1
|
Huang Q, Ravindra Pilvankar M, Dixit R, Yu H. Approaches to Improve the Translation of Safety, Pharmacokinetics and Therapeutic Index of ADCs. Xenobiotica 2024:1-16. [PMID: 38733255 DOI: 10.1080/00498254.2024.2352600] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2024] [Accepted: 05/03/2024] [Indexed: 05/13/2024]
Abstract
Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are an important class of cancer therapies. They are complex molecules, comprising an antibody, a cytotoxic payload, and a linker. ADCs intend to confer high specificity by targeting a unique antigen expressed predominately on the surface of the tumor cells than on the normal cells and by releasing the potent cytotoxic drug inside the tumor causing cytotoxic cell death. Despite high specificity to tumor antigens, many ADCs are associated with off-target and on-target off-tumor toxicities, often leading to safety concerns before achieving the desirable clinical efficacy. Therefore, it is crucial to improve the therapeutic index (TI) of ADCs to enable the full potential of this important therapeutic modality.The review summarizes current approaches to improve the translation of safety, pharmacokinetics, and TI of ADCs. Common safety findings of ADCs resulting from off-target and on-target toxicities and nonclinical approaches to de-risk ADC safety will be discussed; multiple approaches of using preclinical and clinical dose and exposure data to calculate TI to guide clinical dosing will be elaborated; different approaches to improve TI of ADCs, including selecting the right target, right payload-linker and patients, optimizing physicochemical properties, and using fractionation dosing, will also be discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qihong Huang
- Nonclinical Drug Safety, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 900 Ridgebury Road, Ridgefield, CT, USA 06877
| | - Minu Ravindra Pilvankar
- NBE PK, Biotherapeutics Discovery, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 900 Ridgebury Road, Ridgefield, CT, USA 06877
| | - Rakesh Dixit
- Bionavigen Oncology, LLC, GAITHERSBURG, MD, USA 20878
| | - Hongbin Yu
- NBE PK, Biotherapeutics Discovery, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 900 Ridgebury Road, Ridgefield, CT, USA 06877
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Jaffry M, Choudhry H, Aftab OM, Dastjerdi MH. Antibody-Drug Conjugates and Ocular Toxicity. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 2023; 39:675-691. [PMID: 37615544 DOI: 10.1089/jop.2023.0069] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are a growing class of chemotherapeutic agents for the purpose of treating cancers that often have relapsed or failed first- and second-line treatments. ADCs are composed of extremely potent cytotoxins with a variety of side effects, one of the most significant being ocular toxicity. The available literature describes these toxicities as varying in severity and in incidence, although with disparate methods of evaluation and management. Some of the most common toxicities include microcyst-like epithelial keratopathy and dry eye. We discuss proposed mechanisms of ocular toxicity and describe the reports that mention these toxicities. We focus on ADCs with the most published literature and the most significant effects on ocular tissue. We propose areas for further investigation and possible ideas of future management. We provide a comprehensive look at the reports of ADCs in current literature to better inform clinicians on an expanding drug class.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mustafa Jaffry
- Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey, USA
| | - Hassaam Choudhry
- Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey, USA
| | - Owais M Aftab
- Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey, USA
| | - Mohammad H Dastjerdi
- Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Renardy M, Prokopienko AJ, Maxwell JR, Flusberg DA, Makaryan S, Selimkhanov J, Vakilynejad M, Subramanian K, Wille L. A Quantitative Systems Pharmacology Model Describing the Cellular Kinetic-Pharmacodynamic Relationship for a Live Biotherapeutic Product to Support Microbiome Drug Development. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2023; 114:633-643. [PMID: 37218407 DOI: 10.1002/cpt.2952] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2022] [Accepted: 04/30/2023] [Indexed: 05/24/2023]
Abstract
Live biotherapeutic products (LBPs) are human microbiome therapies showing promise in the clinic for a range of diseases and conditions. Describing the kinetics and behavior of LBPs poses a unique modeling challenge because, unlike traditional therapies, LBPs can expand, contract, and colonize the host digestive tract. Here, we present a novel cellular kinetic-pharmacodynamic quantitative systems pharmacology model of an LBP. The model describes bacterial growth and competition, vancomycin effects, binding and unbinding to the epithelial surface, and production and clearance of butyrate as a therapeutic metabolite. The model is calibrated and validated to published data from healthy volunteers. Using the model, we simulate the impact of treatment dose, frequency, and duration as well as vancomycin pretreatment on butyrate production. This model enables model-informed drug development and can be used for future microbiome therapies to inform decision making around antibiotic pretreatment, dose selection, loading dose, and dosing duration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Joseph R Maxwell
- Takeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
| | | | | | | | - Majid Vakilynejad
- Takeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
| | | | - Lucia Wille
- Takeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lisina S, Inam W, Huhtala M, Howaili F, Zhang H, Rosenholm JM. Nano Differential Scanning Fluorimetry as a Rapid Stability Assessment Tool in the Nanoformulation of Proteins. Pharmaceutics 2023; 15:pharmaceutics15051473. [PMID: 37242715 DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics15051473] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2023] [Revised: 04/20/2023] [Accepted: 05/09/2023] [Indexed: 05/28/2023] Open
Abstract
The development and production of innovative protein-based therapeutics is a complex and challenging avenue. External conditions such as buffers, solvents, pH, salts, polymers, surfactants, and nanoparticles may affect the stability and integrity of proteins during formulation. In this study, poly (ethylene imine) (PEI) functionalized mesoporous silica nanoparticles (MSNs) were used as a carrier for the model protein bovine serum albumin (BSA). To protect the protein inside MSNs after loading, polymeric encapsulation with poly (sodium 4-styrenesulfonate) (NaPSS) was used to seal the pores. Nano differential scanning fluorimetry (NanoDSF) was used to assess protein thermal stability during the formulation process. The MSN-PEI carrier matrix or conditions used did not destabilize the protein during loading, but the coating polymer NaPSS was incompatible with the NanoDSF technique due to autofluorescence. Thus, another pH-responsive polymer, spermine-modified acetylated dextran (SpAcDEX), was applied as a second coating after NaPSS. It possessed low autofluorescence and was successfully evaluated with the NanoDSF method. Circular dichroism (CD) spectroscopy was used to determine protein integrity in the case of interfering polymers such as NaPSS. Despite this limitation, NanoDSF was found to be a feasible and rapid tool to monitor protein stability during all steps needed to create a viable nanocarrier system for protein delivery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sofia Lisina
- Pharmaceutical Sciences Laboratory, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Åbo Akademi University, 20500 Turku, Finland
| | - Wali Inam
- Pharmaceutical Sciences Laboratory, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Åbo Akademi University, 20500 Turku, Finland
| | - Mikko Huhtala
- Structural Bioinformatics Laboratory, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Biochemistry, Åbo Akademi University, 20500 Turku, Finland
| | - Fadak Howaili
- Pharmaceutical Sciences Laboratory, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Åbo Akademi University, 20500 Turku, Finland
| | - Hongbo Zhang
- Pharmaceutical Sciences Laboratory, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Åbo Akademi University, 20500 Turku, Finland
| | - Jessica M Rosenholm
- Pharmaceutical Sciences Laboratory, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Åbo Akademi University, 20500 Turku, Finland
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Nada H, Sivaraman A, Lu Q, Min K, Kim S, Goo JI, Choi Y, Lee K. Perspective for Discovery of Small Molecule IL-6 Inhibitors through Study of Structure–Activity Relationships and Molecular Docking. J Med Chem 2023; 66:4417-4433. [PMID: 36971365 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.2c01957] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/29/2023]
Abstract
Interleukin-6 (IL-6) is a proinflammatory cytokine that plays a key role in the pathogenesis and physiology of inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, such as coronary heart disease, cancer, Alzheimer's disease, asthma, rheumatoid arthritis, and most recently COVID-19. IL-6 and its signaling pathway are promising targets in the treatment of inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. Although, anti-IL-6 monoclonal antibodies are currently being used in clinics, huge unmet medical needs remain because of the high cost, administration-related toxicity, lack of opportunity for oral dosing, and potential immunogenicity of monoclonal antibody therapy. Furthermore, nonresponse or loss of response to monoclonal antibody therapy has been reported, which increases the importance of optimizing drug therapy with small molecule drugs. This work aims to provide a perspective for the discovery of novel small molecule IL-6 inhibitors by the analysis of the structure-activity relationships and computational studies for protein-protein inhibitors targeting the IL-6/IL-6 receptor/gp130 complex.
