RESUMO
Aim: We present a novel methodology to compare results between distinct immunogenicity assays, performed by two laboratories, for the same biotherapeutic. Materials & methods: Human serum pools from clinical trials were generated to provide representative immunogenicity titers. Pools were evaluated at two laboratories in a blinded fashion to assess the effect of assay format and laboratory change on clinical interpretation of immunogenicity results. Results: The laboratories validated two different assay formats and demonstrated comparable sensitivity and drug tolerance. Overall, the comparisons in assay format and laboratory ensured a comparable ability to detect treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies for a biotherapeutic. Conclusion: We have established an approach, using pooling of patient samples, that allows for the interlaboratory comparisons without creating duplicative results.
Lay abstract Measuring immunogenicity, an immune response to a drug, is important in understanding the benefits and risks associated with a drug. Immunogenicity is measured by specific tests within a laboratory; however, these tests and laboratories may change over time. This paper proposes a method to determine if a change in test and laboratory will impact the interpretation of immunogenicity for a drug. Blood samples from clinical trial patients were combined in order to provide representative samples for the immunogenicity tests. The samples were tested at two laboratories with two tests to measure if any interpretation of immunogenicity results would change due to the different tests and laboratories. Laboratories and tests demonstrated similar and reliable results of the samples. This study has established a method which allows for the comparison of immunogenicity results when tests and/or laboratories are changed.
RESUMO
Despite recent advances in the development of tools to predict immunogenicity risk of biotherapeutic molecules, the ability of a protein to elicit the formation of anti-drug antibodies (ADA) remains one of the most common causes for termination of clinical development programs. In this study, we use ADA assays to detect and measure pre-existing reactivity or the ability of a molecule to produce an ADA-like response in serum from treatment-naïve, healthy donors. We report herein that the magnitude of pre-existing reactivity evaluated pre-clinically and expressed as the 90th percentile of Tier 2 inhibition correlates with the subsequent rate of ADA emergence in the clinic. Furthermore, a multi-domain biotherapeutic (IgG-scFv bispecific antibody) showed the highest pre-existing reactivity and incidence of treatment-emergent ADA (TE-ADA) (57% and 93%, respectively). Using the components of the multidomain molecule in the Tier 2 step of the ADA assay, we were able to identify the scFv as the target of the serum pre-existing reactivity. Most importantly, the domain specificity of pre-existing ADA was the same as that of the TE-ADA from patients treated with the molecule. Based on these data, we propose the evaluation of the magnitude and of the domain specificity of pre-existing reactivity as a powerful tool to understand the immunogenic potential of novel biotherapeutics.
