著者
斎藤 嘉朗 中村 亮介
出版者
公益社団法人 日本薬学会
雑誌
YAKUGAKU ZASSHI (ISSN:00316903)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.139, no.12, pp.1557-1562, 2019-12-01 (Released:2019-12-01)
参考文献数
15
被引用文献数
2

Severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs) are important in postmarketing drug safety because SCAR patients were highest in the adverse drug reaction relief system of Japan. The SCAR symptoms of Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) include high fever, severe mucosal impairment, and epidermal necrosis-induced erosions and blisters. Approximately 600 cases of SJS and 300 cases of TEN are reported annually in Japan. Many suspected drugs such as acetaminophen, lamotrigine, allopurinol, and carbamazepine have been reported. Over the last 15 years, an association between human leukocyte antigen and SJS/TEN onset has been reported with several drugs. Pathophysiological examinations in those reports revealed marked CD8-positive T cell infiltration into epidermal lesions, and the presence of cytotoxic granulysin, soluble Fas ligand, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α in blister fluid. Therefore, SJS and TEN are immunological disorders that lead to epidermal necrosis and are consequently treated with the systemic administration of corticosteroids and with high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin therapy and plasma exchange in severe cases. Additionally, because the epidermal necrosis has characteristics similar to those of organ rejection after transplantation, the administration of cyclosporine, an immunosuppressant that inhibits helper T cell activation, has been attempted. Further, the administration of the TNF-α inhibitor etanercept has also been reported. This review summarizes current knowledge on the mechanisms of onset of SJS/TEN and their treatments.
著者
青木 良子 佐井 君江 勝田 由紀子 鈴木 美佳 鈴木 康夫 石井 明子 斎藤 嘉朗
出版者
公益社団法人 日本薬学会
雑誌
YAKUGAKU ZASSHI (ISSN:00316903)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.142, no.5, pp.547-560, 2022-05-01 (Released:2022-05-01)
参考文献数
19
被引用文献数
1

Biosimilars are less expensive than their originators, and Japanese government policies call for their development and promotion. However, the adoption and prescription of some biosimilars, especially antibody/its-related ones, have been delayed for use in Japan, possibly due to concerns on the differences in quality attributes such as glycan structures between the originators and their biosimilars, and that clinical efficacy/safety studies are conducted for usually one disease and its results extrapolated to other indications. We conducted a questionnaire survey among physicians in four disease areas (hematology, medical oncology, rheumatoid arthritis, and inflammatory bowel disease), where biosimilars of antibody/its-related drugs have been approved, regarding their thoughts on the adoption and prescription of biosimilars in Japan from January to April 2020. We received totally 1024 responses. When adopting biosimilars and explaining them to patients, physicians requested specific information including the comparative results of phase III clinical trials and quality characteristics between biosimilars and their originators; the results of clinical studies on switching from originators to their biosimilars; and a comparison of the estimated cost on patients in consideration of the high medical cost payment system. Priority differed depending on the studied disease areas. In terms of post-marketing information, physicians requested a variety of information. When explaining biosimilars to the patients, physicians would like to use general material from government describing the comparability between originators and their biosimilars. These results suggest that physicians sought more comparative information on the quality, efficacy, and patients' cost between originators and their biosimilars when adopting or prescribing biosimilars.
著者
斎藤 嘉朗 宇山 佳明 佐井 君江 頭金 正博
出版者
一般社団法人 レギュラトリーサイエンス学会
雑誌
レギュラトリーサイエンス学会誌 (ISSN:21857113)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.7, no.1, pp.61-69, 2017 (Released:2017-01-31)
参考文献数
14

近年, 本邦における医薬品開発時の臨床試験は, 国内治験, ブリッジングから国際共同治験へと, その戦略は移りつつある. そのため, 複数の国内のガイドラインが整備されてきたが, 2014年よりICHトピック (E17 「国際共同治験の計画及びデザインに関する一般原則」) に採用され, 2016年にパブリックコメント募集のためガイドライン案として公表された. 一方, 国際共同治験の大半を占める日米欧を中心とした多地域国際共同治験に加え, 遺伝的・文化的に類似している東アジア諸国を対象にした国際共同治験も一定程度実施されている. しかし, 医薬品の薬物動態や応答性における民族差は, 東アジア諸国間においても, 存在する可能性が指摘されている. そこで, 日中韓薬事関係局長級会合の活動のひとつとして, 日本が主導する形で民族差に関する科学的検討が継続的になされている. 日中韓および白人を対象に3種の医薬品に関して行った臨床薬物動態試験では, 遺伝子多型による層別化と当該医薬品の薬物動態に重要な外的要因を均一化したプロトコトールにより, みかけの民族差は認められなくなることが明らかとなった. また50種以上の機能変化を有する遺伝子多型に関し, アレル頻度の民族差を調査したところ, 東アジア民族間で, 薬物代謝酵素およびトランスポーターについては概して大きな頻度差は認められないものの, 副作用に関連するHLA型では民族差が認められた. これまでの, そして今後の研究成果が, 東アジア国際共同治験の推進による, 東アジアの人々の医薬品アクセス向上に資することを期待する.
著者
石井 明子 斎藤 嘉朗
出版者
一般社団法人 日本臨床薬理学会
雑誌
日本臨床薬理学会学術総会抄録集
巻号頁・発行日
vol.42, pp.3-S47-4, 2021

<p>感染症ワクチンの有効性の評価においては,免疫原性(immunogenicity),臨床試験での有効率(efficacy),実社会での有効率(effectiveness)が指標となり得るが,新型コロナウイルスワクチンの評価の考え方(令和2年9月2日PMDAワクチン等審査部)では,原則として臨床試験における発症予防効果を主要評価項目とすべきとの見解が示されている.一方で,海外で発症予防効果を主要評価項目とした大規模な検証的臨床試験が実施される場合には,日本人における免疫原性及び安全性を確認することを目的とした国内臨床試験を実施することで十分な場合がある(新型コロナワクチン審査報告書)とされ,これまでに本邦で特例承認された3種類の新型コロナワクチンでは,免疫原性及び安全性の確認を目的とした国内臨床試験が行われた.さらに,変異株ワクチンの有効性及び安全性評価における考え方が補遺1として示され(令和3年4月5日),既承認のワクチンを改良した変異株ワクチンの有効性については,中和抗体陽転率,及び中和抗体価の幾何平均値を主要評価項目とするとされている. </p><p>新型コロナワクチン国内臨床試験における免疫原性の評価では,Sタンパク質特異的抗体価,及びウイルスあるいはシュードウイルスを用いた中和抗体価が測定された.ここで得られる抗体価は用いる測定系に依存する値であるため,一つの臨床試験の中で群間の比較を行うことは可能であるが,異なる測定系で得られた値を比較することはできない.今後,国内で開発される新型コロナワクチンの臨床試験における有効性評価や,既存ワクチンの2回接種後の追加接種の必要性の検討,実社会における各自の免疫状態の調査等において,抗体価の標準化が重要な課題の一つとなる.2020年12月にWHOが最初の新型コロナウイルス抗体国際標準品を策定し,中和活性に関するIU(International Unit),及び結合活性に関するBAU(Binding Antibody Unit)が定められた.今後は,この国際標準品を基準に標準化が図られると考えられるが,普及は十分でなく標準化は緒についたばかりである.本講演では,新型コロナワクチンの有効性評価に関して,特に抗体測定法と標準化の観点から現状と課題について考察するとともに,令和2年度に実施した,抗体検査キットの一斉性能評価試験の結果を紹介する.</p>
著者
辻 大樹 斎藤 嘉朗 莚田 泰誠 三浦 昌朋 平 大樹 寺田 智祐
出版者
一般社団法人日本医療薬学会
雑誌
医療薬学 (ISSN:1346342X)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.46, no.2, pp.66-76, 2020-02-10 (Released:2021-02-10)
参考文献数
12
被引用文献数
1 2

Given that the cancer gene panel test was approved in June 2019, precision medicine based on the information about somatic mutation is expected to be widely available. Similarly, pharmacogenomics (PGx) associated with germline genes, such as drug-metabolizing enzymes, could also be effective tools. However, its clinical implementation has been delayed.To address this issue, we conducted a survey regarding pharmacists’ involvement in “cancer genomic medicine (CGM)” and actual use of PGx and therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). The response rate of the survey was 96.8% (121/125).According to this survey, genetic polymorphism analysis for irinotecan (UGT1A1), which is approved for genetic testing, was most commonly used. Among the tests not covered by insurance, tacrolimus (CYP3A5) and voriconazole (CYP2C19) were commonly used. Only a few facilities conducted PGx tests. Unlike PGx, many drugs are covered by insurance for TDM, which was commonly used. Vancomycin was most commonly used, followed by teicoplanin and cyclosporine. Regarding CGM, it was found that the pharmacists were most commonly involved in dose adjustment support, followed by support for selection of anti-cancer agents. Pharmacists’ participation in the expert panel was 21.3%.This survey revealed that PGx testing is less common compared with TDM. PGx of drug-metabolizing enzymes could potentially influence adverse reactions and efficacy. It might be possible to provide individualized pharmacotherapy if PGx testing could be performed at the same time as gene panel tests. Insurance-covered PGx testing may increase in the future if more high-quality clinical trials are conducted and its usefulness is validated.
著者
頭金 正博 斎藤 嘉朗
出版者
公益社団法人 日本薬学会
雑誌
YAKUGAKU ZASSHI (ISSN:00316903)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.135, no.5, pp.649-653, 2015-05-01 (Released:2015-05-01)
参考文献数
10
被引用文献数
2 1

New drug development (NDD) for intractable diseases such as cancer and Alzheimer's disease has been challenging in recent years because it is difficult to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of new drugs and the response of individual patients. Thus biomarkers might be a useful tool to facilitate NDD because they can be used to evaluate accurately drug responses. Biomarkers include proteins, metabolites, and genetic targets; imaging data and can also be used in pre-clinical studies, clinical trials, and post-marketing surveillance. In pre-clinical studies, biomarkers are used as an index of the pharmacological and toxicological effects of a new drug, which may help to predict the clinical response. In clinical studies, biomarkers are widely used as an index of clinical efficacy and safety for dose-adjustment and for patient selection. In post-clinical studies, biomarkers may facilitate the evaluation of drug responses, as well as aid improvements in drug efficacy. Several points should be considered for biomarker-guided NDD. First, the clinical study design is very important and must be suitable to permit the use of the relevant biomarkers. The analytical methods should be carefully evaluated, and evidence should be provided regarding the physiological significance and relevance of the biomarker with regard to its intended use. Regulatory sciences are required to resolve these issues and bridge the gap between basic science and clinical studies that involve biomarkers.