Collapse
|
6
|
Menezes B, Khera E, Calopiz M, Smith MD, Ganno ML, Cilliers C, Abu-Yousif AO, Linderman JJ, Thurber GM. Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of TAK-164 Antibody Drug Conjugate Coadministered with Unconjugated Antibody. AAPS J 2022; 24:107. [PMID: 36207468 PMCID: PMC10754641 DOI: 10.1208/s12248-022-00756-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2022] [Accepted: 09/21/2022] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
The development of new antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) has led to the approval of 7 ADCs by the FDA in 4 years. Given the impact of intratumoral distribution on efficacy of these therapeutics, coadministration of unconjugated antibody with ADC has been shown to improve distribution and efficacy of several ADCs in high and moderately expressed tumor target systems by increasing tissue penetration. However, the benefit of coadministration in low expression systems is less clear. TAK-164, an ADC composed of an anti-GCC antibody (5F9) conjugated to a DGN549 payload, has demonstrated heterogeneous distribution and bystander killing. Here, we evaluated the impact of 5F9 coadministration on distribution and efficacy of TAK-164 in a primary human tumor xenograft mouse model. Coadministration was found to improve the distribution of TAK-164 within the tumor, but it had no significant impact (increase or decrease) on efficacy. Experimental and computational evidence indicates that this was not a result of tumor saturation, increased binding to perivascular cells, or compensatory bystander effects. Rather, the cellular potency of DGN549 was matched with the single-cell uptake of TAK-164 making its IC50 close to its equilibrium binding affinity (KD), and as such, coadministration dilutes total DGN549 in cells below the maximum cytotoxic concentration, thereby offsetting an increased number of targeted cells with decreased ability to kill each cell. These results provide new insights on matching payload potency to ADC delivery to help identify when increasing tumor penetration is beneficial for improving ADC efficacy and demonstrate how mechanistic simulations can be leveraged to design clinically effective ADCs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bruna Menezes
- Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA
| | - Eshita Khera
- Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA
| | - Melissa Calopiz
- Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA
| | - Michael D Smith
- Takeda Development Center Americas-Inc. TDCA, Oncology, Lexington, Massachussetts, USA
| | - Michelle L Ganno
- Takeda Development Center Americas-Inc. TDCA, Oncology, Lexington, Massachussetts, USA
| | - Cornelius Cilliers
- Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA
| | - Adnan O Abu-Yousif
- Takeda Development Center Americas-Inc. TDCA, Oncology, Lexington, Massachussetts, USA
| | - Jennifer J Linderman
- Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA
| | - Greg M Thurber
- Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA.
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Orientation of nanocarriers in subarachnoid space: A tweak in strategic transport for effective CNS delivery. J Drug Deliv Sci Technol 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jddst.2022.103641] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
8
|
Lam I, Pilla Reddy V, Ball K, Arends RH, Mac Gabhann F. Development of and insights from systems pharmacology models of
antibody‐drug
conjugates. CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol 2022; 11:967-990. [PMID: 35712824 PMCID: PMC9381915 DOI: 10.1002/psp4.12833] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/29/2022] [Revised: 05/26/2022] [Accepted: 06/02/2022] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Antibody‐drug conjugates (ADCs) have gained traction in the oncology space in the past few decades, with significant progress being made in recent years. Although the use of pharmacometric modeling is well‐established in the drug development process, there is an increasing need for a better quantitative biological understanding of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic relationships of these complex molecules. Quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) approaches can assist in this endeavor; recent computational QSP models incorporate ADC‐specific mechanisms and use data‐driven simulations to predict experimental outcomes. Various modeling approaches and platforms have been developed at the in vitro, in vivo, and clinical scales, and can be further integrated to facilitate preclinical to clinical translation. These new tools can help researchers better understand the nature and mechanisms of these targeted therapies to help achieve a more favorable therapeutic window. This review delves into the world of systems pharmacology modeling of ADCs, discussing various modeling efforts in the field thus far.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Inez Lam
- Institute for Computational Medicine and Department of Biomedical Engineering Johns Hopkins University Baltimore Maryland USA
| | - Venkatesh Pilla Reddy
- Clinical Pharmacology and Quantitative Pharmacology, Clinical Pharmacology and Safety Sciences, BioPharmaceuticals R&D AstraZeneca Cambridge UK
| | - Kathryn Ball
- Clinical Pharmacology and Quantitative Pharmacology, Clinical Pharmacology and Safety Sciences, BioPharmaceuticals R&D AstraZeneca Cambridge UK
| | - Rosalinda H. Arends
- Clinical Pharmacology and Quantitative Pharmacology, Clinical Pharmacology and Safety Sciences, BioPharmaceuticals R&D AstraZeneca Gaithersburg Maryland USA
| | - Feilim Mac Gabhann
- Institute for Computational Medicine and Department of Biomedical Engineering Johns Hopkins University Baltimore Maryland USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Patsatzis DG, Wu S, Shah DK, Goussis DA. Algorithmic multiscale analysis for the FcRn mediated regulation of antibody PK in human. Sci Rep 2022; 12:6208. [PMID: 35418134 PMCID: PMC9008124 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-09846-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2021] [Accepted: 03/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
A demonstration is provided on how algorithmic asymptotic analysis of multi-scale pharmacokinetics (PK) systems can provide (1) system level understanding and (2) predictions on the response of the model when parameters vary. Being algorithmic, this type of analysis is not hindered by the size or complexity of the model and requires no input from the investigator. The algorithm identifies the constraints that are generated by the fast part of the model and the components of the slow part of the model that drive the system within these constraints. The demonstration is based on a typical monoclonal antibody PK model. It is shown that the findings produced by the traditional methodologies, which require significant input by the investigator, can be produced algorithmically and more accurately. Moreover, additional insights are provided by the algorithm, which cannot be obtained by the traditional methodologies; notably, the dual influence of certain reactions depending on whether their fast or slow component dominates. The analysis reveals that the importance of physiological processes in determining the systemic exposure of monoclonal antibodies (mAb) varies with time. The analysis also confirms that the rate of mAb uptake by the cells, the binding affinity of mAb to neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn), and the intracellular degradation rate of mAb are the most sensitive parameters in determining systemic exposure of mAbs. The algorithmic framework for analysis introduced and the resulting novel insights can be used to engineer antibodies with desired PK properties.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dimitris G Patsatzis
- School of Chemical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, 15780, Athens, Greece
| | - Shengjia Wu
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, 14214-8033, USA
| | - Dhaval K Shah
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, 14214-8033, USA
| | - Dimitris A Goussis
- Department of Mechanical Engineering, Khalifa University, 127788, Abu Dhabi, UAE.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Chang HP, Li Z, Shah DK. Development of a Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic Model for Whole-Body Disposition of MMAE Containing Antibody-Drug Conjugate in Mice. Pharm Res 2022; 39:1-24. [PMID: 35044590 DOI: 10.1007/s11095-021-03162-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2021] [Accepted: 12/21/2021] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To quantitate and mathematically characterize the whole-body pharmacokinetics (PK) of different ADC analytes following administration of an MMAE-conjugated ADC in tumor-bearing mice. METHODS The PK of different ADC analytes (total antibody, total drug, unconjugated drug) was measured following administration of an MMAE-conjugated ADC in tumor-bearing mice. The PK of ADC analytes was compared with the whole-body PK of the antibody and drug obtained following administration of these molecules alone. An ADC PBPK model was developed by linking antibody PBPK model with small-molecule PBPK model, where the drug was assumed to deconjugate in DAR-dependent manner. RESULTS Comparison of antibody biodistribution coefficient (ABC) values for total antibody suggests that conjugation of drug did not significantly affect the PK of antibody. Comparison of tissue:plasma AUC ratio (T/P) for the conjugated drug and total antibody suggests that in certain tissues (e.g., spleen) ADC may demonstrate higher deconjugation. It was observed that the tissue distribution profile of the drug can be altered following its conjugation to antibody. For example, MMAE distribution to the liver was found to increase while its distribution to the heart was found to decrease upon conjugation to antibody. MMAE exposure in the tumor was found to increase by ~20-fold following administration as conjugate (i.e., ADC). The PBPK model was able to a priori predict the PK of all three ADC analytes in plasma, tissues, and tumor reasonably well. CONCLUSIONS The ADC PBPK model developed here serves as a platform for translational and clinical investigations of MMAE containing ADCs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hsuan-Ping Chang
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 455 Pharmacy Building, Buffalo, New York, 14214-8033, USA
| | - Zhe Li
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 455 Pharmacy Building, Buffalo, New York, 14214-8033, USA
| | - Dhaval K Shah
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 455 Pharmacy Building, Buffalo, New York, 14214-8033, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Kareva I, Zutshi A, Gupta P, Kabilan S. Bispecific antibodies: A guide to model informed drug discovery and development. Heliyon 2021; 7:e07649. [PMID: 34381902 PMCID: PMC8334385 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07649] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2021] [Revised: 07/02/2021] [Accepted: 07/20/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Affinity (KD) optimization of monoclonal antibodies is one of the factors that impacts the stoichiometric binding and the corresponding efficacy of a drug. This impacts the dose and the dosing regimen, making the optimum KD a critical component of drug discovery and development. Its importance is further enhanced for bispecific antibodies, where affinity of the drug needs to be optimized with respect to two targets. Mathematical modeling can have critical impact on lead compound optimization. Here we build on previous work of using mathematical models to facilitate lead compound selection, expanding analysis from two membrane bound targets to soluble targets as well. Our analysis reveals the importance of three factors for lead compound optimization: drug affinity to both targets, target turnover rates, and target distribution throughout the body. We describe a method that leverages this information to help make early stage decisions on whether to optimize affinity, and if so, which arm of the bispecific should be optimized. We apply the proposed approach to a variety of scenarios and illustrate the ability to make improved decisions in each case. We integrate results to develop a bispecific antibody KD optimization guide that can be used to improve resource allocation for lead compound selection, accelerating advancement of better compounds. We conclude with a discussion of possible ways to assess the necessary levels of target engagement for affecting disease as part of an integrative approach for model-informed drug discovery and development.
