Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
At the present time, there are no uniform standards for the duration of non-rodent chronic toxicity studies. The European Union (EU) requires a 6-month non-rodent study. In Japan, a 6-month study is sufficient for most, but not all, compounds. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) maintains its standard duration of 12 months for non-rodents, with 6-month studies accepted for some clinical indications on a case-by-case basis. To achieve harmonization on the duration of non-rodent toxicity studies, each member regulatory region (EU, U.S., and Japan) of the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) collected non-rodent studies with significant new toxicological findings that had occurred after 6 months. An ICH expert working group was organized that included representatives from the regulatory authorities of each ICH region, to jointly review all available case studies for the purpose of arriving at a consensus on the best duration time for non-rodent toxicity studies. Eighteen case studies were identified and evaluated (16 original cases plus 2 additional FDA cases); most of the toxicities identified fell into the following categories: (1) toxicities identified at 6 months; (2) toxicities observed at 12 months, which were absent or considered isolated and not noteworthy findings at 6 months; (3) drug-related deaths or morbidity that occurred between 6 and 12 months, with a pattern of toxicity that permitted the interpolation of findings to an intermediate interval between 6 and 12 months; and (4) a shift in the dose response for toxicity with increasing duration of drug exposure. Of the 18 cases evaluated, 11 supported a study-duration of 9-12 months, 4 supported a duration of 12 months, and the 3 remaining cases indicated that a 6-month study would be adequate. The working group concluded that there was sufficient evidence to support a harmonized 9-month duration for non-rodent toxicity studies, which would be applicable for most categories of pharmaceuticals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Joseph J. DeGeorge (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: