Clinical Pharmacology & Biopharmaceutics
Open Access

Microdosing; Early-phase clinical trials; Drug development; Pharmacokinetics; Pharmacodynamics; Safety profiling; Therapeutic dose; Regulatory considerations; Clinical research; Drug efficacy; Minimal risk

Introduction

The process of developing a new drug is long, costly, and fraught with uncertainties, especially in the early stages of clinical trials. Traditionally, these trials start with high doses to evaluate safety, which can expose participants to unnecessary risks. However, the introduction of microdosing as an alternative approach has revolutionized early-phase clinical trials. Microdosing involves the administration of subtherapeutic doses—typically 1/100th to 1/1000th of the expected therapeutic dose—allowing researchers to study the pharmacokinetics (ADME: absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion) of a drug in humans with minimal risk to participants [1].

This approach provides an opportunity to gather critical information on a drug’s behavior in the human body before proceeding with higher, potentially riskier doses. It allows for more accurate predictions of a drug's efficacy and safety at later stages of development. One of the major benefits of microdosing is the ability to detect drug interactions, assess metabolic pathways, and observe how a drug is absorbed and excreted, all while minimizing adverse effects. It has proven especially useful for compounds that may exhibit unpredictable behavior in human trials, enabling scientists to make more informed decisions about dose escalation in subsequent studies.

Microdosing also accelerates the clinical trial process, reducing the time and financial resources spent on early-phase trials. By enabling faster identification of the most promising drug candidates, it facilitates a quicker transition to Phase II and Phase III trials, where larger doses are tested for therapeutic effects. In addition, the data gathered from microdosing studies can improve safety profiling, ensuring that drugs are better understood and safer for larger populations before widespread use

The regulatory acceptance of microdosing has also contributed to its growing popularity in early-phase clinical trials. Regulatory bodies like the FDA and EMA have issued guidelines to ensure that microdosing studies are conducted in a way that balances innovation with patient safety. These guidelines emphasize the need for comprehensive pharmacokinetic studies, toxicity assessments, and close monitoring of participants to avoid any potential adverse effects.

Despite its advantages, microdosing is not without limitations. The challenge of accurately extrapolating data from very low doses to predict therapeutic outcomes at higher doses remains a key concern. Furthermore, microdosing may not be suitable for all types of drugs, particularly those with complex or unpredictable pharmacodynamics. As a result, careful consideration must be given to the drug’s characteristics and the specific goals of the clinical trial before adopting a microdosing strategy

In this paper, we will explore the concept of microdosing in early-phase clinical trials, its role in drug development, its benefits in terms of safety and efficiency, and the challenges that researchers face in its application. We will also discuss the future potential of microdosing as an integral part of modern drug development, providing a valuable tool for enhancing the safety and efficacy of new treatments.

Materials and Methods

The materials and methods for a study focused on microdosing in early-phase clinical trials typically involve the preparation, formulation, administration, and assessment of a microdose in a clinical trial setting. Below is a general overview of the key components that would be involved in such a study:

Drug selection and formulation

The drug selected for microdosing must be well-characterized, with prior in-vitro studies demonstrating sufficient understanding of its pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Ideal candidates for microdosing include compounds that are expected to exhibit predictable behavior at subtherapeutic doses.

Drug selection criteria

Well-established pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles from preclinical studies.

A drug with low toxicity at therapeutic doses.

Suitable for the intended therapeutic area and designed to undergo significant metabolism.

Formulation preparation

A microdose formulation of the drug is developed, ensuring that the dose is subtherapeutic but retains the drug’s bioavailability and stability.

The formulation typically involves an oral, intravenous, or subcutaneous route of administration depending on the drug’s properties and the study design [2].

Study design

Microdosing studies are generally designed as single-dose, open-label studies, often employing a sequential cohort model. These studies usually aim to investigate the pharmacokinetics and safety profile of the drug at extremely low doses in healthy volunteers.