Collapse
|
12
|
Anderson TS, Wooster AL, La-Beck NM, Saha D, Lowe DB. Antibody-drug conjugates: an evolving approach for melanoma treatment. Melanoma Res 2021; 31:1-17. [PMID: 33165241 DOI: 10.1097/cmr.0000000000000702] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
Melanoma continues to be an aggressive and deadly form of skin cancer while therapeutic options are continuously developing in an effort to provide long-term solutions for patients. Immunotherapeutic strategies incorporating antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) have seen varied levels of success across tumor types and represent a promising approach for melanoma. This review will explore the successes of FDA-approved ADCs to date compared to the ongoing efforts of melanoma-targeting ADCs. The challenges and opportunities for future therapeutic development are also examined to distinguish how ADCs may better impact individuals with malignancies such as melanoma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Ninh M La-Beck
- Departments of Immunotherapeutics and Biotechnology
- Pharmacy Practice, Jerry H. Hodge School of Pharmacy, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Abilene, Texas, USA
| | | | - Devin B Lowe
- Departments of Immunotherapeutics and Biotechnology
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Singh AP, Zheng X, Lin-Schmidt X, Chen W, Carpenter TJ, Zong A, Wang W, Heald DL. Development of a quantitative relationship between CAR-affinity, antigen abundance, tumor cell depletion and CAR-T cell expansion using a multiscale systems PK-PD model. MAbs 2021; 12:1688616. [PMID: 31852337 PMCID: PMC6927769 DOI: 10.1080/19420862.2019.1688616] [Citation(s) in RCA: 61] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
The development of mechanism-based, multiscale pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) models for chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cells is needed to enable investigation of in vitro and in vivo correlation of CAR-T cell responses and to facilitate preclinical-to-clinical translation. Toward this goal, we first developed a cell-level in vitro PD model that quantitatively characterized CAR-T cell-induced target cell depletion, CAR-T cell expansion and cytokine release. The model accounted for key drug-specific (CAR-affinity, CAR-densities) and system-specific (antigen densities, E:T ratios) variables and was able to characterize comprehensive in vitro datasets from multiple affinity variants of anti-EGFR and anti-HER2 CAR-T cells. Next, a physiologically based PK (PBPK) model was developed to simultaneously characterize the biodistribution of untransduced T-cells, anti-EGFR CAR-T and anti-CD19 CAR-T cells in xenograft -mouse models. The proposed model accounted for the engagement of CAR-T cells with tumor cells at the site of action. Finally, an integrated PBPK-PD relationship was established to simultaneously characterize expansion of CAR-T cells and tumor growth inhibition (TGI) in xenograft mouse model, using datasets from anti-BCMA, anti-HER2, anti-CD19 and anti-EGFR CAR-T cells. Model simulations provided potential mechanistic insights toward the commonly observed multiphasic PK profile (i.e., rapid distribution, expansion, contraction and persistence) of CAR-T cells in the clinic. Model simulations suggested that CAR-T cells may have a steep dose-exposure relationship, and the apparent Cmax upon CAR-T cell expansion in blood may be more sensitive to patient tumor-burden than CAR-T dose levels. Global sensitivity analysis described the effect of other drug-specific parameters toward CAR-T cell expansion and TGI. The proposed modeling framework will be further examined with the clinical PK and PD data, and the learnings can be used to inform design and development of future CAR-T therapies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aman P Singh
- Discovery and Translational Research, Biologics Development Sciences, Janssen Biotherapeutics, Spring House, PA, USA
| | - Xirong Zheng
- Discovery and Translational Research, Biologics Development Sciences, Janssen Biotherapeutics, Spring House, PA, USA
| | | | - Wenbo Chen
- Discovery and Translational Research, Biologics Development Sciences, Janssen Biotherapeutics, Spring House, PA, USA
| | - Thomas J Carpenter
- Discovery and Translational Research, Biologics Development Sciences, Janssen Biotherapeutics, Spring House, PA, USA
| | - Alice Zong
- Discovery and Translational Research, Biologics Development Sciences, Janssen Biotherapeutics, Spring House, PA, USA
| | - Weirong Wang
- Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacometrics, Janssen Research and Development, Spring House, PA, USA
| | - Donald L Heald
- Discovery and Translational Research, Biologics Development Sciences, Janssen Biotherapeutics, Spring House, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Zou H, Banerjee P, Leung SSY, Yan X. Application of Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Modeling in Drug Delivery: Development and Challenges. Front Pharmacol 2020; 11:997. [PMID: 32719604 PMCID: PMC7348046 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2020.00997] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2020] [Accepted: 06/19/2020] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
With the advancement of technology, drug delivery systems and molecules with more complex architecture are developed. As a result, the drug absorption and disposition processes after administration of these drug delivery systems and engineered molecules become exceedingly complex. As the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) modeling allows for the separation of the drug-, carrier- and pharmacological system-specific parameters, it has been widely used to improve understanding of the in vivo behavior of these complex delivery systems and help their development. In this review, we summarized the basic PK-PD modeling theory in drug delivery and demonstrated how it had been applied to help the development of new delivery systems and modified large molecules. The linkage between PK and PD was highlighted. In particular, we exemplified the application of PK-PD modeling in the development of extended-release formulations, liposomal drugs, modified proteins, and antibody-drug conjugates. Furthermore, the model-based simulation using primary PD models for direct and indirect PD responses was conducted to explain the assertion of hypothetical minimal effective concentration or threshold in the exposure-response relationship of many drugs and its misconception. The limitations and challenges of the mechanism-based PK-PD model were also discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Huixi Zou
- School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - Parikshit Banerjee
- School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - Sharon Shui Yee Leung
- School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - Xiaoyu Yan
- School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Singh AP, Seigel GM, Guo L, Verma A, Wong GGL, Cheng HP, Shah DK. Evolution of the Systems Pharmacokinetics-Pharmacodynamics Model for Antibody-Drug Conjugates to Characterize Tumor Heterogeneity and In Vivo Bystander Effect. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2020; 374:184-199. [PMID: 32273304 DOI: 10.1124/jpet.119.262287] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2019] [Accepted: 03/30/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
The objective of this work was to develop a systems pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics (PK-PD) model that can characterize in vivo bystander effect of antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) in a heterogeneous tumor. To accomplish this goal, a coculture xenograft tumor with 50% GFP-MCF7 (HER2-low) and 50% N87 (HER2-high) cells was developed. The relative composition of a heterogeneous tumor for each cell type was experimentally determined by immunohistochemistry analysis. Trastuzumab-vc-MMAE (T-vc-MMAE) was used as a tool ADC. Plasma and tumor PK of T-vc-MMAE was analyzed in N87, GFP-MCF7, and coculture tumor-bearing mice. In addition, tumor growth inhibition (TGI) studies were conducted in all three xenografts at different T-vc-MMAE dose levels. To characterize the PK of ADC in coculture tumors, our previously published tumor distribution model was evolved to account for different cell populations. The evolved tumor PK model was able to a priori predict the PK of all ADC analytes in the coculture tumors reasonably well. The tumor PK model was subsequently integrated with a PD model that used intracellular tubulin occupancy to drive ADC efficacy in each cell type. The final systems PK-PD model was able to simultaneously characterize all the TGI data reasonably well, with a common set of parameters for MMAE-induced cytotoxicity. The model was later used to simulate the effect of different dosing regimens and tumor compositions on the bystander effect of ADC. The model simulations suggested that dose-fractionation regimen may further improve overall efficacy and bystander effect of ADCs by prolonging the tubulin occupancy in each cell type. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: A PK-PD analysis is presented to understand bystander effect of Trastuzumab-vc-MMAE ADC in antigen (Ag)-low, Ag-high, and coculture (i.e., Ag-high + Ag-low) xenograft mice. This study also describes a novel single cell-level systems PK-PD model to characterize in vivo bystander effect of ADCs. The proposed model can serve as a platform to mathematically characterize multiple cell populations and their interactions in tumor tissues. Our analysis also suggests that fractionated dosing regimen may help improve the bystander effect of ADCs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aman P Singh
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences (A.P.S., L.G., A.V., H.-P.C., D.K.S.), Center for Hearing and Deafness, SUNY Eye Institute (G.M.S.), and Department of Biological Sciences (G.G.-L.W.), The State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York
| | - Gail M Seigel
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences (A.P.S., L.G., A.V., H.-P.C., D.K.S.), Center for Hearing and Deafness, SUNY Eye Institute (G.M.S.), and Department of Biological Sciences (G.G.-L.W.), The State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York
