Search

Vermeulen et al. suggest a moral duty exists for physicians to inform patients of "relevant opportunities" for Expanded Access. Such a duty is likely both too broad, leading to important practical challenges, and too narrow, without further steps to promote patient access. However, physicians should be expected to be aware of the EA pathway, disclose it to eligible patients, and support the pursuit of EA options reasonably likely to help. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Phase 1 clinical trials have challenges relative to later-phase clinical trials. As of April 2020, there were 71 active phase 1 cancer clinical trials at the Johns Hopkins Medicine Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center (SKCCC), and limited clinical pharmacy services are dedicated to the unique needs of phase 1 clinical trials. OBJECTIVES: To characterize the current phase 1 cancer-specific clinical pharmacy services at National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated institutions, and to develop a framework for the implementation of these services at Johns Hopkins Medicine SKCCC. METHODS: We queried the current pharmacy practices for phase 1 cancer clinical trials at NCIdesignated institutions through an e-mailed 20-question national online survey to 208 pharmacists. The recipients were asked to rate how often specific pharmacy services were performed, using a 4-point Likert scale of rarely/never (<10%), sometimes (10%-49%), often (50%-80%), or almost always (>80%). The services were grouped into pretrial implementation support, phase 1 trial implementation support, medication profile review, medication therapy management, and miscellaneous support. Using the survey results, a framework for phase 1 trial clinical pharmacy services was developed concurrently to prioritize protocol complexity, monitoring requirements, and clinical pharmacy interventions. RESULTS: Of the 208 surveys e-mailed, 45 recipients responded, for an overall survey response rate of 22%. The responses were divided into 2 subgroups for the institutions that currently conduct phase 1 cancer clinical trials, including institutions with >40 active phase 1 cancer clinical trials and institutions with =40 active phase 1 cancer clinical trials. The institutions with >40 active phase 1 cancer clinical trials were more likely to have pharmacists involved with direct participant care (47% vs 18.8%, respectively) and document medication lists for phase 1 trial participants (41% vs 18.8%, respectively) than institutions with =40 active phase 1 cancer clinical trials. The survey results assisted in developing a framework to classify drug regimens as platinum level (ie, higher complexity) or standard level (ie, lower or average complexity) to prioritize clinical pharmacy services based on their complexity level. CONCLUSION: Our analysis of current phase 1 clinical trial pharmacy practices at NCI institutions enabled the development of a framework for increased collaboration with research teams and phase 1 clinical trial-specific clinical pharmacy services within Johns Hopkins Medicine SKCCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

L-alanine possesses extensive physiological functionality and tremendous pharmacological significance, therefore could be considered as potential ingredient for food, pharmaceutical, and personal care products. However, therapeutic properties of L-alanine still need to be addressed in detail to further strengthen its utilization as a viable ingredient for developing natural therapeutics with minimum side effects. Thus, the present study was aimed to explore the anticipated therapeutic potential of L-alanine, produced microbially using a lactic acid bacterial strain Pediococcus acidilactici BD16 (alaD+) expressing L-alanine dehydrogenase enzyme. The anticipated therapeutic potential of L-alanine was assessed in terms of anti-proliferative, anti-bacterial, and anti-urolithiatic properties. Anti-bacterial assays revealed that L-alanine successfully inhibited growth and in vitro proliferation of important human pathogens including Enterococcus faecalis, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumonia, Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus mutans, and Vibrio cholerae in a concentration-dependent manner. Current investigation has also revealed its significant anti-proliferative potential against human lung adenocarcinoma (A549; IC50 7.32 μM) and mammary gland adenocarcinoma (MCF-7; IC50 8.81 