ICHS1B (R1) Step4 Presentation 2022 0809

TESTING FOR CARCINOGENICITY OF
PHARMACEUTICALS
S1B(R1)
Step 4 document – to be implemented
9 August 2022
International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements

for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use
1
ICH S1B(R1): Testing for Carcinogenicity of
Pharmaceuticals
Legal Notice
• This presentation is protected by copyright and may, with the exception of the ICH
logo, be used, reproduced, incorporated into other works, adapted, modified,
translated or distributed under a public license provided that ICH's copyright in the
presentation is acknowledged at all times. In case of any adaption, modification or
translation of the presentation, reasonable steps must be taken to clearly label,
demarcate or otherwise identify that changes were made to or based on the original
presentation. Any impression that the adaption, modification or translation of the
original presentation is endorsed or sponsored by the ICH must be avoided.
• The presentation is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. In no event shall
the ICH or the authors of the original presentation be liable for any claim, damages
or other liability arising from the use of the presentation.
• The above-mentioned permissions do not apply to content supplied by third parties.
Therefore, for documents where the copyright vests in a third party, permission for
reproduction must be obtained from this copyright holder.
2
ICH S1B(R1): Testing for Carcinogenicity
of Pharmaceuticals
Background
• This document has been signed off as Step 4 document (4
August 2022) to be implemented by the ICH Regulatory
Members.
• This document was developed based on a Concept Paper
(14 Nov 2012) and a Business Plan (14 Nov 2012).
• The Addendum to ICH S1B is supported by scientific
advances since S1B was adopted, several retrospective
analyses of pharmaceutical datasets, and an independent
international prospective study conducted by the ICH S1
EWG confirming that an integrative Weight of Evidence
(WoE) approach could be applied to adequately assess the
human carcinogenic risk for certain pharmaceuticals in lieu
of conducting a 2-year rat study without compromise to
patient safety.
3
of Pharmaceuticals
Key Principles
• This Addendum to ICH S1B introduces a more
comprehensive and integrative approach to assessing
human carcinogenic risk of pharmaceuticals.
• This integrative approach describes specific WoE criteria
that in some cases may provide an adequate assessment
of human carcinogenicity risk without data from a 2-year
rat carcinogenicity study.
• The Addendum encourages a more mechanism-based
human carcinogenicity risk assessment and may reduce
the use of animals in accordance with 3R
(reduce/refine/replace) principles while continuing safe and
ethical development of new pharmaceuticals.
4
of Pharmaceuticals
Guideline Objectives 1/2

• Scope: all pharmaceuticals where carcinogenicity
evaluations are recommended as described in ICH S1A.
• Objectives:
• Expand the testing scheme for assessing human carcinogenic
risk by introducing an integrative approach that provides
specific WoE criteria that inform whether a 2-year rat study is
likely to add value to a human carcinogenicity risk
assessment.
• Encourage a more mechanism-based approach to human
carcinogenicity risk assessment of pharmaceuticals starting
earlier in drug development.
5
of Pharmaceuticals
Guideline Objectives 2/2

• Objectives (continued):
• Reduce the use of animals in accordance with the 3R
principles and shift resources to focus on generating more
mechanism-based carcinogenicity assessments, while
continuing to promote safe and ethical development of new
pharmaceuticals.
• Add a plasma exposure ratio-based approach for setting the
high dose in the rasH2-Tg alternative mouse model.
6
of Pharmaceuticals
Table of Contents
PREAMBLE
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Scope of the Addendum
1.2 Purpose of the Addendum
1.3 Background
2. A WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE APPROACH TO ASSESS THE HUMAN

CARCINOGENIC POTENTIAL OF PHARMACEUTICALS
2.1 Factors to Consider for a WoE Assessment
2.2 Integration of WoE Factors for Assessing Human Carcinogenic Risk
2.3 Mouse Carcinogenicity Studies
3. CLARIFICATION ON CRITERIA FOR HIGH DOSE SELECTION BASED ON

EXPOSURE FOR RASH2-TG MOUSE CARCINOGENICITY STUDIES
REFERENCES
APPENDIX: CASE STUDIES APPLYING THE WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE 7
APPROACH
of Pharmaceuticals
Summary of Guideline Content 1/7

• This Addendum is to be used in close conjunction with ICH S1A
Guideline on the Need for Carcinogenicity Studies of
Pharmaceuticals, S1B Testing for Carcinogenicity of
Pharmaceuticals, and S1C(R2) Dose Selection for
Carcinogenicity Studies of Pharmaceuticals.
• The document references ICH S2(R1) Guidance on Genotoxicity
Testing and Data Interpretation for Pharmaceuticals Intended for
Human Use, and ICH S8 Immunotoxicity Studies for Human
Pharmaceuticals when conducting the WoE assessment.
• The Addendum extends to all pharmaceuticals needing
carcinogenicity testing as described in ICH S1A Guideline the
principles modelled for carcinogenicity assessment of
biotechnology-derived pharmaceuticals by ICH S6(R1) Preclinical
Safety Evaluation of Biotechnology-Derived Pharmaceuticals.
8
of Pharmaceuticals

An integrative WoE assessment approach as described in
Sections 2.1 and 2.2 may support a conclusion that the
carcinogenic potential of a pharmaceutical in humans is
either:
• likely, such that a 2-year rat carcinogenicity study would not
add value; or
• unlikely, such that a 2-year rat study would not add value; or
• uncertain, such that a 2-year rat carcinogenicity study would
add value to human risk assessment.
9
of Pharmaceuticals
Figure 1: Flow scheme outlining key steps and options in developing a carcinogenicity
assessment strategy and determining the added value of a 2-year rat study.
10
of Pharmaceuticals

