Phase 1 Clinical Trials of Small Molecules: Evolution and State of the Art

John    J.    Sramek; Michael    F.    Murphy; Sherilyn       Adcock; Jeffrey    G.    Stark; Neal    R.    Cutler

doi:10.2174/1574887116666210204125844

Abstract

Background: Phase 1 studies comprise the first exposure of a promising new chemical entity in healthy volunteers or, when appropriate, in patients. To assure a solid foundation for subsequent drug development, this first step must carefully assess the safety and tolerance of a new compound and often provide some indication of potential effect, so that a safe dose or dose range can be confidently selected for the initial Phase 2 efficacy study in the target patient population.

Methods: This review was based on a literature search using both Google Scholar and PubMed, dated back to 1970, using search terms including “healthy volunteers”, “Phase 1”, and “normal volunteers”, and also based on the authors’ own experience conducting Phase 1 clinical trials. This paper reviews the history of Phase 1 studies of small molecules and their rapid evolution, focusing on the critical single and multiple dose studies, their designs, methodology, use of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling, application of potentially helpful biomarkers, study stopping criteria, and novel study designs.

Results: We advocate for determining the safe dose range of a new compound by conducting careful dose escalation in a well-staffed inpatient setting, defining the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) by reaching the minimally intolerated dose (MID). The dose immediately below the MID is then defined as the MTD. This is best accomplished by using appropriately screened patients for the target indication, as patients in many CNS indications often tolerate doses differently than healthy non-patients. Biomarkers for safety and pharmacodynamic measures can also assist in further defining a safe and potentially effective dose range for subsequent clinical trial phases.

Conclusion: Phase 1 studies can yield critical insights into the pharmacology of a new compound in man and offer perhaps the only development period in which the dose range can be safely and thoroughly explored. Phase 1 studies often contain multiple endpoint objectives, the reconciliation of which can present a dilemma for drug developers and study investigators alike, but which can crucially determine whether a compound can survive to the next step in the drug development process.

Keywords: Phase 1 clinical trials, maximally tolerated dose, healthy volunteers, drug development, pharmacology, small molecules.

« Previous Next »