μM) cells. The anti-urolithiatic potential of L-alanine was augmented over three different phases, viz., nucleation inhibition, aggregation inhibition, and oxalate depletion. Further, an in vitro cell culture–based kidney stone dissolution model using HEK293-T cells was also established to further strengthen its anti-urolithiatic potential. This is probably the first in vitro cell culture–based model which experimentally validates the immense therapeutic efficacy of L-alanine in treating urolithiasis disease. Key points: • Assessment of therapeutic potential of L-alanine produced by LAB. • L-alanine exhibited significant anti-proliferative and anti-bacterial activities. • L-alanine as potential anti-urolithiatic agent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

L-alanine possesses extensive physiological functionality and tremendous pharmacological significance, therefore could be considered as potential ingredient for food, pharmaceutical, and personal care products. However, therapeutic properties of L-alanine still need to be addressed in detail to further strengthen its utilization as a viable ingredient for developing natural therapeutics with minimum side effects. Thus, the present study was aimed to explore the anticipated therapeutic potential of L-alanine, produced microbially using a lactic acid bacterial strain Pediococcus acidilactici BD16 (alaD+) expressing L-alanine dehydrogenase enzyme. The anticipated therapeutic potential of L-alanine was assessed in terms of anti-proliferative, anti-bacterial, and anti-urolithiatic properties. Anti-bacterial assays revealed that L-alanine successfully inhibited growth and in vitro proliferation of important human pathogens including Enterococcus faecalis, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumonia, Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus mutans, and Vibrio cholerae in a concentration-dependent manner. Current investigation has also revealed its significant anti-proliferative potential against human lung adenocarcinoma (A549; IC50 7.32 μM) and mammary gland adenocarcinoma (MCF-7; IC50 8.81 μM) cells. The anti-urolithiatic potential of L-alanine was augmented over three different phases, viz., nucleation inhibition, aggregation inhibition, and oxalate depletion. Further, an in vitro cell culture–based kidney stone dissolution model using HEK293-T cells was also established to further strengthen its anti-urolithiatic potential. This is probably the first in vitro cell culture–based model which experimentally validates the immense therapeutic efficacy of L-alanine in treating urolithiasis disease. Key points: • Assessment of therapeutic potential of L-alanine produced by LAB. • L-alanine exhibited significant anti-proliferative and anti-bacterial activities. • L-alanine as potential anti-urolithiatic agent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The cost of anticancer drugs is constantly growing. The aim of this study was determine the impact in terms of cost reduction for anticancer drug in the Italian Health Service due to patient participation in clinical trials. Methods We evaluated the cost of drugs administered to patients treated in clinical trials at the National Cancer Institute of Naples in a four-week time period. Patients with a diagnosis of different cancers were considered, including adjuvant therapy and treatment for advanced disease, pharma sponsored and investigator initiated phase I, II and III clinical studies. We defined the expected standard treatment for each patient and we calculated the cost of the standard antineoplastic drugs that should be administered in clinical practice outside clinical trials. We used the market price of drugs to determine the cost savings value. Costs other than drugs were not included in the cost saving calculation. Results From 23.10.2017 to 17.11.2017, 126 patients were treated in 34 pharma sponsored and investigator initiated clinical trials, using experimental drugs provided free of charge by the sponsors, for an overall number of 152 cycles of therapy. If these patients were treated with conventional therapies in clinical practice the cost of antineoplastic drugs would account for 517,658 Euros, with an average of 5487 Euros saved per patients for a period of 4 weeks. Conclusions Clinical trials with investigational antineoplastic drugs provided free of charge by Sponsors render considerable cost savings, with a tangible benefit in clinical and administrative strategies to reduce drug expenditures.