Study population

Healthy adult volunteers (typically aged 18-50 years) with no history of major medical conditions.

Participants must be screened for any contraindications, including allergies to the study drug, pregnancy, or lactation [3].

The study population size is typically small (20-40 participants) due to the subtherapeutic nature of the doses administered.

Ethical considerations

The study must be approved by an institutional review board (IRB) or ethics committee.

Informed consent is obtained from all participants, who are made aware of the risks, even though the doses used are subtherapeutic.

Participants are monitored for any adverse effects throughout the study period [4].

Dosing regimen

The dosing regimen for microdosing studies involves the administration of a drug at a dose much lower than the typical therapeutic dose.

Dose selection

A dose of approximately 1/100th to 1/1000th of the estimated therapeutic dose is used.

The microdose is chosen to be sufficiently low to avoid pharmacological effects but high enough to allow for accurate pharmacokinetic analysis [5].

Route of administration

The drug may be administered via oral, intravenous, or subcutaneous routes depending on its formulation.

The route is selected based on the drug’s expected bioavailability and intended therapeutic use.

Time points

Blood samples are collected at multiple time points after dosing (e.g., 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, and 24 hours) to monitor the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion (ADME) of the drug.

Urine and fecal samples may also be collected to assess excretion [6].

Analytical methods

Pharmacokinetic parameters are assessed using sensitive and validated analytical techniques, typically employing mass spectrometry-based assays.

Blood sampling and analysis

Plasma or serum concentrations of the drug are measured at predetermined time points using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) or liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS).

Key pharmacokinetic parameters, such as peak plasma concentration (C_max), time to peak concentration (T_max), half-life (T_½), and area under the curve (AUC), are determined [7].

Urinary and fecal analysis

Urine and fecal samples are analyzed to assess the excretion patterns of the drug.

Quantification of the drug or its metabolites is carried out to determine renal clearance and fecal elimination.

Safety and toxicity monitoring

Participants are closely monitored for any adverse events or reactions throughout the study.

Vital signs (e.g., heart rate, blood pressure, body temperature) are regularly checked.

Laboratory tests, including blood chemistries and hematology, are conducted to assess any signs of toxicity.

Data analysis

Data from the pharmacokinetic and safety assessments are analyzed using standard pharmacokinetic modeling techniques [8].

Pharmacokinetic modeling

The pharmacokinetic data are analyzed to generate concentration-time curves.

A variety of models (e.g., compartmental or non-compartmental analysis) are used to calculate the aforementioned pharmacokinetic parameters.

Safety data analysis

The safety of the drug is evaluated by comparing baseline and post-dosing clinical and laboratory measurements.

Any adverse events, including mild symptoms such as headaches or nausea, are documented and analyzed to assess the risk profile of the microdosed drug [9].

Regulatory and ethical considerations

Regulatory guidelines

Microdosing studies are conducted in accordance with regulatory guidelines set by health authorities such as the U.S. FDA, European Medicines Agency (EMA), and ICH-GCP (Good Clinical Practice).

These guidelines help ensure that microdosing studies are safe, well-monitored, and scientifically valid.

Informed consent

Detailed informed consent is obtained from each participant, ensuring they understand the nature of microdosing, its potential risks, and the fact that the doses administered are far below the therapeutic threshold.

Statistical methods

Data from the study are analyzed using appropriate statistical methods. Typically, non-compartmental pharmacokinetic analysis is used to derive relevant pharmacokinetic parameters. Descriptive statistics (e.g., mean, standard deviation) are used to report data, and inferential statistical tests (e.g., paired t-tests) may be used to compare changes in vital signs and laboratory values before and after drug administration [10].

Discussion

Microdosing in early-phase clinical trials represents a transformative strategy in the landscape of drug development. By administering subtherapeutic doses of a drug, microdosing allows for the early acquisition of essential pharmacokinetic (PK) data, which is pivotal for understanding a drug's behavior in the human body. This approach contrasts sharply with traditional clinical trial methods, which typically begin with full therapeutic doses. Microdosing's primary advantage lies in its ability to minimize risk while providing valuable insights into a drug’s absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion (ADME) processes.

