1 / 15

Reports from the 5 th IWGT A re-appraisal of the recommendations for photogenotoxicity testing

10 th ICEM – Firenze, Italy , August 20-25, 2009. Reports from the 5 th IWGT A re-appraisal of the recommendations for photogenotoxicity testing. Peter Kasper Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM), Bonn, Germany. 5 TH IWGT - Basel 2009 Photogenotoxicity Group.

savannah
Download Presentation

Reports from the 5 th IWGT A re-appraisal of the recommendations for photogenotoxicity testing

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. 10th ICEM – Firenze, Italy, August 20-25, 2009 Reports from the 5th IWGTA re-appraisal of the recommendations for photogenotoxicity testing Peter Kasper Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM), Bonn, Germany

  2. 5TH IWGT - Basel 2009 Photogenotoxicity Group • 10 Group members • Daniel Bauer, Novartis Pharma, Switzerland • Elmar Gocke*, Roche, Switzerland • Peggy J. Guzzie-Peck*, J&J Pharma, USA(Co-Chair) • Satoru Itoh, Daiichi Sankyo, Japan • Abby Jacobs*, FDA CDER, USA • Peter Kasper, BfArM, Germany (Chair) • Cyrille Krul, TNO, The Netherlands • Anthony Lynch, GSK, UK (Rapporteur) • Andreas Schepky, Beiersdorf AG, Germany • Noriho Tanaka*, Food & Drug Safety Center, Japan * Member of the IWGT Photogenotoxicity Working Group 1999

  3. 5TH IWGT - Basel 2009 Photogenotoxicity Group Groups objective: • Re-evaluation of recommendations for photogenotoxicity testing of IWGT 1999 • in view of the experiences gathered over the last decade • in view of reported pseudo-photoclasto-genicity effects • in view of changing regulatory guidances (EU pharma)

  4. IWGT Report Topics (2000) 5TH IWGT - Basel 2009 Photogenotoxicity Group • Discussion on experimental conditions • Criteria for defining for which compounds photogenotoxicity testing is needed • Recommendations for adequate test models & a test battery • New topic for discussion 2009:Positioning of photogenotoxicity within a photosafety testing strategy

  5. For which compounds is photogenotoxicity testing indicated? 5TH IWGT - Basel 2009 Photogenotoxicity Group • If (1) compound absorbs within the solar spectrum and (2) is present in the cells that are exposed to radiation • Can we define “critical“ threshold levels for the molar absorbance? • Photoreactivity/ -stability as triggers for testing? • Can we define a threshold of skin exposure? • Need established non-phototoxic compounds photogenotoxicity testing?

  6. Can we define a level of molar absorbance? 5TH IWGT - Basel 2009 Photogenotoxicity Group • IWGT 1999: No data to define “critical“ threshold levels for the molar absorbance • New data: Correlation of MEC values and phototoxicity potential • Henry et al. 2009 / D. Bauer SOT 2009 (Novartis) • Group‘s conclusion: • No photosafety testing below MEC 1000 L mol-1 cm-1 • Further data post-meeting for confirmation • Harmonisation of MEC determination in progress • Harmonised protocols may support increased MEC threshold >1000 L mol-1 cm-1

  7. Photoreactivity/ -stability as triggers for testing? 5TH IWGT - Basel 2009 Photogenotoxicity Group • IWGT 1999: Photostability not considered as a sufficient argument to omit testing • Data: GSK presentation • correlation photoreactivity/stability & 3T3NRU/CHO Cab test • Group‘s conclusion: • Potentially useful trigger • Further data from other labs needed • Red Blood Cell test also may define photochemical/ photoreactivity mechanisms

  8. Can we define a threshold of skin exposure? 5TH IWGT - Basel 2009 Photogenotoxicity Group • IWGT 1999: No data to define “critical“ threshold levels for the compound concentration in the skin • Data: research proposal for defining threshold for photosafety concern with use of well-established, potent human phototoxicants • Group‘s conclusion: • Agreed with concept of empirically defined threshold • Data from proposed project required to define a generally applied threshold

  9. Need established non-phototoxic compounds photo-gentox testing? 5TH IWGT - Basel 2009 Photogenotoxicity Group • IWGT 1999: Absence of phototoxicity in relevant studies is not a “completely sufficient“ criterion to omit testing • Data: data indicating photogenotoxic-only compounds not convincing (“pseudo-effects“) • Group‘s conclusion: • Underlying mechanisms for phototoxicity/-genotoxicity are identical • Established non-phototoxic compounds don‘t need photogenotoxic testing

  10. Appropriate testing approach 5TH IWGT - Basel 2009 Photogenotoxicity Group • IWGT 1999: photoclastogenicity test preferred initial test • Data: Dufour et al 2006, Lynch et al 2008 • Clear evidence for pseudo-photoclastogenicity effects • In absence of UV/vis absorption • Preirradiation followed by treatment with compound • Further evidence with other cell lines/endpoints (V79 MN) • Group‘s conclusion: • Photoclastogenicity no longer justified for regulatory purposes

  11. Appropriate testing approach (2) 5TH IWGT - Basel 2009 Photogenotoxicity Group • IWGT 1999: photoclastogenicity test preferred initial test • Data: • Photo-Ames test • In vivo photo MN/comet test • 3D human skin models • Group‘s conclusion: • Ames: Concerns regarding sensitivity (endpoint gene mutation) • In vivo / 3D skin models promising; however still limited data • No preferred test for routine photogenotoxicity testing at the present time

  12. Positioning of photogenotoxicity within a photosafety testing strategy 5TH IWGT - Basel 2009 Photogenotoxicity Group • Current guideline recommendations • FDA guidance / ICH M3R2 • EMEA guidline (revision) • EU Cosmetic • Conclusion: • Photogenotoxicity as required endpoint in current EMEA guideline only

  13. When are data from photogenotoxicity (pgt) studies essentially needed for compound’s assessment?(Assumption: UV-vis absorption + skin exposure) • Data profile: results from other photosafety studies • Phototox neg. – no pgt testing • Phototox in vitro positive – no pgt testing • Phototox in vitro positive, in vivo (animal and/or clinical) negative – no pgt testing • Phototox in vitro and in vivo animal positive /clinical negative or positive – no pgt testing • Risk (photocarc)-benefit assessment with consideration of clinical aspects / human use • Short vs. long-term use • Systemic vs topical application

  14. Positioning of photogenotoxicity within a photosafety testing strategy 5TH IWGT - Basel 2009 Photogenotoxicity Group Group‘s consensus statement: • No added value of photogenotoxicity data for overall photosafety assessment • Therefore no photogenotoxicity testing recommended • Proposals for better triggers for testing still important for phototoxicity testing

  15. 5TH IWGT - Basel 2009 Photogenotoxicity Group Thank you!

More Related