重复剂量毒性研究是否有助于候选疫苗的安全性评估?疫苗开发人员调查。

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY International Journal of Toxicology Pub Date : 2024-10-30 DOI:10.1177/10915818241293371
Cynthia M Rohde, Eric Destexhe, Jan Willem van der Laan, Sarah Gould, Rachel Coe, Bert Haenen
{"title":"重复剂量毒性研究是否有助于候选疫苗的安全性评估?疫苗开发人员调查。","authors":"Cynthia M Rohde, Eric Destexhe, Jan Willem van der Laan, Sarah Gould, Rachel Coe, Bert Haenen","doi":"10.1177/10915818241293371","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A BioSafe-sponsored survey investigated how vaccine companies (n = 12) perceive the value of the repeat-dose toxicity studies for safety assessment of vaccine candidates. As all major vaccine developers were part of the survey, it was considered representative for the industry practices up to 2022. Vaccine developers indicated that they see scientific value in performing repeat-dose toxicity studies with vaccines, especially when novel components (e.g., adjuvant) or technology is being used. However, a few (3/12) also indicated that repeat-dose toxicity studies could be replaced by a pharmacology study with additional toxicity parameters. For the majority of companies (9/12), findings from the repeat-dose toxicity studies never prevented or postponed a first-in-human (FIH) trial. In the remaining 3 companies, a total of 4 occurrences of postponement or prevention of clinical development occurred and in only 2 of these cases was the finding considered related to the vaccine. A platform approach has been successfully implemented for influenza vaccines already in 2016, and an outline of the regulatory requirements for a platform approach has been recently documented in the latest infectious disease mRNA-LNP vaccine guideline, as well as in the guidance on the development and licensure of COVID-19 vaccines presented by the FDA. Vaccine developers are seeking to extend this platform approach to the development of new vaccines, building on established technologies and using well-defined manufacturing processes. This approach could support reduction of animal use (a principle of 3Rs) while still providing reassurance of the nonclinical safety of these products.</p>","PeriodicalId":14432,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Toxicology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are Repeat-Dose Toxicity Studies Informative for Safety Assessment of Vaccine Candidates? A Survey of Vaccine Developers.\",\"authors\":\"Cynthia M Rohde, Eric Destexhe, Jan Willem van der Laan, Sarah Gould, Rachel Coe, Bert Haenen\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10915818241293371\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A BioSafe-sponsored survey investigated how vaccine companies (n = 12) perceive the value of the repeat-dose toxicity studies for safety assessment of vaccine candidates. As all major vaccine developers were part of the survey, it was considered representative for the industry practices up to 2022. Vaccine developers indicated that they see scientific value in performing repeat-dose toxicity studies with vaccines, especially when novel components (e.g., adjuvant) or technology is being used. However, a few (3/12) also indicated that repeat-dose toxicity studies could be replaced by a pharmacology study with additional toxicity parameters. For the majority of companies (9/12), findings from the repeat-dose toxicity studies never prevented or postponed a first-in-human (FIH) trial. In the remaining 3 companies, a total of 4 occurrences of postponement or prevention of clinical development occurred and in only 2 of these cases was the finding considered related to the vaccine. A platform approach has been successfully implemented for influenza vaccines already in 2016, and an outline of the regulatory requirements for a platform approach has been recently documented in the latest infectious disease mRNA-LNP vaccine guideline, as well as in the guidance on the development and licensure of COVID-19 vaccines presented by the FDA. Vaccine developers are seeking to extend this platform approach to the development of new vaccines, building on established technologies and using well-defined manufacturing processes. This approach could support reduction of animal use (a principle of 3Rs) while still providing reassurance of the nonclinical safety of these products.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14432,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Toxicology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Toxicology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10915818241293371\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10915818241293371","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

由生物安全公司发起的一项调查调查了疫苗公司(n = 12)如何看待重复剂量毒性研究在候选疫苗安全性评估中的价值。由于所有主要疫苗开发商都参与了调查,因此调查被认为代表了截至 2022 年的行业实践。疫苗开发商表示,他们认为对疫苗进行重复剂量毒性研究具有科学价值,尤其是在使用新型成分(如佐剂)或技术时。不过,也有少数公司(3/12)表示,重复剂量毒性研究可由带有额外毒性参数的药理学研究取代。对于大多数公司(9/12)来说,重复剂量毒性研究的结果从未阻止或推迟过首次人体试验(FIH)。其余 3 家公司共有 4 次推迟或阻止了临床开发,其中只有 2 次的研究结果被认为与疫苗有关。2016 年,流感疫苗已成功实施了平台方法,最新的传染病 mRNA-LNP 疫苗指南以及 FDA 提出的 COVID-19 疫苗开发和许可指南中都概述了平台方法的监管要求。疫苗开发商正在寻求将这一平台方法推广到新疫苗的开发中,在已有技术的基础上使用定义明确的生产工艺。这种方法有助于减少动物使用(3Rs 的一项原则),同时仍能保证这些产品的非临床安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Are Repeat-Dose Toxicity Studies Informative for Safety Assessment of Vaccine Candidates? A Survey of Vaccine Developers.

A BioSafe-sponsored survey investigated how vaccine companies (n = 12) perceive the value of the repeat-dose toxicity studies for safety assessment of vaccine candidates. As all major vaccine developers were part of the survey, it was considered representative for the industry practices up to 2022. Vaccine developers indicated that they see scientific value in performing repeat-dose toxicity studies with vaccines, especially when novel components (e.g., adjuvant) or technology is being used. However, a few (3/12) also indicated that repeat-dose toxicity studies could be replaced by a pharmacology study with additional toxicity parameters. For the majority of companies (9/12), findings from the repeat-dose toxicity studies never prevented or postponed a first-in-human (FIH) trial. In the remaining 3 companies, a total of 4 occurrences of postponement or prevention of clinical development occurred and in only 2 of these cases was the finding considered related to the vaccine. A platform approach has been successfully implemented for influenza vaccines already in 2016, and an outline of the regulatory requirements for a platform approach has been recently documented in the latest infectious disease mRNA-LNP vaccine guideline, as well as in the guidance on the development and licensure of COVID-19 vaccines presented by the FDA. Vaccine developers are seeking to extend this platform approach to the development of new vaccines, building on established technologies and using well-defined manufacturing processes. This approach could support reduction of animal use (a principle of 3Rs) while still providing reassurance of the nonclinical safety of these products.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
4.50%
发文量
53
审稿时长
4.5 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Toxicology publishes timely, peer-reviewed papers on current topics important to toxicologists. Six bi-monthly issues cover a wide range of topics, including contemporary issues in toxicology, safety assessments, novel approaches to toxicological testing, mechanisms of toxicity, biomarkers, and risk assessment. The Journal also publishes invited reviews on contemporary topics, and features articles based on symposia. In addition, supplemental issues are routinely published on various special topics, including three supplements devoted to contributions from the Cosmetic Review Expert Panel.
期刊最新文献
Temperature Is a Key Factor Governing the Toxic Impact of Ultra-Violet Radiation-Emitting Nail Dryers When Used on Human Skin Cells. Inclusion of Histopathology in Dose Range-Finding Nonclinical Studies for Inhaled Drug Products. Twelfth Triennial Toxicology Salary Survey. Safety Assessment of Ascorbyl Glucoside and Sodium Ascorbyl Glucoside as Used in Cosmetics. Effect of Chronic Consumption of Fluoridated Water on Sciatic Nerve Conduction Velocity in Male Wistar Rats.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1