Abstract Background Statistical methods for the analysis of harm outcomes in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are rarely used, and there is a reliance on simple approaches to display information such as in frequency tables. We aimed to identify whether any statistical methods had been specifically developed to analyse prespecified secondary harm outcomes and non-specific emerging adverse events (AEs). Methods A scoping review was undertaken to identify articles that proposed original methods or the original application of existing methods for the analysis of AEs that aimed to detect potential adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in phase II-IV parallel controlled group trials. Methods where harm outcomes were the (co)-primary outcome were excluded. Information was extracted on methodological characteristics such as: whether the method required the event to be prespecified or could be used to screen emerging events; and whether it was applied to individual events or the overall AE profile. Each statistical method was appraised and a taxonomy was developed for classification. Results Forty-four eligible articles proposing 73 individual methods were included. A taxonomy was developed and articles were categorised as: visual summary methods (8 articles proposing 20 methods); hypothesis testing methods (11 articles proposing 16 methods); estimation methods (15 articles proposing 24 methods); or methods that provide decision-making probabilities (10 articles proposing 13 methods). Methods were further classified according to whether they required a prespecified event (9 articles proposing 12 methods), or could be applied to emerging events (35 articles proposing 61 methods); and if they were (group) sequential methods (10 articles proposing 12 methods) or methods to perform final/one analyses (34 articles proposing 61 methods). Conclusions This review highlighted that a broad range of methods exist for AE analysis. Immediate implementation of some of these could lead to improved inference for AE data in RCTs. For example, a well-designed graphic can be an effective means to communicate complex AE data and methods appropriate for counts, time-to-event data and that avoid dichotomising continuous outcomes can improve efficiencies in analysis. Previous research has shown that adoption of such methods in the scientific press is limited and that strategies to support change are needed. Trial registration PROSPERO registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=97442

Abstract Background Expanded access is the use of investigational drugs (IDs) outside of clinical trials. Generally it is performed in patients with serious and life-threatening diseases who cannot be treated satisfactorily with authorized drugs. Legal regulations of expanded access to IDs have been introduced among others in the USA, the European Union (EU), Canada and Australia. In addition, in the USA an alternative to expanded access is treatment under the Right-to-Try law. However, the treatment use of IDs is inherently associated with a number of ethically relevant problems. Main text The objective of this article is to present a coherent framework made up of eight requirements which have to be met for any treatment use of an ID to be ethical. These include a justified need for the use of an ID, no threat to clinical development of the ID, adequate scientific evidence to support the treatment, patient’s benefit as the primary goal of the use of an ID, informed decision of a patient, fair access of patients to IDs, independent review, as well as the dissemination of treatment results. Conclusions While this framework is essentially consistent with the legal regulations of expanded access of the USA, the EU, Canada and Australia, it is substantially wider in scope because it addresses some important issues that are not covered by the regulations. Overall, the framework that we developed minimizes the risks and threats, and maximizes potential benefits to each of the four key stakeholders involved in the treatment use of IDs including patients, doctors, drug manufacturers, and society at large.

Background: ClinicalTrials.gov (CT.gov) is the most comprehensive internet-based register of different types of clinical studies. Expanded access is the use of unapproved drugs, biologics, or medical devices outside of clinical trials. One of the key problems in expanded access is the availability to both health care providers and patients of information about unapproved treatments.Objective: We aimed to evaluate CT.gov as a potential source of information about expanded access programs.Methods: We assessed the completeness of information in the records of 228 expanded access programs registered with CT.gov from February 2017 through May 2020. Moreover, we examined what percentage of published expanded access studies has been registered with CT.gov. Logistic regression (univariate and multivariate) and mediation analyses were used to identify the predictors of the absence of some information and a study's nonregistration.Results: We found that some important data were missing from the records of many programs. Information that was missing most often included a detailed study description, facility information, central contact person, and eligibility criteria (55.3%, 54.0%, 41.7%, and 17.5% of the