PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-7 (7)
 

Clipboard (0)
None

Select a Filter Below

Journals
Year of Publication
Document Types
1.  Stratification of Antibody-Positive Subjects by Antibody Level Reveals an Impact of Immunogenicity on Pharmacokinetics 
The AAPS Journal  2012;15(1):30-40.
The availability of highly sensitive immunoassays enables the detection of antidrug antibody (ADA) responses of various concentrations and affinities. The analysis of the impact of antibody status on drug pharmacokinetics (PK) is confounded by the presence of low-affinity or low-concentration antibody responses within the dataset. In a phase 2 clinical trial, a large proportion of subjects (45%) developed ADA following weekly dosing with AMG 317, a fully human monoclonal antibody therapeutic. The antibody responses displayed a wide range of relative concentrations (30 ng/mL to >13 μg/mL) and peaked at various times during the study. To evaluate the impact of immunogenicity on PK, AMG 317 concentration data were analyzed following stratification by dose group, time point, antibody status (positive or negative), and antibody level (relative concentration). With dose group as a stratifying variable, a moderate reduction in AMG 317 levels (<50%) was observed in antibody-positive subjects when compared to antibody-negative subjects, but the difference was not statistically significant in all dose groups. The most significant reduction in AMG 317 levels was revealed when antibody data was stratified by both time point and antibody level. In general, high ADA concentrations (>500 ng/mL) and later time points (week 12) were associated with significantly (up to 97%) lower trough AMG 317 concentrations. The use of quasi-quantitative antibody data and appropriate statistical methods was critical for the most comprehensive evaluation of the impact of immunogenicity on PK.
doi:10.1208/s12248-012-9408-8
PMCID: PMC3535100  PMID: 23054969
antidrug antibodies; immunogenicity; pharmacokinetics
2.  Comparing Exponentially Weighted Moving Average and Run Rules in Process Control of Semiquantitative Immunogenicity Immunoassays 
The AAPS Journal  2009;12(1):79-86.
The immunogenicity immunoassay validation process ensures development of a robust, reproducible method. However, no matter how well developed, validated, and maintained a method is, in the course of running a large number of samples over time, it is not uncommon to see bad reagents, poorly calibrated equipment, personnel errors, or other unknown and unpredictable factors that have an impact in the performance of the method and quality of the sample results. The immunogenicity immunoassay thus needs to be closely monitored with an internal statistical quality control process overtime to ensure a consistent and reliable output. The statistical process control has been widely applied to monitor manufacturing processes and in clinical laboratories. Its application to immunogenicity immunoassays is relatively novel. Limited guidance is available to implement the process to monitor semiquantitative immunogenicity immunoassay performance. Here, we have performed a suitability evaluation for process control charts with actual laboratory data from three immunogenicity immunoassay methods each utilizing a different technology platform. Additionally, a panel of prepared samples designed to assess long-term method performance were periodically evaluated for over a year. Finally, we make recommendations for an internal quality control process based on the results of these evaluations.
doi:10.1208/s12248-009-9166-4
PMCID: PMC2811647  PMID: 20012239
control chart; EWMA; immunoassay; OOT
3.  A Step-wise Approach for Transfer of Immunogenicity Assays during Clinical Drug Development 
The AAPS Journal  2009;11(3):526-534.
We designed a three-step statistical approach to transfer bioanalytical assays (ELISA and Biacore) which evaluates the (1) average equivalence between the two labs (2) concordance in individual sample results between the two labs, and (3) long-term stability of assay performance. Each experimental design evaluated the contribution of four critical variables to the overall variability. Two lots of each variable were examined in a controlled experiment. The variables tested for ELISA were analyst, plate washer, biotinylated-therapeutic protein, and streptavidin–horseradish peroxidase; and for Biacore were analyst, instrument, chip lot, and conjugation chemistry reagent lots. Equivalence in the mean signal to noise (S/N) or mean relative units (RU) between the two labs was established through statistical evaluation of the assay performance characteristics across multiple assay variables. Concordance between the two labs in the individual sample results was subsequently verified both quantitatively and qualitatively. The long-term maintenance of assay stability was monitored by performance testing of a predefined set of samples which were prepared in sufficient quantities to last several years. The process of method validation for biomarker testing in clinical trials is to analyze the variability of the assay performance. However, different factors contribute to this variability and need to be evaluated when the method is transferred to another site/lab. Lack of understanding the critical variables can potentially result in unexpected problems and delays. The three-step statistical approach of assay transfer provides a robust process for transferring complex biological assays.
doi:10.1208/s12248-009-9130-3
PMCID: PMC2758123  PMID: 19626442
biacore; bioanalytical; concordance; ELISA; method transfer; robustness
4.  Assessment of immunogenicity of romiplostim in clinical studies with ITP subjects 
Annals of Hematology  2010;89(Suppl 1):75-85.
