recognizing drug-induced liver injury (dili) in exposed populations
DESCRIPTION
Recognizing Drug-Induced Liver Injury (DILI) in Exposed Populations. John R. Senior, M.D. Associate Director for Science Office of Pharmacoepidemiology and Statistical Science Food and Drug Administration (FDA). - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
1
Recognizing Drug-Induced Liver Injury (DILI) in Exposed Populations
John R. Senior, M.D.Associate Director for Science
Office of Pharmacoepidemiology and Statistical Science
Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
2
Material presented here is based on the observations of the speaker for 20 years in academic hepatology and gastroenterology, 5 years as a senior executive in the pharmaceutical industry, 11 years in private consulting to industry, and upon 9.5 years at the FDA: 4.5 years as a medical reviewer for new gastrointestinal drugs, 3 as the Senior Scientific Advisor for hepatology in the Office of Drug Safety, 2 years as Associate Director for Science, Office of Pharmacoepidemiology and Statistical Science. Comments made here do not reflect official policies or positions of the Agency, but are personal opinions of the presenter based on his diverse experiences mentioned.
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
3
First, Detect it !– (if you don’t ask or look, you won’t get or find)
• Ask: Is there liver injury or disease?–serum transaminases, other enzymes, bilirubin, INR
• Is it progressive or serious?–progressive = getting worse or likely to do so–serious = disabling, life-threatening, fatal
• Drug-induced or some other cause?– no pathognomonic test for DILI, including biopsy– DILI may mimic any known liver disease
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
4
“some other causes”
• What are they?– mainly acute hepatitis : viral A or B, seldom C,
alcoholic, biliary stones, ischemic, or autoimmune; other causes rarer
• How can they be ruled out?– what information should be collected?
• What are the odds of other causes?– It’s really a problem of differential diagnosis.
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
5
Drug-Induced Liver Injury (DILI)
Most people exposed to a new drug show no injury;
“tolerators”
Some people show transient injury, but adapt;
“adaptors”
A few fail to adapt and show serious toxicity !
“susceptibles”
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
6
Drug-Induced Liver Injury (DILI)
“tolerators”
Time Course of Liver Tests"tolerator" - M47 - Gilbert's syndrome
0.1
1.0
10.0
100.0
-60 0 60
120
180
240
300
360
420
480
540
600
660
720
780
840
900
960
1020
1080
1140
1200
1260
1320
1380
1440
1500
1560
1620
1680
1740
1800
1860
1920
1980
2040
2100
Days Since Exposed to Drug
Test
Valu
es,
(xU
LN
) ALTx
ASTx
ALPx
TBLx
start drug stop drug
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
7
Drug-Induced Liver Injury (DILI)
“adaptors”
Time Course of Liver Tests"adaptor" - M63 - transaminase rises only
0.1
1.0
10.0
100.0
-60 0 60
120
180
240
300
360
420
480
540
600
660
720
780
840
900
960
1020
1080
1140
1200
1260
1320
1380
1440
1500
1560
1620
1680
1740
1800
1860
1920
1980
2040
2100
Days Since Exposed to Drug
Test
Valu
es,
xU
LN
ALTx
ASTx
ALPx
TBLx
start drug stop drug
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
8
Drug-Induced Liver Injury (DILI)
“susceptibles”
Time Course of AbnormalitiesPatient xxx F44, "susceptible"
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
-15 0
15
30
45
60
75
90
10
5
12
0
Study Day
Lo
g(1
0) o
f xU
LN
ALT
AST
ALP
GGT
TBL
start Drug stop Drug
------------hospitalized-----------------
ULN
10xULN
100xULN
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
9
… not DILI
Time Course of Liver Testsmale 72, placebo
0.1
1.0
10.0
100.0
-60
-30 0 30 60 90 120
150
180
210
240
270
300
330
360
390
420
450
480
510
540
570
600
Study Day
Te
st V
alu
es,
xU
LN
altx
astx
alkx
bilx
start drug stop drug
subacute hepatitis B
2xULN
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
10
Is It a Bad Drug or Is It aSusceptible Patient?
• Why do a few people not tolerate it?
• What’s different about them?
• Can we find out?
• A drug tolerated by nearly everybody except a very few cannot be considered “toxic.”
• And not give them this drug?
