Method transfer for ligand-binding assays: recommendations for best practice.

To support clinical trials, bioanalytical methods are often transferred from one laboratory to another. With the rising number of large-molecule therapeutic proteins submitted for US FDA approval, the demand for large-molecule bioanalytical support and, subsequently, method transfer increases. Ligand-binding assays are the methods most commonly used to quantify endogenous and therapeutic proteins for the assessment of biomarkers and pharmacokinetic parameters. The goal of this review is to provide an overview of ligand-binding assay method transfer, essential parameters for partial method validation and to lay out a strategy to increase the chance of success. The recommendations herein are based on a summary of current publications and the authors' specific experiences, to help increase workload efficiency, maintain positive collaborations with partners and meet program timelines.

A strategy for improving comparability across sites for ligand binding assays measuring therapeutic proteins.

Outsourcing and multi-site testing has increased for ligand binding assays supporting protein therapeutic measurement. It is common to combine and compare data across studies with data from multiple bioanalytical sites. We designed a prospective study to determine the benefits of increasing control over the transfer process to improve ruggedness. The experiment involved the testing of 30 incurred samples at 3 stages with incremental laboratory harmonization in standard/quality controls and assay components: Stage I represented a transfer of a detailed protocol and critical reagents. Stage II, a single source of standards and quality controls were provided to each site. Stage III, standards and quality controls plus a ready-to-use kit were provided. The results indicated that all testing facilities failed agreement testing using the stage I procedure. The introduction of standards from a single source improved the agreement. The modification reduced variation by 33% compared to the stage I approach. There was no additional benefit when a packaged kit was provided. In conclusion, introduction of a single source of standards and quality controls reduced the inter-site component of variation and should allow for combinability of data.

Tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRACP 5b): a biomarker of bone resorption rate in support of drug development: modification, validation and application of the BoneTRAP kit assay.

A commercial kit assay of tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRACP 5b) used for the diagnosis of bone resorption was modified with a 'Fit-For-Purpose' approach for drug development of anti-resorptive therapeutics. The modifications included changing the standard matrix from buffer to serum, using a consistent bulk reference material to prepare standards and quality controls (QC), and adding sample controls (SC) prepared from authentic sample pools. Method validation experiments were conducted for: inter- and intra-assay accuracy and precision, establishment of SC, range finding of different population groups, selectivity tests, parallelism and stability. The analytical range was 1.00-10.0 U/L and the total errors of lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) and upper limit of quantification (ULOQ) validation samples were 8% and 21%, respectively. Data of range finding experiment showed that serum samples should be collected in tubes instead of bags. Selectivity results showed accurate spike recovery among the majority of test samples from target populations. Samples were demonstrated to be stable for up to four freeze/thaw cycles and for 24 months at -70+/-10 degrees C. Our results show that the modified TRACP 5b method is reliable for the quantification of TRACP 5b in human serum samples to support clinical trials of bone resorptive effect reflected by TRACP 5b activities. The method was robust with similar assay performance characteristics shown in three bioanalytical laboratories.