Graphical Abstract

[1] 
Junod S. FDA and clinical drug trials: A short history.A Quick Guide to Clinical Trials  Washington: BioPlan, Inc   2008; pp 22-55.
[2] 
Bhatt A. Evolution of clinical research: A history before and beyond james lind. Perspect Clin Res  2010;  1(1): 6-10.
[PMID: 21829774] 
[3] 
Devereaux PJ, Yusuf S. The evolution of the randomized controlled trial and its role in evidence-based decision making. J Intern Med  2003; 254(2): 105-13.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2796.2003.01201.x] [PMID: 12859691] 
[4] 
Dowling HF. The emergence of the cooperative clinical trial. Trans Stud Coll Physicians Phila  1975; 43(1): 20-9.
[PMID: 1189019] 
[5] 
Grabowski HG. Public policy and pharmaceutical innovation. Health Care Financ Rev  1982; 4(1): 75-87.
[PMID: 10309721] 
[6] 
Friedlander WJ. Putnam, Merritt, and the discovery of dilantin. Epilepsia  1986; 27(Suppl. 3): S1-S20.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-1157.1986.tb05743.x] [PMID: 3527690] 
[7] 
Buoen C, Bjerrum OJ, Thomsen MS. How first-time-in-human studies are being performed: A survey of phase I dose-escalation trials in healthy volunteers published between 1995 and 2004. J Clin Pharmacol  2005; 45(10): 1123-36.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0091270005279943] [PMID: 16172177] 
[8] 
Getz KA, Campo RA, Kaitlin K. Variability in protocol design complexity by phase and therapeutic area. Drug Inf J  2011; 45(4): 413-20.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009286151104500403] 
[9] 
Mårtensson E, Roos BE. Serum levels of thioridazine in psychiatric patients and healthy volunteers. Eur J Clin Pharmacol  1973; 6(3): 181-6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00558283] [PMID: 4762056] 
[10] 
Szczeklik A, Teresiak T, Kolaczkowska B. Serum alpha 1 antitrypsin in healthy subjects and in patients with pulmonary emphysema. Minerva Med  1973; 64(9): 415-9.
[PMID: 4694764] 
[11] 
Meier J, Baranowski E, Wagner E. Experimental studies on the cardio-selectivity of pindolol. Studies on healthy subjects, and patients with bronchitis and asthma. Fortschr Med  1973; 91(34): 1363-7.
[PMID: 4764790] 
[12] 
Heyn R, Newton W, Carter R. Elderfield pyrimidine mustard (Nsc-23436) in acute leukemia in children--a phase I study. Cancer Chemother Rep  1963; 33: 51-5.
[PMID: 14102083] 
[13] 
Aust JB, Roux K. Phase I study of 1-aminocyclopentanecarboxylic acid (NSC-1026) in cancer patients. Cancer Chemother Rep  1965; 49: 63-4.
[PMID: 5322841] 
[14] 
Richards DA, Woodings EP, Stephens MD, Maconochie JG. The effects of oral AH 5158, a combined α and β-adrenoceptor antagonist, in healthy volunteers. Br J Clin Pharmacol  1974; 1(6): 505-10.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.1974.tb01702.x] [PMID: 22454938] 
[15] 
Matzkies F, Berg G. Effect of benzbromarone in 100mg and 50mg doses on healthy subjects. Fortschr Med  1977; 95(27): 1745-7.
[PMID: 903059] 
[16] 
Goldberg LI, Besselaar GH, Arnold JD, Lemberger L, Mitchell JR, Whitsett TL. Panel 1: phase I investigations. Clin Pharmacol Ther  1975; 18(5 Pt 2): 643-6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpt1975185part2643] [PMID: 1102240] 
[17] 
Smith RN. Safeguards for healthy volunteers in drug studies. Lancet  1975; 2(7932): 449-50.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(75)90856-9] [PMID: 51249] 
[18] 
Nijhawan LP, Janodia MD, Muddukrishna BS, et al. Informed consent: Issues and challenges. J Adv Pharm Technol Res  2013; 4(3): 134-40.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2231-4040.116779] [PMID: 24083200] 
[19] 
Chandra H, Srimal RC, Kamboj VP, Dhawan BN, Gupta NN. Clinical pharmacology studies with Centchroman. Indian J Exp Biol  1977; 15(12): 1170-2.
[PMID: 350765] 
[20] 
Le Tourneau C, Lee JJ, Siu LL. Dose escalation methods in phase I cancer clinical trials. J Natl Cancer Inst  2009; 101(10): 708-20.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djp079] [PMID: 19436029] 
[21] 
Cutler NR, Sramek J. Understanding Alzheimer’s Disease Jackson: University Press of Mississippi.  1996.
[22] 
Cutler N, Sramek J, Murphy M, Riordan H, Bieck P, Carta A. Critical pathways to success in CNS drug development Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell .  2010.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781444318579] 
[23] 
Stampfer HG, Gabb GM, Dimmitt SB. Why maximum tolerated dose? Br J Clin Pharmacol  2019; 85(10): 2213-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bcp.14032] [PMID: 31219196] 
[24] 
Olson H, Betton G, Robinson D, et al. Concordance of the toxicity of pharmaceuticals in humans and in animals. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol  2000; 32(1): 56-67.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/rtph.2000.1399] [PMID: 11029269] 
[25] 