programs, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that information about central contact person was more likely to be missing from records of studies registered in 2017 (adjusted OR 21.93; 95% CI 4.42-172.29; P<.001). This finding was confirmed by mediation analysis (P=.02). Furthermore, 14% of the programs were registered retrospectively. We also showed that only 33 of 77 (42.9%) expanded access studies performed in the United States and published from 2014 through 2019 were registered with CT.gov. However, multivariate logistic regression analysis showed no significant association between any of the variables related to the studies and the odds of study nonregistration (P>.01).Conclusions: Currently, CT.gov is a quite fragmentary source of data on expanded access programs. This problem is important because CT.gov is the only publicly available primary source of information about specific programs. We suggest the actions that should be taken by different stakeholders to fully exploit this register as a source of information about expanded access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Availability of trained professionals to assist researchers navigating regulatory pathways for new drug and device development is limited within academic institutions. We created ReGARDD (Regulatory Guidance for Academic Research of Drugs and Devices), a regional forum initially involving regulatory professionals from four Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA)-funded institutions, to build and capitalize on local expertise and to develop a regulatory guidance website geared toward academic researchers. Since 2015, members organized 15 forums covering topics such as FDA premarket submissions, gene therapy, and intellectual property for devices and therapeutics. Through user feedback, targeted surveys, and ongoing iterative processes, we refined and maintained a shared regulatory website, which reached 6000+ users in 2019. Website updates improved navigation to drug versus device topic areas, provided new educational content and videos to address commonly asked questions, and created a portal for posting upcoming training opportunities. Survey respondents rated the website favorably and endorsed expanding ReGARDD as a centralized resource. ReGARDD strengthened the regional regulatory workforce, increased regulatory efficiency, and promulgated best organizational and operational practices. Broad-scale deployment of the ReGARDD model across the CTSA consortium may facilitate the creation of a network of regional forums and reduce gaps in access to regulatory support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Availability of trained professionals to assist researchers navigating regulatory pathways for new drug and device development is limited within academic institutions. We created ReGARDD (Regulatory Guidance for Academic Research of Drugs and Devices), a regional forum initially involving regulatory professionals from four Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA)-funded institutions, to build and capitalize on local expertise and to develop a regulatory guidance website geared toward academic researchers. Since 2015, members organized 15 forums covering topics such as FDA premarket submissions, gene therapy, and intellectual property for devices and therapeutics. Through user feedback, targeted surveys, and ongoing iterative processes, we refined and maintained a shared regulatory website, which reached 6000+ users in 2019. Website updates improved navigation to drug versus device topic areas, provided new educational content and videos to address commonly asked questions, and created a portal for posting upcoming training opportunities. Survey respondents rated the website favorably and endorsed expanding ReGARDD as a centralized resource. ReGARDD strengthened the regional regulatory workforce, increased regulatory efficiency, and promulgated best organizational and operational practices. Broad-scale deployment of the ReGARDD model across the CTSA consortium may facilitate the creation of a network of regional forums and reduce gaps in access to regulatory support.

Background: The cost of anticancer drugs is constantly growing. The aim of this study was determine the impact in terms of cost reduction for anticancer drug in the Italian Health Service due to patient participation in clinical trials.Methods: We evaluated the cost of drugs administered to patients treated in clinical trials at the National Cancer Institute of Naples in a four-week time period. Patients with a diagnosis of different cancers were considered, including adjuvant therapy and treatment for advanced disease, pharma sponsored and investigator initiated phase I, II and III clinical studies. We defined the expected standard treatment for each patient and we calculated the cost of the standard antineoplastic drugs that should be administered in clinical practice outside clinical trials. We used the market price of drugs to determine the cost savings value. Costs other than drugs were not included in the cost saving calculation.Results: From 23.10.2017 to 17.11.2017, 126 patients were treated in 34 pharma sponsored and investigator initiated clinical trials, using experimental drugs provided free of charge by the sponsors, for an overall number of 152 cycles of therapy. If these patients were treated with conventional therapies in clinical