| | - Leiming Guo
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences (A.P.S., L.G., A.V., H.-P.C., D.K.S.), Center for Hearing and Deafness, SUNY Eye Institute (G.M.S.), and Department of Biological Sciences (G.G.-L.W.), The State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York
| | - Ashwni Verma
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences (A.P.S., L.G., A.V., H.-P.C., D.K.S.), Center for Hearing and Deafness, SUNY Eye Institute (G.M.S.), and Department of Biological Sciences (G.G.-L.W.), The State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York
| | - Gloria Gao-Li Wong
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences (A.P.S., L.G., A.V., H.-P.C., D.K.S.), Center for Hearing and Deafness, SUNY Eye Institute (G.M.S.), and Department of Biological Sciences (G.G.-L.W.), The State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York
| | - Hsuan-Ping Cheng
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences (A.P.S., L.G., A.V., H.-P.C., D.K.S.), Center for Hearing and Deafness, SUNY Eye Institute (G.M.S.), and Department of Biological Sciences (G.G.-L.W.), The State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York
| | - Dhaval K Shah
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences (A.P.S., L.G., A.V., H.-P.C., D.K.S.), Center for Hearing and Deafness, SUNY Eye Institute (G.M.S.), and Department of Biological Sciences (G.G.-L.W.), The State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Singh AP, Guo L, Verma A, Wong GGL, Thurber GM, Shah DK. Antibody Coadministration as a Strategy to Overcome Binding-Site Barrier for ADCs: a Quantitative Investigation. AAPS JOURNAL 2020; 22:28. [PMID: 31938899 DOI: 10.1208/s12248-019-0387-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/23/2019] [Accepted: 10/04/2019] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
It has been proposed that the binding-site barrier (BSB) for antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) can be overcome with the help of antibody coadministration. However, broad utility of this strategy remains in question. Consequently, here, we have conducted in vivo experiments and pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics (PK-PD) modeling and simulation (M&S) to further evaluate the antibody coadministration hypothesis in a quantitative manner. Two different Trastuzumab-based ADCs, T-DM1 (no bystander effect) and T-vc-MMAE (with a bystander effect), were evaluated in high-HER2 (N87) and low-HER2 (MDA-MB-453) expressing tumors, with or without the coadministration of 1, 3, or 8-fold higher Trastuzumab. The tumor growth inhibition (TGI) data was quantitatively characterized using a semi-mechanistic PK-PD model to determine the nature of drug interaction for each coadministration regimen, by estimating the interaction parameter ψ. It was found that the coadministration strategy improved ADC efficacy under certain conditions and had no impact on ADC efficacy in others. The benefit was more pronounced for N87 tumors with very high antigen expression levels where the effect on treatment was synergistic (a synergistic drug interaction, ψ = 2.86 [2.6-3.12]). The benefit was diminished in tumor with lower antigen expression (MDA-MB-453) and payload with bystander effect. Under these conditions, the coadministration regimens resulted in an additive or even less than additive benefit (ψ ≤ 1). As such, our results suggest that while antibody coadministration may be helpful for ADCs in certain circumstances, one should not broadly apply this strategy to all the scenarios without first identifying the costs and benefits of this approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aman P Singh
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 455 Pharmacy Building, Buffalo, New York, 14214-8033, USA
| | - Leiming Guo
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 455 Pharmacy Building, Buffalo, New York, 14214-8033, USA
| | - Ashwni Verma
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 455 Pharmacy Building, Buffalo, New York, 14214-8033, USA
| | - Gloria Gao-Li Wong
- Department of Biological Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York, 14214-8033, USA
| | - Greg M Thurber
- Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.,Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | - Dhaval K Shah
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 455 Pharmacy Building, Buffalo, New York, 14214-8033, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Burton JK, Bottino D, Secomb TW. A Systems Pharmacology Model for Drug Delivery to Solid Tumors by Antibody-Drug Conjugates: Implications for Bystander Effects. AAPS JOURNAL 2019; 22:12. [PMID: 31828446 DOI: 10.1208/s12248-019-0390-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2019] [Accepted: 10/30/2019] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are cancer drugs composed of a humanized antibody linked to a cytotoxic payload, allowing preferential release of payload in cancer cells expressing the antibody-targeted antigen. Here, a systems pharmacology model is used to simulate ADC transport from blood to tumor tissue and ADC uptake by tumor cells. The model includes effects of spatial gradients in drug concentration in a three-dimensional network of tumor blood vessels with realistic geometry and accounts for diffusion of ADC in the tumor extracellular space, binding to antigen, internalization, intracellular processing, and payload efflux from cells. Cells that process an internalized ADC-antigen complex may release payload that can be taken up by other "bystander" cells. Such bystander effects are included in the model. The model is used to simulate conditions in previous experiments, showing good agreement with experimental results. Simulations are used to analyze the relationship of bystander effects to payload properties and single-dose administrations. The model indicates that exposure of payload to cells distant from vessels is sensitive to the free payload diffusivity in the extracellular space. When antigen expression is heterogeneous, the model indicates that the amount of payload accumulating in non-antigen-expressing cells increases linearly with dose but depends only weakly on the percentage of antigen-expressing cells. The model provides an integrated mechanistic framework for understanding the effects of spatial gradients on drug distribution using ADCs and for designing ADCs to achieve more effective payload distribution in solid tumors, thereby increasing the therapeutic index of the ADC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Dean Bottino
- Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Timothy W Secomb
- Program in Applied Mathematics, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA. .,Department of Physiology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, 85724-5051, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Liu YO, Wang ZN, Chen CY, Zhuang XH, Ruan CG, Zhou Y, Cui YM. Antiplatelet Effect of a Pulaimab [Anti-GPIIb/IIIa F(ab)2 Injection] Evaluated by a Population Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic Model. Curr Drug Metab 2019; 20:1060-1072. [PMID: 31755383 DOI: 10.2174/1389200220666191122120238] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2019] [Revised: 10/01/2019] [Accepted: 10/25/2019] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cardiovascular disease has one of the highest mortality rates among all the diseases. Platelets play an important role in the pathogenesis of cardiovascular diseases. Platelet membrane glycoprotein GPIIb/IIIa antagonists are the most effective antiplatelet drugs, and pulaimab is one of these. The study aims to promote individual medication of pulaimab [anti-GPIIb/IIIa F(ab)2 injection] by discovering the pharmacological relationship among the dose, concentration, and effects. The goal of this study is to establish a population pharmacokineticpharmacodynamic model to evaluate the antiplatelet effect of intravenous pulaimab injection. METHODS Data were collected from 59 healthy subjects who participated in a Phase-I clinical trial. Plasma concentration was used as the pharmacokinetic index, and platelet aggregation inhibition rate was used as the pharmacodynamic index. The basic pharmacokinetics model was a two-compartment model, whereas the basic pharmacodynamics model was a sigmoid-EMAX model with a direct effect. The covariable model was established by a stepwise method. The final model was verified by a goodness-of-fit method, and predictive performance was assessed by a Bootstrap (BS) method. RESULTS In the final model, typical population values of the parameters were as follows: central distribution Volume (V1), 183 L; peripheral distribution Volume (V2), 349 L; Central Clearance (CL), 31 L/h; peripheral clearance(Q), 204 L/h; effect compartment concentration reaching half of the maximum effect (EC50), 0.252 mg/L; maximum effect value (EMAX), 54.0%; and shape factor (γ), 0.42. In the covariable model, thrombin time had significant effects on CL and EMAX. Verification by the goodness-of-fit and BS methods showed that the final model was stable and reliable. CONCLUSION A model was successfully established to evaluate the antiplatelet effect of intravenous pulaimab injection that could provide support for the clinical therapeutic regimen.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ya-Ou Liu
- Department of Pharmacy, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Zi-Ning Wang
- Department of Pharmacy, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Chao-Yang Chen
- Department of Pharmacy, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Xian-Han Zhuang
- Shanghai Asia United Antibody Medicine Limited Company, Shanghai, China
| | - Chang-Geng Ruan
- Jiangsu Institute of Hematology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Suzhou University, Suzhou, Jiangsu, China
| | - Ying Zhou
- Department of Pharmacy, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Yi-Min Cui
- Department of Pharmacy, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Rock BM, Foti RS. Pharmacokinetic and Drug Metabolism Properties of Novel Therapeutic Modalities. Drug Metab Dispos 2019; 47:1097-1099. [PMID: 31399505 DOI: 10.1124/dmd.119.088708] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2019] [Accepted: 07/26/2019] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