Van Norman GA. Limitations of animal studies for predicting toxicity in clinical trials: Is it time to rethink our current approach? JACC Basic Transl Sci  2019; 4(7): 845-54.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacbts.2019.10.008] [PMID: 31998852] 
[26] 
Clark M, Steger-Hartmann T. A big data approach to the concordance of the toxicity of pharmaceuticals in animals and humans. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol  2018; 96: 94-105.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2018.04.018] [PMID: 29730448] 
[27] 
Swinney DC. Phenotypic vs. target-based drug discovery for first-in-class medicines. Clin Pharmacol Ther  2013; 93(4): 299-301.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/clpt.2012.236] [PMID: 23511784] 
[28] 
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. Guidance for industry: estimating the maximum safe starting dose in initial clinical trials for therapeutics in adult healthy volunteers 2005. Available from:https://www.fda.gov/media/72309/download
[29] 
Wexler D, Bertelsen KM. A brief survey of first-in-human studies. J Clin Pharmacol  2011; 51(7): 988-93.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0091270010377631] [PMID: 20671293] 
[30] 
Omura GA. Modified Fibonacci search. J Clin Oncol  2003; 21(16): 3177.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2003.99.058] [PMID: 12915613] 
[31] 
Buöen C, Holm S, Thomsen MS. Evaluation of the cohort size in phase I dose escalation trials based on laboratory data. J Clin Pharmacol  2003; 43(5): 470-6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0091270003252243] [PMID: 12751268] 
[32] 
Sramek JJ, Hurley DJ, Wardle TS, et al. The safety and tolerance of xanomeline tartrate in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. J Clin Pharmacol  1995; 35(8): 800-6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1552-4604.1995.tb04123.x] [PMID: 8522637] 
[33] 
Bodick NC, Offen WW, Levey AI, et al. Effects of xanomeline, a selective muscarinic receptor agonist, on cognitive function and behavioral symptoms in Alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol  1997; 54(4): 465-73.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archneur.1997.00550160091022] [PMID: 9109749] 
[34] 
Ivanova A, Murphy M. An adaptive first in man dose-escalation study of NGX267: statistical, clinical, and operational considerations. J Biopharm Stat  2009; 19(2): 247-55.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10543400802609805] [PMID: 19212877] 
[35] 
Garnett C, Bonate PL, Dang Q, et al. Scientific white paper on concentration-QTc modeling. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn  2018; 45(3): 383-97.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10928-017-9558-5] [PMID: 29209907] 
[36] 
Redahan L, Murray PT. Novel biomarkers of drug-induced kidney injury. Clin Pharmacol Ther  2018; 103(3): 396-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpt.999] [PMID: 29417562] 
[37] 
Roth SE, Avigan MI, Bourdet D, et al. Next-generation DILI biomarkers: prioritization of biomarkers for qualification and best practices for biospecimen collection in drug development. Clin Pharmacol Ther  2020; 107(2): 333-46.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpt.1571] [PMID: 31314926] 
[38] 
Karakunnel JJ, Bui N, Palaniappan L, et al. Reviewing the role of healthy volunteer studies in drug development. J Transl Med  2018; 16(1): 336.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12967-018-1710-5] [PMID: 30509294] 
[39] 
Cutler NR, Sramek JJ, Kilborn JR. The bridging concept: optimizing dose for phase II/III in Alzheimer’s disease. Neurodegeneration  1996; 5(4): 511-4.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/neur.1996.0071] [PMID: 9117571] 
[40] 
Cutler NR, Sramek JJ. Guidelines for conducting bridging studies in Alzheimer disease. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord  1998; 12(2): 88-92.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00002093-199806000-00006] [PMID: 9651137] 
[41] 
Cutler NR, Sramek JJ. The target population in phase I clinical trials of cholinergic compounds in Alzheimer disease: the role of the “bridging study”. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord  1995; 9(3): 139-45.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00002093-199509030-00004] [PMID: 8534412] 
[42] 
Cutler NR, Sramek JJ. Scientific and ethical concerns in clinical trials in Alzheimer’s patients: the bridging study. Eur J Clin Pharmacol  1995; 48(6): 421-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00194329] [PMID: 8582458] 
[43] 
Pokorny R, Finkel MJ, Robinson WT. Normal volunteers should not be used for bioavailability or bioequivalence studies of clozapine. Pharm Res  1994; 11(8): 1221.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1018965622014] [PMID: 7971728] 