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
11
Given: Some Drugs are More Toxic
• many or most eliminated in development
• molecular variations in class
• differing potencies of variants
• therapeutic index varies
• variable PK ADME among patients
• variable PD responses in patients
• one dose may (will) not suit all patients
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
12
Relative Hepatotoxicity in Class“- glitazones” (thiazolidenediones)
peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor- (PPAR) agents
OCH2
CH2
S
NH
OO
CH3
CH3
OH
CH3
O
CH3
troglitazone (REZULIN)
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
13
OCH2
CH2
S
NH
OO
- glitazone (G)
- methoxy-phenyl-methyl- thiazolidinedione
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
14
The Glitazone Family
O
CH3
CH3
CH3
OH
CH3
N[G] N
N
CH3
[G][G]
tro-glitazoneREZULINSankyo 1963
pio-glitazoneACTOS
Takeda 1986
rosi-glitazoneAVANDIA
Beecham 1989
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
15
Other Drug “Families”
• “-profens”– benoxaprofen
– flurbiprofen
– ibuprofen
• “-fenacs”– ibufenac
– bromfenac
– diclofenac
• “-pidems”– alpidem
– zolpidem
• “-navirs”– ritonavir
– indinavir
– nefinavir
– saquinavir
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
16
Need research on . . .1) which cytochrome isoforms attack what part of the molecules?
2) which metabolites are more toxic?
3) proof that efficacy and toxicity are in different parts of same molecule ?
4) some rules to predict DILI
5) mechanisms causing the DILI
6) not just in animals, but in humans
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
17
Should We Be Looking More Carefully at the Patients ?
• Humans are often very different than animal models• They are incredibly diverse genetically• They resist being standardized or controlled• They take a lot of drugs, diets, supplements, alcohol• They have lots of other diseases/disorders/activities• The ones treated are not the same as the ones studied• They don’t always report troubles promptly
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
18
"" Our study is man, as the subject of accidents or Our study is man, as the subject of accidents or diseases. Were he always, inside and outside, cast diseases. Were he always, inside and outside, cast in the same mould, instead of differing from his in the same mould, instead of differing from his fellow man as much in constitution and in his fellow man as much in constitution and in his reaction to stimulus as in feature, we should ere reaction to stimulus as in feature, we should ere this have reached some settled principles in our art. this have reached some settled principles in our art. The practice of medicine is an art, based on The practice of medicine is an art, based on science ... it has not reached, perhaps never will, science ... it has not reached, perhaps never will, the dignity of a complete science, with exact laws, the dignity of a complete science, with exact laws, like astronomy or engineering.”like astronomy or engineering.”
William Osler, M.D. (1849-1919)William Osler, M.D. (1849-1919)““Teacher and Student,”Minneapolis 1892Teacher and Student,”Minneapolis 1892
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
19
"" …he who aspires to treat correctly of …he who aspires to treat correctly of human regimen must first acquire human regimen must first acquire knowledge and discernment of the knowledge and discernment of the nature of man in general nature of man in general –– knowledge knowledge of its primary constituents and of its primary constituents and discernment of the components by discernment of the components by which it is controlled.which it is controlled.… … though they are made from the though they are made from the same materials, no two are alike…”same materials, no two are alike…”
Hippocrates 460-377 B.C.Hippocrates 460-377 B.C.
The Father of MedicineThe Father of Medicine
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
20
HippocratesHippocrates ““Nature of Man”Nature of Man” elementselements qualities qualities constituents constituents
firefire hot hot blood bloodwaterwater wet wet phlegm phlegmairair cold cold bile - yellow bile - yellowearthearth dry dry bile - black bile - black
““Airs, Waters, Places”Airs, Waters, Places” “ “Epidemics”Epidemics”
“ “Nutriment”Nutriment”
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
21
Why Are They Susceptible ?“idio-sug-krasia” (Hippocrates, ~ 400 B.C.)
idios () - one’s own, selfsyn () - togethercrasis () - mixing, mixture
therefore, a person’s own individual mixture of characteristics, factors; “nature and nurture,” unique in the world
[it does NOT mean rare, unexpected, unexplained, although it may or may not be any or all of them]
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
22
(idiosugkrasia)(idiosugkrasia) s.f., (substantive, feminine) s.f., (substantive, feminine)
temperament; constitutiontemperament; constitution
Pocket Oxford Greek DictionaryPocket Oxford Greek DictionaryOxford University Press, Oxford UK, 2000Oxford University Press, Oxford UK, 2000
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
23
Factors in Idiosyncrasy
• genetic, bestowed at conception–gender–cytochromes, enzymes, transport systems
• acquired in life since conception–age, activities, travels–infections, immunities, diseases–diet, obesity, dietary supplements–other drugs, chemical exposures
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
24
Especially Susceptible Patients
• adverse effect, often not dose-related• may not be duration-related• may not depend on prior disease• unexpected, unpredictable (up to now)• risk factors not well known• toxicity often uncommon or rare• who are they? how can they be identified?