Romiplostim is an Fc-peptide fusion protein that activates intracellular transcriptional pathways via the thrombopoietin (TPO) receptor leading to increased platelet production. Romiplostim has been engineered to have no amino acid sequence homology to endogenous TPO. Recombinant protein therapeutics can be at a risk of development of an antibody response that can impact efficacy and safety. Hence, a strategy to detect potential antibody formation to the drug and to related endogenous molecules can be useful. The immunogenicity assessment strategy involved both the detection and characterization of binding and neutralizing antibodies. The method for detection was based on a surface plasmon resonance biosensor platform using the Biacore 3000. Samples that tested positive for binding antibodies in the Biacore immunoassay were then tested in a neutralization assay. Serum samples from 225 subjects with immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) dosed with romiplostim and 45 ITP subjects dosed with placebo were tested for romiplostim and TPO antibodies. Prior to romiplostim treatment, 17 subjects (7%) tested romiplostim antibody positive and 12 subjects (5%) tested TPO antibody positive for pre-existing binding antibodies. After romiplostim exposure, 11% of the subjects exhibited binding antibodies against romiplostim and 5% of the subjects with ITP showed binding antibodies against TPO. The antibodies against romiplostim did not cross-react with TPO and vice versa. No cases of anti-TPO neutralizing antibodies were detected in romiplostim-treated subjects. The incidence of anti-romiplostim neutralizing antibodies to romiplostim was 0.4% (one subject); this subject tested negative at the time of follow-up 4 months later. No impact on platelet profiles were apparent in subjects that had antibodies to romiplostim to date. In summary, administration of romiplostim in ITP subjects resulted in the development of a binding antibody response against romiplostim and TPO ligand. One subject developed a neutralizing antibody response to romiplostim that impacted the platelet counts of this subject. No neutralizing antibodies to endogenous TPO were observed.
doi:10.1007/s00277-010-0908-2
PMCID: PMC2900600  PMID: 19484238
Immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP); Romiplostim; Immunogenicity; TPO; Platelet
5.  Feasibility of a Multiplex Flow Cytometric Bead Immunoassay for Detection of Anti-Epoetin Alfa Antibodies▿  
Immunogenicity profiles of recombinant therapeutic proteins are important to understand because antibodies raised against these molecules may have important clinical sequelae. The purpose of the present study was to demonstrate that a flow cytometric bead array could be used to detect clinically relevant antibodies with specificity to such therapeutics. We chose to evaluate well-characterized specimens from persons treated with epoetin alfa that developed antibody-mediated pure red blood cell aplasia as a means to demonstrate the utility of this platform. Our data show that this assay is capable of detecting anti-epoetin alfa antibodies with a relative antibody concentration of 50 ng/ml, where 25 of 25 sera spiked with antibodies at this concentration scored positive. Moreover, the assay was designed to include positive and negative control beads for each specimen that is processed to ensure the specificity of the signal when detected. Measurement of interassay precision supports quantitative estimates of relative antibody concentrations in the range of 313 to 5,000 ng/ml, where the percent coefficient of variation did not exceed 20%. With respect to clinical specimens, antibodies with specificity for epoetin alfa could be easily detected in a set of specimens from persons with pure red blood cell aplasia that had prior exposure to the EPREX brand of recombinant epoetin alfa. Further development and validation of this approach may facilitate successful widespread application of the method for detection of anti-epoetin alfa antibodies, as well as antibodies directed against other recombinant therapeutic proteins.
doi:10.1128/CVI.00157-07
PMCID: PMC2043303  PMID: 17634512
7.  Immunogenicity of panitumumab in combination chemotherapy clinical trials 
Background
Panitumumab is a fully human antibody against the epidermal growth factor receptor that is indicated for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after disease progression on standard chemotherapy. The purpose of this analysis was to examine the immunogenicity of panitumumab and to evaluate the effect of anti-panitumumab antibodies on pharmacokinetic and safety profiles in patients with mCRC receiving panitumumab in combination with oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based chemotherapies.
Methods
Three validated assays (two screening immunoassays and a neutralizing antibody bioassay) were used to detect the presence of anti-panitumumab antibodies in serum samples collected from patients enrolled in four panitumumab combination chemotherapy clinical trials. The impact of anti-panitumumab antibodies on pharmacokinetic and safety profiles was analyzed using population pharmacokinetic analysis and descriptive statistics, respectively.
Results
Of 1124 patients treated with panitumumab in combination with oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based chemotherapy with postbaseline samples available for testing, 20 (1.8%) patients developed binding antibodies and 2 (0.2%) developed neutralizing antibodies. The incidence of anti-panitumumab antibodies was similar in patients with tumors expressing wild-type or mutant KRAS and in patients receiving oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based chemotherapies. No evidence of an altered pharmacokinetic or safety profile was found in patients who tested positive for anti-panitumumab antibodies.
Conclusions
The immunogenicity of panitumumab in the combination chemotherapy setting was infrequent and similar to the immunogenicity observed in the monotherapy setting. Panitumumab immunogenicity did not appear to alter pharmacokinetic or safety profiles. This low rate of immunogenicity may be attributed to the fully human nature of panitumumab.
Trial registration
ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00339183 (study 20050181), NCT00411450 (study 20060277), NCT00332163 (study 20050184), and NCT00364013 (study 20050203).
doi:10.1186/1472-6904-11-17
PMCID: PMC3231982  PMID: 22070868

Results 1-7 (7)