The discovery and development of novel pharmaceutical therapies is rapidly transitioning from a small molecule-dominated focus to a more balanced portfolio consisting of small molecules, monoclonal antibodies, engineered proteins (modified endogenous proteins, bispecific antibodies, and fusion proteins), oligonucleotides, and gene-based therapies. This commentary, and the special issue as a whole, aims to highlight these emerging modalities and the efforts underway to better understand their unique pharmacokinetic and absorption, disposition, metabolism, and excretion (ADME) properties. The articles highlighted herein can be broadly grouped into those focusing on the ADME properties of novel therapeutics, those exploring targeted-delivery strategies, and finally, those discussing oligonucleotide therapies. It is also evident that whereas the field in general continues to progress toward new and more complex molecules, a significant amount of effort is still being placed on antibody-drug conjugates. As therapeutic molecules become increasingly complex, a parallel demand for advancements in experimental and analytical tools will become increasingly evident, both to increase the speed and efficiency of identifying safe and efficacious molecules and simultaneously decreasing our dependence on in vivo studies in preclinical species. The research and commentary included in this special issue will provide researchers, clinicians, and the patients we serve more options in the ongoing fight against grievous illnesses and unmet medical needs. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Recent trends in drug discovery and development suggest a shift away from a small molecule-dominated approach to a more balanced portfolio that includes small molecules, monoclonal antibodies, engineered proteins, and gene therapies. The research presented in this special issue of Drug Metabolism and Disposition will serve to highlight advancements in the understanding of the mechanisms that govern the pharmacokinetic and drug metabolism properties of the novel therapeutic modalities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brooke M Rock
- Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Amgen Research, South San Francisco, California (B.M.R.) and Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Amgen Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts (R.S.F.)
| | - Robert S Foti
- Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Amgen Research, South San Francisco, California (B.M.R.) and Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Amgen Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts (R.S.F.)
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
A Cell-Level Systems PK-PD Model to Characterize In Vivo Efficacy of ADCs. Pharmaceutics 2019; 11:pharmaceutics11020098. [PMID: 30823607 PMCID: PMC6409735 DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics11020098] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2019] [Revised: 02/18/2019] [Accepted: 02/20/2019] [Indexed: 01/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Here, we have presented the development of a systems pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics (PK-PD) model for antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), which uses intracellular target occupancy to drive in-vivo efficacy. The model is built based on PK and efficacy data generated using Trastuzumab-Valine-Citrulline-Monomethyl Auristatin E (T-vc-MMAE) ADC in N87 (high-HER2) and GFP-MCF7 (low-HER2) tumor bearing mice. It was observed that plasma PK of all ADC analytes was similar between the two tumor models; however, total trastuzumab, unconjugated MMAE, and total MMAE exposures were >10-fold, ~1.6-fold, and ~1.8-fold higher in N87 tumors. In addition, a prolonged retention of MMAE was observed within the tumors of both the mouse models, suggesting intracellular binding of MMAE to tubulin. A systems PK model, developed by integrating single-cell PK model with tumor distribution model, was able to capture all in vivo PK data reasonably well. Intracellular occupancy of tubulin predicted by the PK model was used to drive the efficacy of ADC using a novel PK-PD model. It was found that the same set of PD parameters was able to capture MMAE induced killing of GFP-MCF7 and N87 cells in vivo. These observations highlight the benefit of adopting a systems approach for ADC and provide a robust and predictive framework for successful clinical translation of ADCs.
Collapse
|
21
|
A "Dual" Cell-Level Systems PK-PD Model to Characterize the Bystander Effect of ADC. J Pharm Sci 2019; 108:2465-2475. [PMID: 30790581 DOI: 10.1016/j.xphs.2019.01.034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2018] [Accepted: 01/28/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Here, we have developed a cell-level systems PK-PD model to characterize the bystander effect of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs). Cytotoxicity data generated following incubation of Trastuzumab-vc-MMAE in cocultures of high HER2-expressing N87 and low HER2-expressing GFP-MCF7 cells were used to build the model. Single-cell PK model for ADC was used to characterize the PK of trastuzumab-vc-MMAE and released MMAE in N87 and GFP-MCF7 cells. The 2 cell-level PK models were mechanistically integrated to mimic the coculture condition. MMAE-induced intracellular occupancy of tubulin was used to drive the efficacy of ADC, and improvement in the tubulin occupancy of GFP-MCF7 cells in the presence of N87 cells was used to drive the bystander effect of trastuzumab-vc-MMAE. The "dual" cell-level PK-PD model was able to capture the observed data reasonably well. It was found that similar and high occupancy of tubulin by MMAE was required to achieve the cytotoxic effect in each cell line. In addition, estimated model parameters suggested that ∼60% improvement in the tubulin occupancy was required to attain half of the maximum bystander killing effect by the ADC. The presented model provides foundation for in vivo systems PK-PD model to characterize and predict the bystander effect of ADCs.
Collapse
|
22
|
Khera E, Thurber GM. Pharmacokinetic and Immunological Considerations for Expanding the Therapeutic Window of Next-Generation Antibody-Drug Conjugates. BioDrugs 2019; 32:465-480. [PMID: 30132210 DOI: 10.1007/s40259-018-0302-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) development has evolved greatly over the last 3 decades, including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of several new drugs. However, translating ADCs from the design stage and preclinical promise to clinical success has been a major hurdle for the field, particularly for solid tumors. The challenge in clinical development can be attributed to the difficulty in connecting the design of these multifaceted agents with the impact on clinical efficacy, especially with the accelerated development of 'next-generation' ADCs containing a variety of innovative biophysical developments. Given their complex nature, there is an urgent need to integrate holistic ADC characterization approaches. This includes comprehensive in vivo assessment of systemic, intratumoral and cellular pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, toxicodynamics, and interactions with the immune system, with the aim of optimizing the ADC therapeutic window. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic factors influencing the ADC therapeutic window include (1) selecting optimal target and ADC components for prolonged and stable plasma circulation to increase tumoral uptake with minimal non-specific systemic toxicity, (2) balancing homogeneous intratumoral distribution with efficient cellular uptake, and (3) translating improved ADC potency to better clinical efficacy. Balancing beneficial immunological effects such as Fc-mediated and payload-mediated immune cell activation against harmful immunogenic/toxic effects is also an emerging concern for ADCs. Here, we review practical considerations for tracking ADC efficacy and toxicity, as aided by high-resolution biomolecular and immunological tools, quantitative pharmacology, and mathematical models, all of which can elucidate the relative contributions of the multitude of interactions governing the ADC therapeutic window.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eshita Khera
- Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA
| | - Greg M Thurber
- Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA. .,Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
ADME Considerations and Bioanalytical Strategies for Pharmacokinetic Assessments of Antibody-Drug Conjugates. Antibodies (Basel) 2018; 7:antib7040041. [PMID: 31544891 PMCID: PMC6698957 DOI: 10.3390/antib7040041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2018] [Revised: 11/21/2018] [Accepted: 11/26/2018] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are a unique class of biotherapeutics of inherent heterogeneity and correspondingly complex absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion (ADME) properties. Herein, we consider the contribution of various components of ADCs such as various classes of warheads, linkers, and conjugation strategies on ADME of ADCs. Understanding the metabolism and disposition of ADCs and interpreting exposure-efficacy and exposure-safety relationships of ADCs in the context of their various catabolites is critical for design and subsequent development of a clinically successful ADCs. Sophisticated bioanalytical assays are required for the assessments of intact ADC, total antibody, released warhead and relevant metabolites. Both ligand-binding assays (LBA) and hybrid LBA-liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (LBA-LC-MS/MS) methods have been employed to assess pharmacokinetics (PK) of ADCs. Future advances in bioanalytical techniques will need to address the rising complexity of this biotherapeutic modality as more innovative conjugation strategies, antibody scaffolds and novel classes of warheads are employed for the next generation of ADCs. This review reflects our considerations on ADME of ADCs and provides a perspective on the current bioanalytical strategies for pharmacokinetic assessments of ADCs.