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
25
Drug Development Issues: Idiosyncratic Drug Toxicity
• Occurs despite careful preclinical testing in animals• … and despite careful and costly clinical trials• Some problem (perhaps wrong) assumptions:
– Assuming drug variability is the key to safety
– Obsolete concepts of “safe and effective” – for all?
– Assuming one dose/regimen suits all patients
– Focus on efficacy, little on safety (especially if rare)
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
26
Needles in the Haystack Tyranny of the Numbers - I
• if only 1 patient in 1000 reacts adversely to a drug, should we call the drug “toxic”?
• If 1 person in 1000 is idiosyncratically hyper-susceptible to show drug-induced liver injury, how many patients need to be observed to have 95% chance of finding at least 1?
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
27
A Binomial Answer . . .- if i = incidence of a rare event, and u = usual absence of the event, then (i + u) = 1, it happens or it doesn’t. And (i + u)N, where N = number of persons
- when uN, the chance of seeing no events in a group of N persons, is <0.05, then the chance of seeing at least one is >95%, because 1 – uN = 1- <0.05 = >95%
- for (0.001 + 0.999)N, need 2995 people to make (0.999)2995 = 0.04996, which is <0.05;
- in general, N 3/i for rare events.
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
28
Detection of Rare Safety Problems
• Before approval and marketing– NDA review: seldom have enough patients, so
rare but serious event may not be observed; but if they are seen, investigate!
• After marketing and clinical use– spontaneous, voluntary reporting useful, but
severely underreported and incomplete data– problems usually worse after marketing
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
29
Liver “Function” Tests• what are they ?• what do they mean ?Important: distinguish between liver
function and liver injury
• they’re the biomarkers we use
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
30
Commonly Used Tests
enzymes
“transaminases”: ALT
AST
alkaline phosphatase
gamma-glutamyl transferase
substances
bilirubin (total, “direct”)
albumin
prothrombin (INR)
injury
hepatocellular
cholestatic
function
excretory
synthetic
synthetic
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
31
Is Serum ALT a Liver Function Test ?
• serum enzymes not just from liver but also from skeletal and heart muscle, gut, etc.
• . . . so let’s not assume “liver”
• it is not a function or job of the liver to regulate the level of serum enzyme activity
• . . . so let’s not say “function”
• elevated serum ALT activity MAYMAY indicate hepatocellular injury
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
32
Is Serum Transaminase Enough?
Serum ALT > 3x ULN ?
DILI i
none u
totals
predictive power
Yes “positive”
95
999
1,094
8.7%
No “negative”
5
98,901
98,906
99.995%
incidence 1 per 1000
100
99,900
100,000
sensitivity 95%
specificity 99%
accuracy 99%
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
33
Need Very, Very Specific TestsTyranny of the Numbers - II
• For relatively low prevalence or incidence events, need extremely high specificity of test to avoid “finding” many false positives
• Almost impossible to find a hyper-specific test; compound tests may help: ALT+TBL
• Probably need to add clinical differential diagnostic data and methods to attain
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
34
Hy Zimmerman
1917-1999
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
35
ESTIMATED CASE FATALITY RATE IN DRUG-INDUCED ACUTE HEPATOCELLULAR INJURY
WITH NON-OBSTRUCTIVE JAUNDICE
DRUG APPARENT FATALITY RATE
alpha-methyldopa 10%
isoniazid >10%
iproniazid 15%
phenytoin >40%
cinchophen 50%
Halothane 50%
Zimmerman. HEPATOTOXICITY, 1978 & 1999
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
36
Intrinsic vs Idiosyncratic Toxicity
• “intrinsic”– predictable– dose-related– similar in animals– high incidence– short interval– types
• directly destructive• indirect, metabolic• cholestatic
• “idiosyncratic”– unpredictable– not dose-related – not seen in animals– low incidence, rare– variably longer interval– types
• hypersensitivity• metabolic
…H. Zimmerman, 1978
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
37
HZ…but that’s an oversimplification!“…this dichotomy into intrinsic toxicity or host idiosyncracy is an overly simplified formulation. The potential for injury is arranged along a spectrum, … modified by several different mechanisms.”
