Neutralizing Antibody Validation Testing and Reporting Harmonization.

Evolving immunogenicity assay performance expectations and a lack of harmonized neutralizing antibody validation testing and reporting tools have resulted in significant time spent by health authorities and sponsors on resolving filing queries. A team of experts within the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists' Therapeutic Product Immunogenicity Community across industry and the Food and Drug Administration addressed challenges unique to cell-based and non-cell-based neutralizing antibody assays. Harmonization of validation expectations and data reporting will facilitate filings to health authorities and are described in this manuscript. This team provides validation testing and reporting strategies and tools for the following assessments: (1) format selection; (2) cut point; (3) assay acceptance criteria; (4) control precision; (5) sensitivity including positive control selection and performance tracking; (6) negative control selection; (7) selectivity/specificity including matrix interference, hemolysis, lipemia, bilirubin, concomitant medications, and structurally similar analytes; (8) drug tolerance; (9) target tolerance; (10) sample stability; and (11) assay robustness.

Clinical Immunogenicity Risk Assessment Strategy for a Low Risk Monoclonal Antibody.

This article provides a theoretical case-study risk assessment report for a low-risk monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapeutic. In terms of risk, there are considerations around risks to safety, but also risks regarding effects on pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and efficacy. Much of the discussion in this document is around the risk of immunogenicity incidence. A higher incidence of immunogenicity would necessitate a detailed review of the PK, efficacy and safety in anti-drug antibody (ADA) positive and ADA negative subjects, in order to evaluate potential effects. The publication is intended to provide a framework of some the current thought processes around assessing immunogenicity risk and for building strategies to mitigate those risks. For this example, we have created a hypothetical antibody, ABC-123, targeting a membrane protein on antigen presenting cells, for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This hypothetical antibody therapeutic is provided as an example for the purposes of risk assessment for a low risk molecule, although any application of similar approach would be case by case.

Bioanalytical assays in support of tanezumab developmental and reproductive toxicity studies: challenges and learnings.

Bioanalytical challenges were encountered during developmental and reproductive toxicity studies of tanezumab in cynomolgus monkeys. Possible changes in breast milk composition over the postpartum period potentially complicated assessment of tanezumab concentration in this matrix, requiring validation of the quantification assay across different time intervals. Immunogenicity assessment in maternal serum was complicated by apparent increases in the incidence of antidrug antibody-positive results in treatment-naive samples as pregnancy progressed that were due to changes in the concentration of nerve growth factor, tanezumab's target protein. This was overcome by employing gestational day-specific cut points throughout pregnancy. Researchers should recognize potential challenges associated with dynamic matrices/physiological conditions and anticipate that assays developed under normal conditions may require adaptation for specialized situations.

Cytokine release: A workshop proceedings on the state-of-the-science, current challenges and future directions.

In October 2013, the International Life Sciences Institute - Health and Environmental Sciences Institute Immunotoxicology Technical Committee (ILSI-HESI ITC) held a one-day workshop entitled, "Workshop on Cytokine Release: State-of-the-Science, Current Challenges and Future Directions". The workshop brought together scientists from pharmaceutical, academic, health authority, and contract research organizations to discuss novel approaches and current challenges for the use of in vitro cytokine release assays (CRAs) for the identification of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) potential of novel monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapeutics. Topics presented encompassed a regulatory perspective on cytokine release and assessment, case studies regarding the translatability of preclinical cytokine data to the clinic, and the latest state of the science of CRAs, including comparisons between mAb therapeutics within one platform and across several assay platforms, a novel physiological assay platform, and assay optimization approaches such as determination of FcR expression profiles and use of statistical tests. The data and approaches presented confirmed that multiple CRA platforms are in use for identification of CRS potential and that the choice of a particular CRA platform is highly dependent on the availability of resources for individual laboratories (e.g. positive and negative controls, number of human blood donors), the assay through-put required, and the mechanism-of-action of the therapeutic candidate to be tested. Workshop participants agreed that more data on the predictive performance of CRA platforms is needed, and current efforts to compare in vitro assay results with clinical cytokine assessments were discussed. In summary, many laboratories continue to focus research efforts on the improvement of the translatability of current CRA platforms as well explore novel approaches which may lead to more accurate, and potentially patient-specific, CRS prediction in the future.

Immunogenicity/hypersensitivity of biologics.

This continuing education course was designed to provide an overview of the immunologic mechanisms involved in immunogenicity and hypersensitivity reactions following administration of biologics in nonclinical toxicity studies, the methods used to determine whether such reactions are occurring, and the associated clinical and anatomic pathology findings. Hypersensitivity reactions have classically been divided into type I, II, III, and IV reactions; type I and III reactions are those most often observed following administration of biologics. A variety of methods can be used to detect these reactions. Antemortem methods include hematology; detection of antidrug antibodies, circulating immune complexes and complement fragments, and immunoglobulin E in serum; tests for serum complement activity; and evaluation of complement receptor 1 on erythrocytes. Postmortem methods include routine light microscopy and electron microscopy, which can demonstrate typical findings associated with hypersensitivity reactions, and immunohistochemistry, which can detect the presence of immune complexes in tissues, including the detection of the test article. A final determination of whether findings are related to a hypersensitivity reaction in individual animals or across the entire study should rely on the overall weight of evidence, as findings indicative of these reactions are not necessarily consistent across all affected animals.