Section 2.1: The WoE approach is based on a comprehensive
assessment of the totality of data relevant to carcinogenic potential
available from public sources and from relevant drug development
studies, including:
1) data that inform carcinogenic potential based on drug target biology and
the primary pharmacologic mechanism of the parent compound and
major human metabolites including carcinogenicity information on class
effects,
2) results from secondary pharmacology screens, especially those that
inform carcinogenic risk,
3) histopathology data from repeated-dose toxicity studies completed with
the compound, with particular emphasis on the 6-month rat study
including plasma exposure margin assessments,
4) evidence for hormonal perturbation,
5) genetic toxicology study data using criteria from ICH S2(R1),
6) evidence of immune modulation in accordance with ICH S8. 11
of Pharmaceuticals

Section 2.2: While all factors contribute to the integrated
analysis, the relative importance of each factor will vary
depending on the compound being considered.
• An established profile of other compound(s) in a drug class
contributes substantially to assessing human carcinogenic risk
associated with modulation of the pharmacologic target.
• While compounds with novel drug targets (i.e., first-in-class) are
considered eligible for an integrative WoE assessment, further
evidence that there is no cause-for-concern in regard to target
biology is needed to compensate for the lack of precedent.
• Case Study examples are provided in the Appendix
demonstrating how the WoE factors can be integrated to
determine the value of conducting a 2-year rat study for
assessment of human carcinogenic risk.
12
of Pharmaceuticals
Figure 2: Integration of key WoE factors and potential investigative approaches to

further inform on the value of conducting a 2-year rat study for assessment of human
carcinogenic risk.
13
of Pharmaceuticals

Section 3: A plasma exposure (AUC) ratio for high dose
selection in the rasH2-Tg model has not been globally
accepted as an endpoint.
• A retrospective evaluation of available data derived from the
rasH2-Tg mouse model was completed and indicates that a 50-
fold plasma exposure (AUC) ratio (rodent:human) is an adequate
criterion for high dose selection.
• All criteria for selection of the high dose for carcinogenicity
studies as specified in ICH S1C(R2) for 2-year rodent studies are
applicable to rasH2-Tg mice, including a plasma exposure (AUC)
ratio, except that the plasma exposure ratio will be 50-fold in
rasH2-Tg mice rather than 25-fold as for 2-year studies
conducted in standard strains of rodents.
14
of Pharmaceuticals
Considerations 1/2
• When the WoE assessment supports a conclusion that

conduct of a 2-year rat study does not add value to the
assessment of human carcinogenic risk, the sponsor
should seek consultation with the applicable Drug
Regulatory Agency (DRA) in accordance with the
established regulatory procedure for that region.
• When a sponsor decides to conduct a 2-year rat study
in accordance with ICH S1B, there is no obligation to
seek consultation with the DRA.
15
of Pharmaceuticals
Considerations 2/2
• A carcinogenicity study in mice, either a 2-year study
in a standard strain or a short-term study in a
transgenic model as in ICH S1B, remains a
recommended component of a carcinogenicity
assessment plan.
• There are cases where it may not be appropriate to
conduct a mouse carcinogenicity study such as when:
• the WoE assessment strongly indicates no carcinogenic risk
to humans and the data indicate that only subtherapeutic and
pharmacologically inactive drug levels relative to human
exposure can be achieved in the mouse, or
• the WoE assessment indicates that a compound is likely to be
carcinogenic in humans.
16
of Pharmaceuticals
Guidelines for Implementation

• With the implementation of the S1B(R1) Addendum, it
is anticipated that industry will generate and submit a
WoE-based carcinogenicity assessment for DRA
consideration when a sponsor concludes that a 2-year
rat study does not add value to human carcinogenicity
risk assessment.
• A 50-fold plasma exposure (AUC) ratio will be
considered as an adequate criterion for high dose
selection in the rasH2-Tg mouse model along with
other criteria specified in ICH S1C(R2).
17
of Pharmaceuticals
Conclusions
• ICH S1B(R1) introduces a more integrated approach to
assess the human carcinogenic risk of
pharmaceuticals, using WoE criteria evaluated on a
case-by-case basis in lieu of always conducting a 2-
year rat study.
• A plasma exposure (AUC) ratio of 50-fold is an
adequate criterion for high dose selection for
carcinogenicity studies in the rasH2-Tg mouse model.
International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements

for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use
18
of Pharmaceuticals
Contact
• For any questions please contact the ICH Secretariat:
admin@ich.org
19

ICHS1B (R1) Step4 Presentation 2022 0809

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ICHS1B (R1) Step4 Presentation 2022 0809

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ICHS1B (R1) Step4 Presentation 2022 0809

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TESTING FOR CARCINOGENICITY OF

International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements

Guideline Objectives 1/2

Guideline Objectives 2/2

2. A WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE APPROACH TO ASSESS THE HUMAN

3. CLARIFICATION ON CRITERIA FOR HIGH DOSE SELECTION BASED ON

Summary of Guideline Content 1/7

Summary of Guideline Content 2/7

Summary of Guideline Content 4/7

Summary of Guideline Content 5/7

Summary of Guideline Content 6/7

Figure 2: Integration of key WoE factors and potential investigative approaches to

Summary of Guideline Content 7/7

• When the WoE assessment supports a conclusion that

Guidelines for Implementation

International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements

You might also like