Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32236952›Full record

ArticleClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2020

Pharmacogenetic-Pharmacokinetic Interactions in Drug Marketing Authorization Applications via the European Medicines Agency Between 2014 and 2017.

Marc Maliepaard, Timi Toiviainen, Marie L De Bruin, Didier Meulendijks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Cannabis Pharmacogenomics: A Path to Personalized Medicine.Current issues in molecular biology · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Marc MaliepaardDutch Medicines Evaluation Board (CBG-MEB), Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2351-6814
Timi ToiviainenDutch Medicines Evaluation Board (CBG-MEB), Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5038-2017
Marie L De BruinCopenhagen Centre for Regulatory Science, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-9197-7068
Didier MeulendijksDutch Medicines Evaluation Board (CBG-MEB), Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4580-426X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to determine to which extent data on potential pharmacogenetic-pharmacokinetic (PG-PK) interactions are provided to, and assessed by, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in novel drug marketing authorization applications (MAAs), and whether regulatory assessment of PG-PK interactions is adequate or could be optimized. For this purpose, we retrospectively analyzed MAAs of small molecule drugs assessed by the EMA between January 2014 and December 2017. As per two key requirements in the EMA's guideline, we analyzed cases where (i) a single functionally polymorphic drug metabolizing enzyme (DME) metabolizes > 25% of the drug, or (ii) the drug's PK shows high interindividual variability not explained by other factors than PG. Results showed that, of 113 drugs analyzed, 53 (47%) had ≥ 1 functionally polymorphic DME accounting for > 25% of the drug's metabolism, yielding 55 gene-drug pairs. For 36 of 53 (68%) of the products, CYP3A4 was the major DME. Compliance with European Union (EU) guidance on PG-PK issues in drug development was notably different for CYP3A4 substrates vs. non-CYP3A4 substrates. Adequate PG-PK data were provided during registration in 89% (16/18) of cases concerning non-CYP3A4 substrates, compared with 32% (12/37) of cases concerning CYP3A4 substrates. Concluding, PG-PK interactions related to non-CYP3A4 substrate drugs were, in general, addressed adequately in EU MAAs. PG-PK information on CYP3A4 substrates was available less frequently, despite some available evidence on the functional relevance of CYP3A4 polymorphisms. A more harmonized approach toward assessment of PG-PK issues in EU MAAs seems warranted, and a discussion on the relevance of CYP3A4 polymorphisms, such as CYP3A4*22, is recommended.

Indexed as

Drug ApprovalDrug InteractionsGovernment AgenciesPharmacogeneticsPharmacogenomic VariantsPolymorphism, GeneticCytochrome P-450 CYP3ACytochrome P-450 CYP3A InducersCytochrome P-450 CYP3A InhibitorsEuropeHumansPatient SafetyPharmacokineticsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentCYP3A4 protein, humanCytochrome P-450 CYP3ACytochrome P-450 CYP3A InducersCytochrome P-450 CYP3A Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID32236952
PMCPMC7484984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.