Relative Importance for Hepatotoxicity
phosphorusamanita phalloides
carbon tetrachloride anabolic steroidstetracycline
chlorpromazinephenytoin
penicillin
Intrinsic Toxicity ------------------------------------some of both--------------------------------------- Host Susceptibility___________________________________________________________________________________________
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
38
“Hy’s Law” ...for drug-induced hepatotoxicity
• If both hepatocellular injury and jaundice occur, look out for at least 10% mortality!
• i.e., when both transaminase and bilirubin elevations occur together.
Robert Temple, FDA, 1999
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
39
Searching for Clues, Predictors• Can ways be found to search pre-approval
clinical databases (NDA submissions) for clues or “signals” that predict liver failure in at least some who show the signal?
• Hy Zimmerman was on to a key concept - the combination of an indicator of injury and loss of overall function may be a valid predictor. It needs confirmation.
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
40
“Temple’s Corollary” ...for drug-induced hepatotoxicity:
Hy’s Law cases arise out of a background of increased incidence of transaminase elevations
• Hy’s Rule-type serious cases of DILI usually arise from a background of increased injury rates, so
• Look for more ALT elevations in those exposed to drug, compared to placebo or control drug.
Robert Temple, FDA, 2004
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
41
Distribution of Peak Values
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0-1
.0
-0.5 0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Log10(xULRR) peak ALT
Lo
g10
(xU
LR
R)
pea
k T
BL
placebo drug xxx
normal range Temple's Corollary
Hy's Law
Gilbert's;cholestasis
2xULRR
3xU
LRR
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
42
What to Do When a “Signal” Detected
“signal” = laboratory abnormality, complaint, finding
• immediately (within day or two) confirm by repeat tests, examination, questions
• investigate possible causes AT ONCE ! r/o disease• start close observation (3x/week) immediately• obtain more information about possible causes• obtain consultation as appropriate or needed• follow closely (weekly, prn) to normalization or
worsening and management decision
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
43
It may be DILI if it’s nothing else
• Diagnosis of exclusion; no test FOR DILI• Must gather data to rule out other causes• Need to educate “docs” to do it better• Develop model for quantitative likelihood estimate• Prospective large safety studies needed:
• for true incidence• for risk factors and to design risk management plans• for ‘omic’ analyses (gen-, prote-, metabon-) specimens
for elucidation of mechanisms
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
44
Tip of the Iceberg
Death or Tx
Acute Liver Failure
Serious DILI – Threatening
Detectable DILI – but Not Serious
Patient Adaptation to New Agent Exposure
Patients/People Tolerate Exposure Without Effects
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
45
Serious Adverse Events
• Often have relatively low incidence rate, i
• Difficult to establish correct value for i
• Voluntary reporting gives uncertain values
• May be missed in the usual efficacy trials
• Must balance modest clinical benefits for many against serious risks for a few
• Spontaneous reports (AERS) not enough
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
46
Retrospective Database Studies
• Epidemiologic, observational – closer to reality
• A definite improvement on spontaneous reports
• Limited to who was included, data recorded
• No attribution of causality; statistical differences
• Can improve estimates of incidence, risk factors
• But cannot investigate mechanisms or causes or “do it right” in real time, collect specimens
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
47
How many patients to study?
• Prospective, not retrospective
• Focus on safety, as drug actually prescribed
• Large and long enough to find rare events
• Full accounting, numbers of cases/exposed
• Use patient self-reporting, then investigate possible cases intensely; get needed info
• Prospective case-control design
• Impartial study conduct: NIH or AHRQ
28 January 2005 FDA/CDER-AASLD-PhRMA HepTox Steering Group
48
Prospective Large Safety Studies
• Offer best chance to learn, and to protect patients• Need to establish true incidence of DILI• Need to identify risk factors for rational RM• Need to investigate mechanisms• In best interests of everybody, including patients,
regulators, and sponsors• In 2005, are we content with safety meaning
“not poison,” and withdrawing “toxic” drugs ?