Collapse
|
24
|
Figueroa I, Leipold D, Leong S, Zheng B, Triguero-Carrasco M, Fourie-O'Donohue A, Kozak KR, Xu K, Schutten M, Wang H, Polson AG, Kamath AV. Prediction of non-linear pharmacokinetics in humans of an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) when evaluation of higher doses in animals is limited by tolerability: Case study with an anti-CD33 ADC. MAbs 2018; 10:738-750. [PMID: 29757698 PMCID: PMC6150628 DOI: 10.1080/19420862.2018.1465160] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2018] [Revised: 04/03/2018] [Accepted: 04/09/2018] [Indexed: 11/01/2022] Open
Abstract
For antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) that carry a cytotoxic drug, doses that can be administered in preclinical studies are typically limited by tolerability, leading to a narrow dose range that can be tested. For molecules with non-linear pharmacokinetics (PK), this limited dose range may be insufficient to fully characterize the PK of the ADC and limits translation to humans. Mathematical PK models are frequently used for molecule selection during preclinical drug development and for translational predictions to guide clinical study design. Here, we present a practical approach that uses limited PK and receptor occupancy (RO) data of the corresponding unconjugated antibody to predict ADC PK when conjugation does not alter the non-specific clearance or the antibody-target interaction. We used a 2-compartment model incorporating non-specific and specific (target mediated) clearances, where the latter is a function of RO, to describe the PK of anti-CD33 ADC with dose-limiting neutropenia in cynomolgus monkeys. We tested our model by comparing PK predictions based on the unconjugated antibody to observed ADC PK data that was not utilized for model development. Prospective prediction of human PK was performed by incorporating in vitro binding affinity differences between species for varying levels of CD33 target expression. Additionally, this approach was used to predict human PK of other previously tested anti-CD33 molecules with published clinical data. The findings showed that, for a cytotoxic ADC with non-linear PK and limited preclinical PK data, incorporating RO in the PK model and using data from the corresponding unconjugated antibody at higher doses allowed the identification of parameters to characterize monkey PK and enabled human PK predictions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Doug Leipold
- Preclinical Translational Pharmacokinetics Department
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Melissa Schutten
- Safety Assessment Department Genentech Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Hong Wang
- Safety Assessment Department Genentech Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
LC–MS Challenges in Characterizing and Quantifying Monoclonal Antibodies (mAb) and Antibody-Drug Conjugates (ADC) in Biological Samples. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2018. [DOI: 10.1007/s40495-017-0118-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
|
26
|
A generic whole body physiologically based pharmacokinetic model for therapeutic proteins in PK-Sim. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 2017; 45:235-257. [PMID: 29234936 PMCID: PMC5845054 DOI: 10.1007/s10928-017-9559-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 55] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2017] [Accepted: 12/05/2017] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Proteins are an increasingly important class of drugs used as therapeutic as well as diagnostic agents. A generic physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model was developed in order to represent at whole body level the fundamental mechanisms driving the distribution and clearance of large molecules like therapeutic proteins. The model was built as an extension of the PK-Sim model for small molecules incorporating (i) the two-pore formalism for drug extravasation from blood plasma to interstitial space, (ii) lymph flow, (iii) endosomal clearance and (iv) protection from endosomal clearance by neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn) mediated recycling as especially relevant for antibodies. For model development and evaluation, PK data was used for compounds with a wide range of solute radii. The model supports the integration of knowledge gained during all development phases of therapeutic proteins, enables translation from pre-clinical species to human and allows predictions of tissue concentration profiles which are of relevance for the analysis of on-target pharmacodynamic effects as well as off-target toxicity. The current implementation of the model replaces the generic protein PBPK model available in PK-Sim since version 4.2 and becomes part of the Open Systems Pharmacology Suite.
Collapse
|
27
|
Singh AP, Shah DK. Measurement and Mathematical Characterization of Cell-Level Pharmacokinetics of Antibody-Drug Conjugates: A Case Study with Trastuzumab-vc-MMAE. Drug Metab Dispos 2017; 45:1120-1132. [PMID: 28821484 DOI: 10.1124/dmd.117.076414] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2017] [Accepted: 08/11/2017] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
The main objective of this work was to understand and mathematically characterize the cellular disposition of a tool antibody-drug conjugate (ADC), trastuzumab-valine-citrulline-monomethyl auristatin E (T-vc-MMAE). Toward this goal, three different analytical methods were developed to measure the concentrations of different ADC-related analytes in the media and cell lysate. A liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method was developed to quantify unconjugated drug (i.e., MMAE) concentrations, a forced deconjugation method was developed to quantify total drug concentrations, and an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay method was developed to quantify total antibody (i.e., trastuzumab) concentrations. Cellular disposition studies were conducted in low-HER2-(GFP-MCF7) and high-HER2-expressing (N87) cell lines, following continuous or 2-hour exposure to MMAE and T-vc-MMAE. Similar intracellular accumulation of MMAE was observed between two cell lines following incubation with plain MMAE. However, when incubated with T-vc-MMAE, much higher intracellular exposures of unconjugated drug, total drug, and total antibody were observed in N87 cells compared with GFP-MCF7 cells. A novel single-cell disposition model was developed to simultaneously characterize in vitro pharmacokinetics of all three analytes of the ADC in the media and cellular space. The model was able to characterize all the data well and provided robust estimates of MMAE influx rate, MMAE efflux rate, and intracellular degradation rate for T-vc-MMAE. ADC internalization and degradation rates, HER2 expression, and MMAE efflux rate were found to be the key parameters responsible for intracellular exposure to MMAE, on the basis of a global sensitivity analysis. The single-cell pharmacokinetics model for ADCs presented here is expected to provide a better framework for characterizing bystander effect of ADCs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aman P Singh
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York
| | - Dhaval K Shah
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Khot A, Tibbitts J, Rock D, Shah DK. Development of a Translational Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Model for Antibody-Drug Conjugates: a Case Study with T-DM1. AAPS JOURNAL 2017; 19:1715-1734. [PMID: 28808917 DOI: 10.1208/s12248-017-0131-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2017] [Accepted: 07/26/2017] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
Systems pharmacokinetic (PK) models that can characterize and predict whole body disposition of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are needed to support (i) development of reliable exposure-response relationships for ADCs and (ii) selection of ADC targets with optimal tumor and tissue expression profiles. Towards this goal, we have developed a translational physiologically based PK (PBPK) model for ADCs, using T-DM1 as a tool compound. The preclinical PBPK model was developed using rat data. Biodistribution of DM1 in rats was used to develop the small molecule PBPK model, and the PK of conjugated trastuzumab (i.e., T-DM1) in rats was characterized using platform PBPK model for antibody. Both the PBPK models were combined via degradation and deconjugation processes. The degradation of conjugated antibody was assumed to be similar to a normal antibody, and the deconjugation of DM1 from T-DM1 in rats was estimated using plasma PK data. The rat PBPK model was translated to humans to predict clinical PK of T-DM1. The translation involved the use of human antibody PBPK model to characterize the PK of conjugated trastuzumab, use of allometric scaling to predict human clearance of DM1 catabolites, and use of monkey PK data to predict deconjugation of DM1 in the clinic. PBPK model-predicted clinical PK profiles were compared with clinically observed data. The PK of total trastuzumab and T-DM1 were predicted reasonably well, and slight systemic deviations were observed for the PK of DM1-containing catabolites. The ADC PBPK model presented here can serve as a platform to develop models for other ADCs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antari Khot
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 455 Kapoor Hall, Buffalo, NY, 14214, USA
| | | | - Dan Rock
- Department of Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, 91320, USA
| | - Dhaval K Shah
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 455 Kapoor Hall, Buffalo, NY, 14214, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Singh AP, Shah DK. Application of a PK-PD Modeling and Simulation-Based Strategy for Clinical Translation of Antibody-Drug Conjugates: a Case Study with Trastuzumab Emtansine (T-DM1). AAPS JOURNAL 2017; 19:1054-1070. [PMID: 28374319 DOI: 10.1208/s12248-017-0071-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2016] [Accepted: 02/28/2017] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Successful clinical translation of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) can be challenging due to complex pharmacokinetics and differences between preclinical and clinical tumors. To facilitate this translation, we have developed a general pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) modeling and simulation (M&S)-based strategy for ADCs. Here we present the validation of this strategy using T-DM1 as a case study. A previously developed preclinical tumor disposition model for T-DM1 (Singh and Shah, AAPSJ. 2015; 18(4):861-875) was used to develop a PK-PD model that can characterize in vivo efficacy of T-DM1 in preclinical tumor models. The preclinical data was used to estimate the efficacy parameters for T-DM1. Human PK of T-DM1 was a priori predicted using allometric scaling of monkey PK parameters. The predicted human PK, preclinically estimated efficacy parameters, and clinically observed volume and growth parameters for breast cancer were combined to develop a translated clinical PK-PD model for T-DM1. Clinical trial simulations were performed using the translated PK-PD model to predict progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rates (ORRs) for T-DM1. The model simulated PFS rates for HER2 1+ and 3+ populations were comparable to the rates observed in three different clinical trials. The model predicted only a modest improvement in ORR with an increase in clinically approved dose of T-DM1. However, the model suggested that a fractionated dosing regimen (e.g., front loading) may provide an improvement in the efficacy. In general, the PK-PD M&S-based strategy presented here is capable of a priori predicting the clinical efficacy of ADCs, and this strategy has been now retrospectively validated for all clinically approved ADCs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aman P Singh
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 455 Kapoor Hall, Buffalo, New York, 14214-8033, USA
| | - Dhaval K Shah
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 455 Kapoor Hall, Buffalo, New York, 14214-8033, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Calculated conjugated payload from immunoassay and LC–MS intact protein analysis measurements of antibody-drug conjugate. Bioanalysis 2016; 8:2205-2217. [DOI: 10.4155/bio-2016-0160] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
Aim: Complex nature of bioconjugates require multiple bioanalytical approaches to support PK and absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion characterization. For antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) bioanalysis both LC–MS and ligand-binding assays (LBAs) are employed. Results: A method consisting of immunocapture extraction of ADC from biomatrices followed by LC–MS analysis of light and heavy chain is described. Drug antibody ratio (DAR) profiles of ADC Tras-mcVC-PF06380101 dosed at 0.3, 1 and 3 mg/kg in Sprague Dawley rats were obtained. Combined with total antibody (monoclonal antibody) measurement by LBA, conjugated payload concentration was calculated. Conclusion: PK profiles from LBA, ADC and calculated conjugated payload (DAR × monoclonal antibody) were in good agreement. We present a new tool for PK assessment of ADCs while also exploring ADC metabolism and DAR sensitivity of LBA ADC assay.