Recommendations for the validation of cell-based assays used for the detection of neutralizing antibody immune responses elicited against biological therapeutics.

The administration of biological therapeutics may result in the development of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) in treated subjects. In some cases, ADA responses may result in the loss of therapeutic efficacy due to the formation of neutralizing ADAs (NAbs). An important characteristic of anti-drug NAbs is their direct inhibitory effect on the pharmacological activity of the therapeutic. Neutralizing antibody responses are of particular concern for biologic products with an endogenous homolog whose activity can be potentially dampened or completely inhibited by the NAbs leading to an autoimmune-type deficiency syndrome. Therefore, it is important that ADAs are detected and characterized appropriately using sensitive and reliable methods. The design, development and optimization of cell-based assays used for detection of NAbs have been published previously by Gupta et al. 2007 [1]. This paper provides recommendations on best practices for the validation of cell-based NAb assay and suggested validation parameters based on the experience of the authors.

Comparison of competitive ligand-binding assay and bioassay formats for the measurement of neutralizing antibodies to protein therapeutics.

Administration of biological therapeutic proteins can lead to unwanted immunogenicity in recipients of these products. The assessment and characterization of such immune reactions can be helpful to better understand their clinical relevance and how they relate to patient safety and therefore, have become an integral part of a product development program for biological therapeutics. Testing for anti-drug antibodies (ADA) to biological/biotechnology-derived therapeutic proteins generally follows a tiered approach. Samples are initially screened for binding antibodies; presumptive positives are then confirmed in a confirmatory assay; subsequently, confirmed-positive samples may be further characterized by titration and with a neutralizing antibody (NAb) assay. Regulatory guidances on immunogenicity state that assessing the neutralizing capacity of antibodies should preferably be done using functional bioassays, while recognizing that competitive ligand-binding (CLB) assays may be substituted when neutralizing bioassays are inadequate or not feasible. This manuscript describes case studies from four companies in which CLB assays and functional bioassays were compared for their ability to detect neutralizing ADA against a variety of biotechnology-derived therapeutic proteins. Our findings indicate that CLB assays are comparable to bioassays for the detection of NAbs, in some cases offering better detection sensitivity, lower variability, and less matrix interference.

A multiple-dose toxicity study of tanezumab in cynomolgus monkeys.

Nerve growth factor (NGF) is an important mediator of pain and hyperalgesia and has become a target of novel analgesic therapeutics. Tanezumab is a humanized IgG(2) antibody that binds NGF with high affinity and specificity. In a study to assess the toxicity and pharmacokinetic properties of tanezumab in adult, male and female, cynomolgus monkeys following weekly intravenous administration of 1, 10, or 30 mg/kg for up to 26 weeks (followed by an 8-week recovery period), tanezumab was well tolerated with no macroscopic or microscopic effects on those brain, spinal cord, nerve, or ganglia sections evaluated. One fifth of tanezumab-treated monkeys developed an antibody response to tanezumab that prevented maintenance of tanezumab exposure between dosing. In the antibody-negative animals, accumulation of tanezumab was observed; steady state was achieved approximately 8 weeks after the first dose of study drug, and exposure to tanezumab was approximately dose proportional with no observed difference between male and female animals. One monkey died during the study; this monkey had findings suggestive of hypersensitivity reaction. The favorable toxicity and pharmacokinetic profile of tanezumab seen in this study supports its further evaluation for the treatment of pain in clinical practice.

Embryo-fetal developmental toxicity of figitumumab, an anti-insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor (IGF-1R) monoclonal antibody, in cynomolgus monkeys.

BACKGROUND: Insulin-like growth factor (IGF) signaling has been linked to tumor cell survival and tumorigenesis. The anti-IGF-1 receptor monoclonal antibody, figitumumab, has been developed as an anti-cancer therapeutic. As part of the safety evaluation, an embryo-fetal developmental toxicity study was conducted in the cynomolgus monkey. METHODS: Figitumumab was administered once weekly intravenously at a dose of 5, 15, or 100 mg/kg during the period of major organogenesis (gestation days [GD] 20-48) with scheduled cesarean section around GD100. Maternal endpoints included clinical observations, food consumption, body weights, hematology, placental weights, toxicokinetics, and immunogenicity. Fetal evaluations included viability; body weights; external, visceral, and skeletal examination (and measurements); drug exposure; and immunogenicity. RESULTS: There was a dose-dependent increase in embryo-fetal loss in the presence of decreased maternal food consumption and slight reduction in body weight. Figitumumab-related embryo-fetal developmental toxicity was observed as growth retardation exhibited by reduced fetal body weights at all doses with corresponding developmental delays in morphology. Treatment-related fetal structural malformations were also observed in the mid- and high-dose groups. CONCLUSIONS: Maternal figitumumab dosing only during the period of organogenesis was associated with pregnancy loss and fetal growth deficits; both considered consistent with inhibition of IGF signaling. Fetal malformations were also observed, and were considered secondary to altered placental function and/or reduced fetal growth; however, direct inhibition of IGF signaling in the conceptus cannot be ruled out. This appears to be the first report of treatment-related fetal anomalies with a monoclonal antibody when administered only during the period of major organogenesis.