[44] 
Grof P, Campbell M. Clinical evaluation of psychotropic drugs for psychiatric disorders: principles and proposed guidelines  Seattle: Hogrefe and Huber .  1993.
[45] 
Sramek JJ, Fresquet A, Marion-Landais G, et al. Establishing the maximum tolerated dose of lesopitron in patients with generalized anxiety disorder: a bridging study. J Clin Psychopharmacol  1996; 16(6): 454-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004714-199612000-00009] [PMID: 8959472] 
[46] 
Sørensen B, Kragh-Sørensen P, Larsen NE, Hvidberg EF. The practical significance of nortriptyline plasma control. A prospective evaluation under routine conditions in endogenous depression. Psychopharmacology (Berl)  1978; 59(1): 35-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00428027] [PMID: 100810] 
[47] 
Ziegler VE, Clayton PJ, Taylor JR, Tee B, Biggs JT. Nortriptyline plasma levels and therapeutic response. Clin Pharmacol Ther  1976; 20(4): 458-63.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpt1976204458] [PMID: 788992] 
[48] 
Corona GL, Cucchi ML, Frattini P, et al. Aspects of amitriptyline and nortriptyline plasma levels monitoring in depression. Psychopharmacology (Berl)  1990; 100(3): 334-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02244602] [PMID: 2315430] 
[49] 
Othman AA, Lenz RA, Zhang J, Li J, Awni WM, Dutta S. Single- and multiple-dose pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of the selective alpha7 neuronal nicotinic receptor agonist, ABT-107, in healthy human volunteers. J Clin Pharmacol  2011; 51(4): 512-26.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0091270010370460] [PMID: 20495134] 
[50] 
Barbier AJ, Hilhorst M, Van Vliet A, et al. Pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of encenicline, a selective α7 nicotinic receptor partial agonist, in single ascending-dose and bioavailability studies. Clin Ther  2015; 37(2): 311-24.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2014.09.013] [PMID: 25438724] 
[51] 
Liu JP, Chow SC. Bridging studies in clinical development. J Biopharm Stat  2002; 12(3): 359-67.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1081/BIP-120014564] [PMID: 12448577] 
[52] 
Cutler NR, Sramek JJ, Kurtz NM, Murphy MF, Carta A. Accelerating CNS drug development Chichester, UK: Wiley.  1998.
[53] 
Sramek JJ, Kirkesseli S, Paccaly-Moulin A, et al. A bridging study of fananserin in schizophrenic patients. Psychopharmacol Bull  1998; 34(4): 811-8.
[PMID: 10513457] 
[54] 
Sramek JJ, Eldon MA, Posvar E, et al. Initial safety, tolerability pharmacodynamics, and pharmacokinetics of CI-1007 in patients with schizophrenia. Psychopharmacol Bull  1998; 34(1): 93-9.
[PMID: 9564205] 
[55] 
Sramek JJ, Kurtz NM, Murphy MF, Carta A. Optimizing the development of antipsychotic drugs Chichester, UK: Wiley.  1997.
[56] 
Siemers ER, Quinn JF, Kaye J, et al. Effects of a gamma-secretase inhibitor in a randomized study of patients with Alzheimer disease. Neurology  2006; 66(4): 602-4.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/01.WNL.0000198762.41312.E1] [PMID: 16505324] 
[57] 
Jackson WJ, Buccafusco JJ, Terry AV, Turk DJ, Rush DK. Velnacrine maleate improves delayed matching performance by aged monkeys. Psychopharmacology (Berl)  1995; 119(4): 391-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02245854] [PMID: 7480518] 
[58] 
Puri SK, Hsu RS, Ho I, Lassman HB. Single dose safety, tolerance, and pharmacokinetics of HP 029 in healthy young men: a potential Alzheimer agent. J Clin Pharmacol  1989; 29(3): 278-84.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1552-4604.1989.tb03328.x] [PMID: 2723116] 
[59] 
Puri SK, Ho I, Hsu R, Lassman HB. Multiple dose pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerance of velnacrine (HP 029) in healthy elderly subjects: a potential therapeutic agent for Alzheimer’s disease. J Clin Pharmacol  1990; 30(10): 948-55.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1552-4604.1990.tb03576.x] [PMID: 2229455] 
[60] 
Wood DM, Ford JM, Roberts CJ. Variability in the plasma protein binding of velnacrine (1-hydroxy tacrine hydrochloride). A potential agent for Alzheimer’s disease. Eur J Clin Pharmacol  1996; 50(1-2): 115-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s002280050078] [PMID: 8739821] 
[61] 
Williams RL. Dosage regimen design: pharmacodynamic considerations. J Clin Pharmacol  1992; 32(7): 597-602.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1552-4604.1992.tb05766.x] [PMID: 1639996] 
[62] 
European Medicines Agency. Guideline on strategies to identify and mitigate risks for first-in-human and early clinical trials with investigational medicinal products 2017.
[63] 
Institute of Medicine. Evaluation of biomarkers and surrogate endpoints in chronic disease  Washington, DC: The National Academies Press .  2010.