One of the key benefits of microdosing is its ability to enhance the safety profile of a drug early in development. By exposing participants to minimal amounts of the drug, the likelihood of adverse events is significantly reduced, making it an ideal method for investigating compounds with potentially unpredictable effects. This safety-first approach also allows for quicker identification of undesirable properties, such as toxicity or poor bioavailability, which can be crucial for early-stage decision-making. As a result, microdosing helps in identifying the most appropriate therapeutic dose for subsequent clinical phases, potentially reducing the overall risk for future participants.

Moreover, microdosing has proven invaluable in accelerating the drug development timeline. Traditional drug development, which often involves lengthy and costly Phase I studies, can be expedited by providing crucial information from microdosing studies. This allows researchers to make data-driven decisions about whether a drug is worth advancing into higher-dose trials or if it needs to be abandoned earlier in the process. Microdosing can particularly expedite the development of drugs that are targeted at specific, niche therapeutic areas or have a limited market, ensuring that only the most promising candidates are taken forward.

Another noteworthy advantage is the reduced cost of early-phase clinical trials. By minimizing the number of participants required, lowering the dose, and using faster analysis techniques, microdosing studies are more cost-effective compared to traditional methods. This is especially relevant in the context of pharmaceutical companies facing economic pressures to shorten development cycles while maintaining safety standards.

Despite these advantages, microdosing is not without limitations. A key challenge is the difficulty of extrapolating pharmacokinetic data from microdoses to predict therapeutic effects at higher doses. Since the subtherapeutic doses administered in microdosing trials often do not produce pharmacological effects, understanding how a drug will behave at therapeutic doses remains an area of uncertainty. This issue is particularly relevant for drugs that have nonlinear dose-response relationships or those that involve complex metabolism and drug-receptor interactions.

Furthermore, while microdosing can provide valuable PK data, it does not provide insights into the full pharmacodynamics (PD) of a drug, such as its therapeutic efficacy or potential side effects at higher doses. Consequently, microdosing is typically used as a preliminary step, followed by traditional dose-escalation studies to assess a drug’s pharmacodynamics and long-term safety.

Another concern is the applicability of microdosing to all types of drugs. Certain compounds, particularly those with narrow therapeutic windows or complex dose-response relationships, may not be suitable for microdosing studies. Drugs that rely heavily on specific receptor interactions or those with a significant risk of metabolic or pharmacokinetic variability may require more thorough early-phase testing with higher doses to understand their effects fully.

Regulatory considerations also play a crucial role in the successful implementation of microdosing in clinical trials. Regulatory bodies, such as the FDA and EMA, have provided guidelines for conducting microdosing studies, but they emphasize the need for rigorous safety monitoring and validation of data. These guidelines ensure that microdosing remains a controlled and reliable method, preventing any unanticipated risks during the trial.

In conclusion, microdosing represents a valuable tool in early-phase drug development, providing essential pharmacokinetic information with minimal risk to participants. While it cannot replace traditional clinical trials for assessing therapeutic efficacy, it significantly enhances safety profiling and accelerates the overall drug development process. The future of microdosing looks promising, particularly with advances in analytical technologies and a deeper understanding of pharmacokinetic modeling. As the method continues to evolve, its integration into clinical research has the potential to reshape how drugs are developed and tested, ultimately leading to safer, more effective therapies with reduced development costs and timelines.

Conclusion

Microdosing has emerged as a transformative approach in early-phase clinical trials, offering a novel and highly efficient method for evaluating the pharmacokinetics and safety of new drugs with minimal risk to participants. By administering doses significantly lower than therapeutic levels, microdosing allows researchers to gather critical data on how a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and excreted in the human body, without exposing participants to the risks associated with higher doses. This method not only accelerates the drug development process but also enhances the safety profiling of new compounds, ensuring that potential issues are identified early on.