practice the cost of antineoplastic drugs would account for 517,658 Euros, with an average of 5487 Euros saved per patients for a period of 4 weeks.Conclusions: Clinical trials with investigational antineoplastic drugs provided free of charge by Sponsors render considerable cost savings, with a tangible benefit in clinical and administrative strategies to reduce drug expenditures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Investigational treatments are those that have been approved for testing in humans but are not yet available as an approved treatment option. For many patients with a terminal illness who have no approved treatment option and are not eligible for a clinical trial, investigational treatments are the last resort. However, not much is known about the dissemination of information by patient advocacy organizations (PAOs). We evaluated the quantity and quality of information on preapproval access to investigational therapies provided by Japanese PAO websites between January 24 and March 29, 2019. A total of 49 PAOs were identified. Of these, 16 (33%) provided no relevant information. The most frequent information provided was the PAO's own clinical trial finder or list of clinical trials (n = 15, 31%); of the 10 cancer‐related PAOs, 5 (50%) provided this information. Nine (18%) PAOs had developed patient registries or provided a link to relevant registries. Only 1 PAO (2%) provided a link about the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare trials that described the process and regulations of clinical trials. Our results indicate that PAOs do not disseminate adequate information on preapproval pathways. We suggest that the government involve PAOs in disseminating this information to both patients and physicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The objectives of this study were to determine if clinical trials in breast cancer, with an investigational drug, created direct drug cost savings for the healthcare system related to cost avoidance of the best standard of care treatments used in these studies. The aim was to quantify this potential drug cost avoidance. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study of the drug cost avoidance during the study period (2014–2016). We included clinical trials with investigational drug, managed by pharmacy department and provided by the sponsor. The patients included had a therapeutic alternative defined as standard treatment that should have been received in case of not participating in the clinical trial. Direct cost savings, to national healthcare system, associated to clinical trials were calculated. Results: Thirty-seven clinical trials with a total of 89 breast cancer patients were included in the study. A total of 62.2% were phase III and 75.7% belonged to the pharmaceutical industry. They provided a total cost avoidance of 957,246€ (1,130,028$), an average cost avoidance per patient of 10,756€ (12,697$). Conclusions: Our study suggests that those clinical trials in which investigational drug are provided or refunded by the sponsor provide substantial cost savings. Due to the shortage of published articles that calculate the cost avoided in medication, we cannot compare directly the results obtained in the different institutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the colon with an intractable, recurrent course. The goal of UC therapy is to target mucosal healing because immune-suppressive therapy for UC frequently results in relapse. However, few drugs directly target mucosal healing. We, therefore, aim to evaluate the therapeutic effect of an investigational drug on intestinal epithelial cells in an in vitro UC model using human colonic organoids.Methods: Colonic organoids were isolated from human colon and cultured. A mixture of cytokines and bacterial components were used to mimic UC in humans. The effect of the investigational drug on colonic organoid was evaluated by microarray analysis and 3D immunofluorescence. The enrichment of stem cells was assessed with a colony formation assay.Results: Inflammatory stimulation resulted in a significant induction of inflammatory-related genes in colonic organoids whereas cell differentiation was suppressed. Treatment with the investigational drug KAG-308 showed reciprocal dynamics of gene expression to inflammatory stimulation, which resulted in not only the suppression of immune response but also the promotion of cellular differentiation towards secretory lineages. Moreover, SPDEF and Reg4 were identified as novel targets for the enrichment of intestinal epithelial stem cells and mucosal healing.Conclusions: The establishment of in vitro UC model using human colonic organoid could reveal the effects and targets of investigational drugs in intestinal epithelial cells under inflammation conditions. Further maturation of this system might be more efficient to predict the effect on UC, as compared with the use of animal model, for the development of new drugs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Compassionate use (also referred to as expanded access) is therapeutic use of unauthorized drugs outside of clinical trials. The objective of this review is to discuss practical aspects of the current legal regulations concerning compassionate use that have been introduced in the European Union, the USA (both the Food and Drug Administration regulations and Right-to-try laws), Canada and Australia. We also present main ethical challenges associated with use of unauthorized drugs such as possible difficulties with obtaining informed consent and fair patient selection. Moreover, we discuss guidelines, especially those contained in the Declaration of Helsinki, which may aid doctors in the ethical conduct of compassionate treatments. • Compassionate use is use of unauthorized drugs outside of clinical trials. • Many countries have introduced legal regulations concerning compassionate use. • Compassionate use is associated with a number of ethical challenges. • Ethical review of compassionate use is quite controversial. • Some ethics codes contain guidelines regarding compassionate use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: U.S. physicians may treat a patient with an investigational drug outside of a clinical trial by using the expanded access (EA) pathway or the recently created federal right to try (RTT) pathway. The EA pathway requires physicians to get prior permission from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and, except in emergency cases, institutional review board (IRB) approval. The perspectives of IRB professionals on the review of single-patient EA requests have not been empirically studied. Methods: We used a cross-sectional online survey to ascertain IRB professionals' perspectives on IRB experiences with and preparedness for review of single-patient EA requests, as well as their attitudes about the importance of IRB review of such requests. Email invitations were sent to 234 IRB professionals connected to the SMART IRB platform. Approximately half of the survey questions used a Likert scale to assess respondents' agreement with specific statements. Results: Eighty-three respondents completed the survey (36.4% response rate, with 228 deliverable e-mail invitations). Of the respondents, 73.5% were affiliated with an academic medical institution; 78.3% of respondents agreed that it is important for a designated member of an IRB to review single-patient EA requests before investigational drugs are used by patients. The majority indicated that local review of the EA request was important and that a single designated reviewer was sufficient (rather than full board). Further, 86.6% felt that their IRBs were prepared to review these requests, and 9.2% indicated that not all the single-patient EA requests reviewed by their IRBs in 2017 were approved. Conclusions: A large majority of IRB professionals affiliated with the SMART IRB platform who responded to this survey felt IRB review of single-patient EA requests is important and that their IRBs were prepared to handle such requests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To determine short‐term efficacy and safety of Paxerol®, novel immediate:sustained (50%:50%) release tablets containing 325 mg acetaminophen and 150 mg ibuprofen per tablet. Methods: One of three dose levels, corresponding to the amounts in 1, 2, and 3 tablets, of Paxerol and placebo were administered for 14 consecutive days to patients with severe nocturia (defined in this study as an average nocturnal voids [NV] ≥2.5) associated with overactive bladder (OAB). Changes in NV, as well as Nocturia Quality of Life (NQOL), duration of first uninterrupted sleep (DFUS), and total hours of nightly sleep (THNS) associated with treatment were assessed. Short‐term safety/tolerability was assessed throughout the study and for at least 30 days post‐treatment. Results: Paxerol at all three doses reduced NV to a greater degree than placebo (average NV −1.1, −1.4, −1.3 voids for low, mid, and high doses, respectively, vs −0.3 void for placebo). NQOL and THNS were similar between baseline and treatment values in all four groups. There were also no between‐group differences. Paxerol at high dose tended to (although not statistical significantly) increase DFUS to a greater degree than placebo (1.2 vs 0.4 h, P = 0.057). There were no treatment related adverse events in any of the four groups. Conclusions: This study demonstrates short‐term efficacy and short‐term safety of Paxerol in patients with severe nocturia associated with OAB. The results warrant further investigation of the long‐term efficacy and safety of Paxerol in larger patient populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/aims: Accurate information on harms arising from medical interventions is essential for assessing benefit–risk ratios. Since 2004, there has been an extension of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement for reporting harms data in publications on randomized clinical trials. The objective of our study was to assess the quality of this reporting from academic randomized clinical trials on drugs. Methods: We searched for articles on randomized clinical trials funded between 2004 and 2008 by the “Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique.” We included all published randomized clinical trials that assessed drugs. Harm-related data were extracted and compared with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Harms extension, and the space in the articles devoted to harms data was measured. Results: In total, 37 randomized clinical trials met the inclusion criteria. The median harm score was 9/18. In 73.0% of the randomized clinical trials, the reporting of adverse events was selective. Less than 50% of