[64] 
Green DJ, Liu XI, Hua T, et al. Enrichment strategies in pediatric drug development: an analysis of trials submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration. Clin Pharmacol Ther  2018; 104(5): 983-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpt.971] [PMID: 29218740] 
[65] 
Praag HM. The Harold E. Himwich Memorial Lecture. Significance of biochemical parameters in the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of depressive disorders. Biol Psychiatry  1977; 12(1): 101-31.
[PMID: 300032] 
[66] 
Aberg-Wistedt A, Jostell KG, Ross SB, Westerlund D. Effects of zimelidine and desipramine on serotonin and noradrenaline uptake mechanisms in relation to plasma concentrations and to therapeutic effects during treatment of depression. Psychopharmacology (Berl)  1981; 74(4): 297-305.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00432735] [PMID: 6457309] 
[67] 
Brass EP, Polinsky R, Sramek JJ, et al. Effects of the cholinomimetic SDZ ENS-163 on scopolamine-induced cognitive impairment in humans. J Clin Psychopharmacol  1995; 15(1): 58-62.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004714-199502000-00009] [PMID: 7714229] 
[68] 
Tall AR, Rader DJ. The trials and tribulations of CETP inhibitors. Circ Res  2018; 122(1): 106-12.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.117.311978] [PMID: 29018035] 
[69] 
Derendorf H, Meibohm B. Modeling of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) relationships: concepts and perspectives. Pharm Res  1999; 16(2): 176-85.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1011907920641] [PMID: 10100300] 
[70] 
Wang W, Zhou H. Pharmacological considerations for predicting PK/PD at the site of action for therapeutic proteins. Drug Discov Today Technol  2016; 21-22: 35-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ddtec.2016.09.006] [PMID: 27978986] 
[71] 
Caruso A, Frances N, Meille C, Greiter-Wilke A, Hillebrecht A, Lavé T. Translational PK/PD modeling for cardiovascular safety assessment of drug candidates: Methods and examples in drug development. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods  2014; 70(1): 73-85.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vascn.2014.05.004] [PMID: 24879942] 
[72] 
Mager DE, Jusko WJ. Development of translational pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models. Clin Pharmacol Ther  2008; 83(6): 909-12.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/clpt.2008.52] [PMID: 18388873] 
[73] 
Stark JG, Werner S, Homrighausen S, et al. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling of total lymphocytes and selected subtypes after oral budesonide. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn  2006; 33(4): 441-59.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10928-006-9013-5] [PMID: 16633890] 
[74] 
Clark AJ. The mode of action of drugs on cells  London: Edward Arnold.  1933.
[75] 
Ariens EJ. Affinity and intrinsic activity in the theory of competitive inhibition. I. Problems and theory. Arch Int Pharmacodyn Ther  1954; 99(1): 32-49.
[PMID: 13229418] 
[76] 
Meibohm B, Derendorf H. Basic concepts of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) modelling. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther  1997; 35(10): 401-13.
[PMID: 9352388] 
[77] 
van der Graaf PH, Benson N. The role of quantitative systems pharmacology in the design of first-in-human trials. Clin Pharmacol Ther  2018; 104(5): 797.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpt.1145] [PMID: 29943816] 
[78] 
Shen J, Swift B, Mamelok R, Pine S, Sinclair J, Attar M. Design and Conduct Considerations for First-in-Human Trials. Clin Transl Sci  2019; 12(1): 6-19.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cts.12582] [PMID: 30048046] 
[79] 
Mick R, Ratain MJ. Model-guided determination of maximum tolerated dose in phase I clinical trials: evidence for increased precision. J Natl Cancer Inst  1993; 85(3): 217-23.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/85.3.217] [PMID: 8423626] 
[80] 
Perry K. From mouse to man: the early clinical testings. Drug Inf J  1997; 31(3): 729-36.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009286159703100313] 

Rights & Permissions Print Cite

Article Metrics

20

Journal Information

For Authors

For Editors

For Reviewers

Explore Articles

Open Access

Open Access Articles

For Visitors

DOI https://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1574887116666210204125844	Print ISSN 1574-8871
Publisher Name Bentham Science Publisher	Online ISSN 1876-1038

Reviews on Recent Clinical Trials

Phase 1 Clinical Trials of Small Molecules: Evolution and State of the Art

Abstract Play Pause

Graphical Abstract

Related Journals

Abstract