The primary advantage of microdosing is its ability to provide vital pharmacokinetic information that can help optimize dosing strategies for subsequent clinical trial phases. This early insight can significantly reduce the likelihood of progressing drugs with unfavorable properties, ultimately improving the chances of clinical success. Additionally, microdosing can shorten the timeline of drug development by providing quick, reliable data with fewer participants, making it an especially cost-effective alternative to traditional Phase I trials.

However, microdosing does have limitations that must be considered. While it provides valuable pharmacokinetic data, it does not offer insights into the pharmacodynamics of a drug, such as its therapeutic efficacy or side effects at higher doses. As such, microdosing is typically used as a preliminary step, followed by conventional dose-escalation studies to fully evaluate a drug’s therapeutic potential. Furthermore, certain drugs, especially those with complex pharmacodynamics or narrow therapeutic windows, may not be suitable candidates for microdosing.

The regulatory landscape for microdosing has evolved to support its safe and effective use in clinical trials. Regulatory agencies such as the FDA and EMA have established guidelines for conducting microdosing studies, ensuring that these trials are rigorously designed and closely monitored to protect participant safety. These regulatory frameworks help maintain public trust in the microdosing approach, ensuring that the benefits of this strategy are realized without compromising safety.

Looking to the future, microdosing holds significant promise in the field of drug development. Advances in analytical techniques, such as improved mass spectrometry and pharmacokinetic modeling, will further enhance the precision and utility of microdosing studies. As pharmaceutical companies continue to face pressures to accelerate drug development, microdosing presents an invaluable tool for identifying the most promising drug candidates early in the process, ultimately leading to safer, more effective therapies reaching the market faster. Microdosing, when used alongside traditional methods, has the potential to reshape clinical trial design and contribute to a more efficient, cost-effective drug development pipeline.

Conflict of Interest

None

Acknowledgment

None

1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A (2022) Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 72:7-33.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

2. Underwood S, Lyratzopoulos G, Saunders CL (2023) Breast, Prostate, Colorectal, and Lung Cancer Incidence and Risk Factors in Women Who Have Sex with Women and Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analysis Using UK Biobank. Cancers 15:2031.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

3. Galasso I, Erikainen S, Pickersgill M, Testa G (2024) “Different names for the same thing”? Novelty, expectations, and performative nominalism in personalized and precision medicine. Soc Theory Health 1-17.

Google Scholar, Crossref

4. Wild CP (2019) The global cancer burden: Necessity is the mother of prevention. Nat Rev Cancer 19:123-124.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

5. Atlihan-Gundogdu E, Ilem-Ozdemir D, Ekinci M, Ozgenc E, Demir ES, et al. (2020) Recent developments in cancer therapy and diagnosis. J Pharm Investig 50:349-361.

Google Scholar

6. Chen M, Ren YX, Xie Y, Lu WL (2020) Gene regulations and delivery vectors for treatment of cancer. J Pharm Investig 50:309-326.

Google Scholar, Crossref

7. Tariq H, Bokhari SAI (2020) Surface-functionalized hybrid nanoparticles for targeted treatment of cancer. IET Nanobiotechnol 14:537-547.

Google Scholar, Crossref

8. Moorthi C, Manavalan R, Kathiresan K (2011) Nanotherapeutics to Overcome Conventional Cancer Chemotherapy Limitations. J Pharm Pharmaceut Sci 14:67-77.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

9. Moses MA, Brem H, Langer R (2003) Advancing the field of drug delivery: Taking aim at cancer. Cancer Cell 4:337-341.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

10. Shams M, Abdallah S, Alsadoun L, Hamid YH, Gasim R, et al. (2023) Oncological Horizons: The Synergy of Medical and Surgical Innovations in Cancer Treatment. Cureus 15:49249.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref