapeutic index in the treatment of AIDS-KS.

Based on the results of our studies, encapsulation of cisplatin in long-circulating pegylated liposomes has overcome limitations experienced with other liposomal cisplatin formulations. SPI-077 has a prolonged circulation time and increased tumor Pt disposition, and its antitumor effect is significantly improved compared to cisplatin in murine colon and lung cancer models.

Background Antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) utilize a monoclonal antibody to deliver a cytotoxic payload specifically to tumor cells, limiting exposure to healthy tissues. Major clinical toxicities of ADCs include hematologic, hepatic, neurologic, and ophthalmic events, which are often dose-limiting. These events may be off-target effects caused by premature release of payload in circulation. A meta-analysis was performed to summarize key clinical safety data for ADCs by payload, and data permitting, establish a dose-response model for toxicity incidence as a function of payload, dose/regimen, and cancer type. Methods A literature search was performed to identify and extract data from clinical ADC studies. Toxicity incidence and severity were collected by treatment arm for anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, leukopenia, hepatic toxicity, peripheral neuropathy, and ocular toxicity. Exploratory plots, descriptive summaries, and logistic regression modelling were used to explore Grade ≥ 3 (G3/4) toxicities and assess the impact of covariates, including cancer type and dose/regimen. Results The dataset contained 70 publications; quantitative analysis included 43 studies with G3/4 toxicity information reported for the endpoints above. G3/4 anemia, neutropenia and peripheral neuropathy were consistently reported for MMAE ADCs, thrombocytopenia and hepatic toxicity for DM1, and ocular toxicity for MMAF. Safety profiles of MMAE, DM1, and DM4 ADCs differed between solid and hematologic cancers. Conclusions Published ADC clinical data is limited by non-uniform reporting for toxicity and lack of dosing information, limiting the ability to develop quantitative models relating toxicity to exposure. However, the current analysis suggests that key G3/4 toxicities of ADCs in the clinic are likely off-target and related to payload.