ToxSci Advance Access published online on March 15, 2007
Toxicological Sciences, doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfm056
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A Strategy in Genotoxicity Testing in Drug Development: Some Examples
* Servier Group, Drug Safety Assessment, 45403 Orléans-Gidy, France H Servier Group, Institut de Recherches Internationales Servier, 92400 Courbevoie, France
1 Biologie Servier BP 43255, 45403 Fleury-les-Aubrais, France; elisabeth.lorge{at}fr.netgrs.com; Fax: +33 2 38 23 86 50.
Received January 25, 2007; revision received March 7, 2007; accepted March 7, 2007
| Abstract |
|---|
The minimal 3-test battery of the ICH guideline has been in use since 1997 for the development of new pharmaceuticals (ICH, 1997). After a 10-year experience of this core battery in regulatory genotoxicity testing, everywhere the time has come for reflection about what was learned from this experience. Different aspects of genotoxicity testing are currently being debated under different organizations (IWGT, 2007; Kirkland et al., 2007; HESI, 2006). The main concerns are to develop relevant strategies and adequate complementary tests to the minimal battery, appropriate for each specific case to assess risk for humans when in vitro positive results or findings in rodent bioassays for carcinogenicity are found. In this paper, an example of an in-house decision-tree is shown, with some options which can contribute to the current reflections. Additionally, tools built for early genotoxicity are presented.
Key Words: Drug Safety; Genotoxicity Strategy; Genotoxicity Battery.