articles provided information on reasons for drug discontinuation that were related to adverse events. The score and the space allocated to harms were higher in antineoplastic and immunomodulating drugs randomized clinical trials, while the median proportion of the space in the results section allocated to harms was 16.8%. In 67.6% of the articles, the space allocated to the authors’ list and affiliations was greater than the space in the results section allocated to descriptions of harms. No significant improvement in the score or the space allocation was observed during the study period. Conclusion: Reporting of harms in French academic drug randomized clinical trials is suboptimal; moreover, this shortcoming is a critical barrier to evaluating the benefit–risk ratio of drug randomized clinical trials. Thus, the authors should be encouraged to adhere to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Harms extension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose. The importance and key components of clinical medication reviews for participants in oncology clinical trials are described, and drug- drug interactions (DDIs) associated with new oncology drug classes are discussed. Summary. Use of investigational drugs is a mainstay of adult oncology clinical trials and has led to discovery of new oncology drug classes, including immunotherapy agents and oral targeted therapies, as well as novel chemotherapy delivery methods. As sponsor-supplied DDI information on investigational drugs and drug classes is typically limited and often inconsistent, a clinical medication review to assess the potential for DDIs is recommended for all patients enrolling in oncology clinical trials. A simplified approach to performing such reviews includes (1) evaluating the trial protocol for DDI risks, (2) meeting with the patient face-to-face to perform the review, (3) making medication-related recommendations based on the findings of the patient encounter, and (4) documenting review findings in the medical record. Pharmacists can create a personalized "concomitant-medication review guide" listing key medication-use information in table format to assist other clinicians in preventing and assessing DDIs during a patient's clinical trial participation. Conclusion. Each investigational drug and new drug class in oncology has a unique DDI profile. It is essential that patients be screened for DDI risks prior to clinical trial participation and that pharmacists and clinical investigators have clear guidelines for managing DDIs. Performing a clinical medication review is one approach to simplifying this process and ensuring patient safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the formation of a tetrazole ring on an investigational drug, two in-process impurities were detected and analyzed by LC-MS, which suggested that both impurities were drug-related with the same mass-to-charge ratio. To understand and control their formation, both impurities were isolated from the mother liquor of the reaction using a multi-step isolation procedure to obtain a sufficient amount for high-resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) and NMR structural analysis. HRMS suggested a protonated mass of 577.32 Da for both impurities; however, MS fragmentation patterns provided limited information on their structures. NMR analysis indicated the presence on an additional NH functional group in both isolates with similar spatial and bond correlations to one of the dimethylcarbamoyl moieties and the corresponding aromatic ring. A phenyldimethylcarbamoylamino moiety was supported by the NMR and HRMS data and could be explained based on the 'Schmidt-like' reaction mechanism, which was an unexpected reaction pathway. Because the reaction conditions were fixed because of safety concerns, the crystallization protocol was redesigned to reduce the levels of these impurities significantly. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Two established disease-specific therapies for the treatment of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) are riluzole and edaravone. Limitations of these medications include minimal progression slowing or survival benefit, and effectiveness only in selected populations, particularly for edaravone. AMX0035 and tofersen received US FDA approval in September 2022 and April 2023, respectively. However, phase 3 trials, further examining both medications' efficacy, are ongoing. CNM-Au8 is an efficient catalyst of energy metabolism and is therefore a potential disease-modifying treatment for ALS, a neurodegenerative condition in which there is bioenergetics impairment., Areas Covered: In this review, we provide an overview of the current ALS treatment market, followed by a description of the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of CNM-Au8. The main preclinical and available early clinical evidence of CNM-Au8 is then described, as well as its potential as an ALS treatment., Expert Opinion: Oral treatment with CNM-Au8 failed to meet primary clinical and electrodiagnostic endpoints in phase 2/3 clinical trials. Despite this failure, a number of exploratory endpoints included in phase 2/3 trials suggest CNM-Au8 has the potential to significantly slow clinical worsening, improve quality of life, and prolong survival in ALS. Further study of CNM-Au8 in a phase 3 clinical trial is currently underway.