Naohisa Tsutsui

Untargeted Metabolomic Profiling as an Evaluative Tool of Fenofibrate-Induced Toxicology in Fischer 344 Male Rats

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-α (PPARα) agonists such as fenofibrate are used to treat dyslipidemia. Although fenofibrate is considered safe in humans, it is known to cause hepatocarcinogenesis in rodents. To evaluate untargeted metabolic profiling as a tool for gaining insight into the underlying pharmacology and hepatotoxicology, Fischer 344 male rats were dosed with 300 mg/kg/day of fenofibrate for 14 days and the urine and plasma were analyzed on days 2 and 14. A combination of liquid and gas chromatography mass spectrometry returned the profiles of 486 plasma and 932 urinary metabolites. Aside from known pharmacological effects, such as accelerated fatty acid β-oxidation and reduced plasma cholesterol, new observations on the drug’s impact on cellular metabolism were generated. Reductions in TCA cycle intermediates and biochemical evidence of lactic acidosis demonstrated that energy metabolism homeostasis was altered. Perturbation of the glutathione biosynthesis and elevation of oxidative stress markers were observed. Furthermore, tryptophan metabolism was up-regulated, resulting in accumulation of tryptophan metabolites associated with reactive oxygen species generation, suggesting the possibility of oxidative stress as a mechanism of nongenotoxic carcinogenesis. Finally, several metabolites related to liver function, kidney function, cell damage, and cell proliferation were altered by fenofibrate-induced toxicity at this dose.

Development of the ICH Guidelines for Immunotoxicology Evaluation of Pharmaceuticals Using a Survey of Industry Practices

An anonymous survey of pharmaceutical industry practices for immunotoxicology evaluation was conducted. This was in support of the development of the guideline on the preclinical evaluation of unintended modulation of the immune system for the International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use. The survey was conducted in two phases in 2003 and 2004. A total of 64 responses were received of which 45 were included in the formal evaluation. The remaining compounds were excluded because they were cytotoxic anti-neoplastic drugs (N = 7), or due to insufficient information (N = 12). The purpose of the survey was to gather data on the correlation between routine toxicology studies (RTS) and additional immunotoxicological studies (AIS). The results of the survey were evaluated by the Expert Working Group (EWG) and classified as to positive or negative findings in RTS and AIS. The results of the survey showed that for 27 of 45 compounds (60%), the RTS and AIS endpoints were in agreement. In 12 of 45 cases (27%), the RTS endpoints showed immune modulation not observed in the AIS assays. Finally for 6 of 45 drugs (13%) a response was seen with the AIS methods where no significant effect was observed in the RTS endpoints. Length of dosing and the number of tests evaluated were similar in all groups. The groups where RTS detected signs of immunosuppression were more likely to have been dosed at or above MTD. This data contributed to the consensus in the EWG that routine immune function testing as an initial screen for all new drugs is not required. Instead, a weight-of-evidence approach including RTS and other causes for concern is recommended to identify the need for additional immunotoxicity studies.