What Is the Structure/Function Relationship? What Do We Know?
Transcription
What Is the Structure/Function Relationship? What Do We Know?
The Structure/Function Relationship: What do we know? What would we like to know? Brian R. Berridge, DVM, PhD, DACVP GlaxoSmithKline Research Triangle Park, NC brian.x.berridge@gsk.com 919-315-6592 Outline • A (very) brief overview of the structure and function of the cardiovascular system? • What data are we integrating and where do we get it? • Connecting the dots • What do we still need to learn? We know a fair bit about the cardiovascular system as an integration of form and function Blood vessels conduct blood to the heart itself as well as the rest of the body. Rhythmic waves of electrical activity ensure coordinated contraction of different regions of the heart. Cardiomyocytes are contractile cells with immense energy needs A muscular pump and its delivery system. Heart valves ensure unidirectional flow of blood. We know something about what cardiovascular toxicity looks like! Nonclinical CV Toxicity Clinical CV Toxicity “Adverse CV events” (Vioxx, Darvocet) vascular injury cardiomyocyte injury Congestive Heart Failure (TZDs, TKIs) cellular biochemistry valvulopathy morphology Decreased EF (TKIs) ultrastructural injury Valvulopathy (Fen-Phen) function ∆cardiac mass QT prolongation Non-QT arrhythmias Increased blood pressure (Torcetrapib) QT prolongation/TdP risk ∆ BP ∆ HR ∆contractility Possible Cardiac Adverse Effects of Drugs Primary functional effects ± morphological consequences Primary effect on cardiac structures ± secondary functional effects Adverse effects on cardiac function Effects on vascular motricity Exaggerated vasodilation and reflex activation of heart Arrhythmias ± conduction impairment Direct effect on cardiac structure Effect on contractile protein or Ca channels Myocardial degeneration Valvular proliferation e.g. QT prolongation Acute Myocardial necrosis e.g. isoproterenol Chronic Cardiac fibrosis Cardiac hypertrophy e.g. minoxidil Decreased/impaired cardiac contractility e.g. doxorubicin Impairment of atrioventricular and/or arterial flows e.g. anorexigenic drugs Exacerbation of pre-existing dz- 1o, 2o Not in the Hanton scheme Adapted from Hanton, G. Drugs R D 2007: 8(4):213 Possible Cardiac Adverse Effects of Drugs Primary functional effects ± morphological consequences Primary effect on cardiac structures ± secondary functional effects Adverse effects on cardiac function Effects on vascular motricity Exaggerated vasodilation and reflex activation of heart Arrhythmias ± conduction impairment Direct effect on cardiac structure Effect on contractile protein or Ca channels Myocardial degeneration Valvular proliferation e.g. QT prolongation Acute Myocardial necrosis e.g. isoproterenol Chronic Cardiac fibrosis Cardiac hypertrophy e.g. minoxidil Decreased/impaired cardiac contractility e.g. doxorubicin Impairment of atrioventricular and/or arterial flows e.g. anorexigenic drugs Exacerbation of pre-existing dz- 1o, 2o Not in the Hanton scheme Adapted from Hanton, G. Drugs R D 2007: 8(4):213 We know we generate a lot of relevant data in relatively sensitive ways? In vitro screening for ion channel and receptor binding activity •Prospective opportunity for identifying putative risks •Retrospective opportunity to define pathogenesis/mechanism In vivo studies Current paradigms in preclinical safety assessment Acute/Single Dose Safety Pharmacology Studies Functional endpoints Multiple species In vitro/Ex vivo Rodents Early Development CV Fxn Patch clamp ion channel assays Rabbit wedge assay Translatable biomarkers Non-Rodents FTIH-enabling GLP CV Study •Telemetered rat •Telemetered dog or •Heart rate monkey •ECG (quantitative) •Heart rate •No QT •ECG (quantitative) •Blood pressure •Blood pressure •± surrogate •± surrogate measures of measures of contractility- LVP, QA contractility- LVP, QA Current paradigms in preclinical safety assessment In Vivo Repeat-Dose General Toxicity Studies Rodents 4 days Multiple species Non-Rodents Repeat-dose studies of increasing length at super-pharmacologic doses Morphologic endpoints Organ weight Gross Microscopic - light microscopy - ultrastructure Blood/urine biomarkers Serum chemistry Hematology 2 years Functional endpoints Heart rate ECG (qualitative) Hemostasis Urinanalysis Translatable biomarkers * Repeat dose studies biased toward morphologic endpoints Morphologic Evaluation- Gross to Microscopic Light microscopy of myocardium Ultrastructure of myocardium Gross examination of the intact rodent heart Evaluation of atrioventricular valve of “opened” non-rodent (dog) heart Light microscopy of atrioventricular valve Standard clinical pathology endpoints in repeat-dose toxicity studies • Serum chemistry Biomarkers of hepatobiliary injury- ALT, AST, Tbili, ALP, GGT Biomarkers of muscle injury- CK, AST, Potassium Biomarkers of renal injury- BUN, Cr, Urine Sp Gr, Urine Total Protein Biomarkers of metabolic health- glucose, triglycerides, cholesterol, electrolytes, total protein, albumin, globulins – Biomarkers of calcium-phosphorus balance – calcium, inorganic phosphorus – – – – • Hematology – Biomarkers of inflammation, hematologic dyscrasia, hematopoiesis – CBC, reticulocyte count, blood smear review – Biomarkers of coagulation- PT, APTT, fibrinogen, platelet count • Urinanalysis – Biomarkers of renal health, metabolic health - pH, protein, glucose, blood, bilirubin, ketones, urobilinogen, urine sediment, urine specific gravity, renal electrolytes Endpoints with particular relevance to CV injury Compliments of A. Eric Schultze Novel CV Biomarker Interests • Cardiac troponins • Natriuretic peptides • H-FABP • Novel contexts of use for troponins or natriuretic peptides • Imaging • miRNAs We know what we’re looking for! • Changes in serum chemistry – – • Changes in function – • • Vacuolation Degeneration Necrosis Apoptosis Hypertrophy Myocardial injury – – – • • Inotropy, chronotropy, rhythmicity Changes in heart mass with our without proportional changes in chamber volumes Cellular injury – – – – – • Increases in cTn, NTproANP/BNP, CK, K+ Altered coagulation parameters Hemorrhage Inflammation Fibrosis Valvular injury Vascular injury *Important to recognize that the heart, like many target organs, has a finite number of ways to respond to altered physiology or noxious stimuli. And what it looks like! • 4 mg/kg s.c. in F344 rats 2-4 hr Temporal pathogenesis of isoproterenolinduced injury in the rat heart 24 hr 48 hr 2 weeks Vascular responses to injury Vasoconstrictor/hypertension injury Medial hypertrophy/hyperplasia Periarterial fibrosis Fibrinoid necrosis Compliments of H. Thomas We know what to do with the data when we get it: Integrated Interpretation of Histopathology Data Light microscopy Vascular injury Myocardial injury Is the injury reversible or irreversible (e.g. necrosis, fibrosis) Is there a correlative change in blood pressure? NO reversible YES Possible translational biomarker or screening parameter NO Generally not monitorable = Dose and development limiting irreversible Is there a correlative functional change? Possible direct vasculotoxin and more difficult development challenge Valvulopathy YES Is there a correlative increase in cTnI? NO Is the molecule an ergot alkaloid or have ALK 5 inhibitory activity? YES SAR screen May be dose &/or development limiting Re-examine time of sampling Translational biomarkers Reporting translational biomarker Monitorability and exposure margins significantly impact progression opportunity! We know can leadPressure to structural Effect functional of Minoxidilchanges on Arterial Blood and Heart Rate in Conscious Rat injuries: Minoxidil as a model cardiovascular toxicant in rats •Minoxidil is a vasodilating K+ channel blocker 7d repeat-dose rat CV study • Mean absolute (relative to BW) heart weight – Gp. 2- +7.8% (+3.6%) – Gp. 3- +21.1% (+13.4%) – Gp. 4- +13.3% (+6.7%) Multifocal myocardial necrosis Arterial injury in the mesentery Single dose rat CV study Minoxidil (mg/kg) MAP HR 3 Maximal decrease of 22 mmHg Effect last ~22 h Maximal increase of 70 beats/min Effect last ~6 h 30 Maximal decrease of 23 mmHg Effect last ~24 h Maximal increase of 181 beats/min Effect last ~24 h 100 Maximal decrease of 33 mmHg Effect last ~24 h Maximal increase of 138 beats/min Effect last ~24 h PDE4 inhibitors can do it too! Subendocardial necrosis Vascular injury *no HW ∆ reported What I would like to know? Every Function Structure Study •Logistical challenges •Technological challenges •How do we get these relationships from the ‘right’ studies? We need to understand the complexity of our target patients better! Attributes of a diabetic patient population •Concurrent medications •Ischemic heart dz •Stroke •Heart failure •Renal disease •Hyperglycemia •Hypertension •Dyslipidemia How do we model diabetic patients preclinically? Baseline characteristics of patients with diabetes studied in the RECORD trial. Lancet 373:2125-2135, 2009 We need to know how to better model our target patients! Drug-induced vascular injury- place for a significant safety pharmacology contribution?? Gap = there are no biomarkers of ‘vasoactivity’ on these lists! Thank you! Questions?