Collapse
|
31
|
Zhang D, Yu SF, Ma Y, Xu K, Dragovich PS, Pillow TH, Liu L, Del Rosario G, He J, Pei Z, Sadowsky JD, Erickson HK, Hop CECA, Khojasteh SC. Chemical Structure and Concentration of Intratumor Catabolites Determine Efficacy of Antibody Drug Conjugates. Drug Metab Dispos 2016; 44:1517-23. [PMID: 27417182 PMCID: PMC4998580 DOI: 10.1124/dmd.116.070631] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2016] [Accepted: 07/08/2016] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Despite recent technological advances in quantifying antibody drug conjugate (ADC) species, such as total antibody, conjugated antibody, conjugated drug, and payload drug in circulation, the correlation of their exposures with the efficacy of ADC outcomes in vivo remains challenging. Here, the chemical structures and concentrations of intratumor catabolites were investigated to better understand the drivers of ADC in vivo efficacy. Anti-CD22 disulfide-linked pyrrolobenzodiazepine (PBD-dimer) conjugates containing methyl- and cyclobutyl-substituted disulfide linkers exhibited strong efficacy in a WSU-DLCL2 xenograft mouse model, whereas an ADC derived from a cyclopropyl linker was inactive. Total ADC antibody concentrations and drug-to-antibody ratios (DAR) in circulation were similar between the cyclobutyl-containing ADC and the cyclopropyl-containing ADC; however, the former afforded the release of the PBD-dimer payload in the tumor, but the latter only generated a nonimmolating thiol-containing catabolite that did not bind to DNA. These results suggest that intratumor catabolite analysis rather than systemic pharmacokinetic analysis may be used to better explain and predict ADC in vivo efficacy. These are good examples to demonstrate that the chemical nature and concentration of intratumor catabolites depend on the linker type used for drug conjugation, and the potency of the released drug moiety ultimately determines the ADC in vivo efficacy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Donglu Zhang
- Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics (D.Z., Y.M., C.E.C.A.H, S.C.K.), Translational Oncology (S.Y., G.D.R.), BioAnalytical Sciences (K.X., L.L., J.H.), Discovery Chemistry (P.S.D., T.H.P., Z.P.), Protein Chemistry (J.D.S., H.K.E.), Genentech, South San Francisco, California
| | - Shang-Fan Yu
- Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics (D.Z., Y.M., C.E.C.A.H, S.C.K.), Translational Oncology (S.Y., G.D.R.), BioAnalytical Sciences (K.X., L.L., J.H.), Discovery Chemistry (P.S.D., T.H.P., Z.P.), Protein Chemistry (J.D.S., H.K.E.), Genentech, South San Francisco, California
| | - Yong Ma
- Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics (D.Z., Y.M., C.E.C.A.H, S.C.K.), Translational Oncology (S.Y., G.D.R.), BioAnalytical Sciences (K.X., L.L., J.H.), Discovery Chemistry (P.S.D., T.H.P., Z.P.), Protein Chemistry (J.D.S., H.K.E.), Genentech, South San Francisco, California
| | - Keyang Xu
- Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics (D.Z., Y.M., C.E.C.A.H, S.C.K.), Translational Oncology (S.Y., G.D.R.), BioAnalytical Sciences (K.X., L.L., J.H.), Discovery Chemistry (P.S.D., T.H.P., Z.P.), Protein Chemistry (J.D.S., H.K.E.), Genentech, South San Francisco, California
| | - Peter S Dragovich
- Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics (D.Z., Y.M., C.E.C.A.H, S.C.K.), Translational Oncology (S.Y., G.D.R.), BioAnalytical Sciences (K.X., L.L., J.H.), Discovery Chemistry (P.S.D., T.H.P., Z.P.), Protein Chemistry (J.D.S., H.K.E.), Genentech, South San Francisco, California
| | - Thomas H Pillow
- Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics (D.Z., Y.M., C.E.C.A.H, S.C.K.), Translational Oncology (S.Y., G.D.R.), BioAnalytical Sciences (K.X., L.L., J.H.), Discovery Chemistry (P.S.D., T.H.P., Z.P.), Protein Chemistry (J.D.S., H.K.E.), Genentech, South San Francisco, California
| | - Luna Liu
- Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics (D.Z., Y.M., C.E.C.A.H, S.C.K.), Translational Oncology (S.Y., G.D.R.), BioAnalytical Sciences (K.X., L.L., J.H.), Discovery Chemistry (P.S.D., T.H.P., Z.P.), Protein Chemistry (J.D.S., H.K.E.), Genentech, South San Francisco, California
| | - Geoffrey Del Rosario
- Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics (D.Z., Y.M., C.E.C.A.H, S.C.K.), Translational Oncology (S.Y., G.D.R.), BioAnalytical Sciences (K.X., L.L., J.H.), Discovery Chemistry (P.S.D., T.H.P., Z.P.), Protein Chemistry (J.D.S., H.K.E.), Genentech, South San Francisco, California
| | - Jintang He
- Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics (D.Z., Y.M., C.E.C.A.H, S.C.K.), Translational Oncology (S.Y., G.D.R.), BioAnalytical Sciences (K.X., L.L., J.H.), Discovery Chemistry (P.S.D., T.H.P., Z.P.), Protein Chemistry (J.D.S., H.K.E.), Genentech, South San Francisco, California
| | - Zhonghua Pei
- Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics (D.Z., Y.M., C.E.C.A.H, S.C.K.), Translational Oncology (S.Y., G.D.R.), BioAnalytical Sciences (K.X., L.L., J.H.), Discovery Chemistry (P.S.D., T.H.P., Z.P.), Protein Chemistry (J.D.S., H.K.E.), Genentech, South San Francisco, California
| | - Jack D Sadowsky
- Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics (D.Z., Y.M., C.E.C.A.H, S.C.K.), Translational Oncology (S.Y., G.D.R.), BioAnalytical Sciences (K.X., L.L., J.H.), Discovery Chemistry (P.S.D., T.H.P., Z.P.), Protein Chemistry (J.D.S., H.K.E.), Genentech, South San Francisco, California
| | - Hans K Erickson
- Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics (D.Z., Y.M., C.E.C.A.H, S.C.K.), Translational Oncology (S.Y., G.D.R.), BioAnalytical Sciences (K.X., L.L., J.H.), Discovery Chemistry (P.S.D., T.H.P., Z.P.), Protein Chemistry (J.D.S., H.K.E.), Genentech, South San Francisco, California
| | - Cornelis E C A Hop
- Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics (D.Z., Y.M., C.E.C.A.H, S.C.K.), Translational Oncology (S.Y., G.D.R.), BioAnalytical Sciences (K.X., L.L., J.H.), Discovery Chemistry (P.S.D., T.H.P., Z.P.), Protein Chemistry (J.D.S., H.K.E.), Genentech, South San Francisco, California
| | - S Cyrus Khojasteh
- Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics (D.Z., Y.M., C.E.C.A.H, S.C.K.), Translational Oncology (S.Y., G.D.R.), BioAnalytical Sciences (K.X., L.L., J.H.), Discovery Chemistry (P.S.D., T.H.P., Z.P.), Protein Chemistry (J.D.S., H.K.E.), Genentech, South San Francisco, California
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Cilliers C, Guo H, Liao J, Christodolu N, Thurber GM. Multiscale Modeling of Antibody-Drug Conjugates: Connecting Tissue and Cellular Distribution to Whole Animal Pharmacokinetics and Potential Implications for Efficacy. AAPS JOURNAL 2016; 18:1117-1130. [PMID: 27287046 DOI: 10.1208/s12248-016-9940-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 69] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2016] [Accepted: 05/27/2016] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Antibody-drug conjugates exhibit complex pharmacokinetics due to their combination of macromolecular and small molecule properties. These issues range from systemic concerns, such as deconjugation of the small molecule drug during the long antibody circulation time or rapid clearance from nonspecific interactions, to local tumor tissue heterogeneity, cell bystander effects, and endosomal escape. Mathematical models can be used to study the impact of these processes on overall distribution in an efficient manner, and several types of models have been used to analyze varying aspects of antibody distribution including physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models and tissue-level simulations. However, these processes are quantitative in nature and cannot be handled qualitatively in isolation. For example, free antibody from deconjugation of the small molecule will impact the distribution of conjugated antibodies within the tumor. To incorporate these effects into a unified framework, we have coupled the systemic and organ-level distribution of a PBPK model with the tissue-level detail of a distributed parameter tumor model. We used this mathematical model to analyze new experimental results on the distribution of the clinical antibody-drug conjugate Kadcyla in HER2-positive mouse xenografts. This model is able to capture the impact of the drug-antibody ratio (DAR) on tumor penetration, the net result of drug deconjugation, and the effect of using unconjugated antibody to drive ADC penetration deeper into the tumor tissue. This modeling approach will provide quantitative and mechanistic support to experimental studies trying to parse the impact of multiple mechanisms of action for these complex drugs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cornelius Cilliers
- Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd., Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA
| | - Hans Guo
- Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd., Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA
| | - Jianshan Liao
- Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd., Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA
| | - Nikolas Christodolu
- Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd., Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA
| | - Greg M Thurber
- Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd., Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA. .,Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Maass KF, Kulkarni C, Betts AM, Wittrup KD. Determination of Cellular Processing Rates for a Trastuzumab-Maytansinoid Antibody-Drug Conjugate (ADC) Highlights Key Parameters for ADC Design. AAPS J 2016; 18:635-46. [PMID: 26912181 PMCID: PMC5256610 DOI: 10.1208/s12248-016-9892-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 53] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2015] [Accepted: 02/16/2016] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are a promising class of cancer therapeutics that combine the specificity of antibodies with the cytotoxic effects of payload drugs. A quantitative understanding of how ADCs are processed intracellularly can illustrate which processing steps most influence payload delivery, thus aiding the design of more effective ADCs. In this work, we develop a kinetic model for ADC cellular processing as well as generalizable methods based on flow cytometry and fluorescence imaging to parameterize this model. A number of key processing steps are included in the model: ADC binding to its target antigen, internalization via receptor-mediated endocytosis, proteolytic degradation of the ADC, efflux of the payload out of the cell, and payload binding to its intracellular target. The model was developed with a trastuzumab-maytansinoid ADC (TM-ADC) similar to trastuzumab-emtansine (T-DM1), which is used in the clinical treatment of HER2+ breast cancer. In three high-HER2-expressing cell lines (BT-474, NCI-N87, and SK-BR-3), we report for TM-ADC half-lives for internalization of 6-14 h, degradation of 18-25 h, and efflux rate of 44-73 h. Sensitivity analysis indicates that the internalization rate and efflux rate are key parameters for determining how much payload is delivered to a cell with TM-ADC. In addition, this model describing the cellular processing of ADCs can be incorporated into larger pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics models, as demonstrated in the associated companion paper.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katie F Maass
- Department of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
- David H. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Chethana Kulkarni
- Oncology Medicinal Chemistry, Worldwide Medicinal Chemistry, Pfizer, Groton, Connecticut, USA
| | - Alison M Betts
- Translational Research Group, Department of Pharmacokinetics Dynamics and Metabolism, Pfizer, Groton, Connecticut, USA
| | - K Dane Wittrup
- Department of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
- David H. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
- Department of Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Ave. 76-261D, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 02139, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Integration of bioanalytical measurements using PK-PD modeling and simulation: implications for antibody-drug conjugate development. Bioanalysis 2016; 7:1633-48. [PMID: 26226312 DOI: 10.4155/bio.15.85] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/23/2023] Open
Abstract
Recent technological advances have enabled precise quantitation of various bioanalytical measurements pertaining to antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs). However, availability of bioanalytical data alone cannot guarantee the provision of correct go/no-go decisions at different stages of ADC development. Integration and comprehension of all the available data at each stage of ADC development is necessary to make a well informed and objective decision about moving the ADC forward to the clinic. In this manuscript, we have reviewed the application of PK-PD modeling and simulation for quantitative integration of diverse bioanalytical data available from different stages of ADC development. We have also elaborated on how similar bioanalytical data can be characterized using different models to gain distinct insights into ADC development.
Collapse
|
35
|
Singh AP, Maass KF, Betts AM, Wittrup KD, Kulkarni C, King LE, Khot A, Shah DK. Evolution of Antibody-Drug Conjugate Tumor Disposition Model to Predict Preclinical Tumor Pharmacokinetics of Trastuzumab-Emtansine (T-DM1). AAPS JOURNAL 2016; 18:861-75. [PMID: 27029797 DOI: 10.1208/s12248-016-9904-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2015] [Accepted: 03/08/2016] [Indexed: 01/17/2023]
Abstract
A mathematical model capable of accurately characterizing intracellular disposition of ADCs is essential for a priori predicting unconjugated drug concentrations inside the tumor. Towards this goal, the objectives of this manuscript were to: (1) evolve previously published cellular disposition model of ADC with more intracellular details to characterize the disposition of T-DM1 in different HER2 expressing cell lines, (2) integrate the improved cellular model with the ADC tumor disposition model to a priori predict DM1 concentrations in a preclinical tumor model, and (3) identify prominent pathways and sensitive parameters associated with intracellular activation of ADCs. The cellular disposition model was augmented by incorporating intracellular ADC degradation and passive diffusion of unconjugated drug across tumor cells. Different biomeasures and chemomeasures for T-DM1, quantified in the companion manuscript, were incorporated into the modified model of ADC to characterize in vitro pharmacokinetics of T-DM1 in three HER2+ cell lines. When the cellular model was integrated with the tumor disposition model, the model was able to a priori predict tumor DM1 concentrations in xenograft mice. Pathway analysis suggested different contribution of antigen-mediated and passive diffusion pathways for intracellular unconjugated drug exposure between in vitro and in vivo systems. Global and local sensitivity analyses revealed that non-specific deconjugation and passive diffusion of the drug across tumor cell membrane are key parameters for drug exposure inside a cell. Finally, a systems pharmacokinetic model for intracellular processing of ADCs has been proposed to highlight our current understanding about the determinants of ADC activation inside a cell.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aman P Singh
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 455 Kapoor Hall, Buffalo, New York, 14214-8033, USA
| | - Katie F Maass
- Department of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.,David H. Koch Institute of Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Alison M Betts
- Translational Research Group, Department of Pharmacokinetics Dynamics and Metabolism, Pfizer, Groton, Connecticut, USA
| | - K Dane Wittrup
- Department of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.,David H. Koch Institute of Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.,Department of Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Chethana Kulkarni
- Oncology Medicinal Chemistry, Worldwide Medicinal Chemistry, Pfizer, Groton, Connecticut, USA
| | - Lindsay E King
- Translational Research Group, Department of Pharmacokinetics Dynamics and Metabolism, Pfizer, Groton, Connecticut, USA
| | - Antari Khot
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 455 Kapoor Hall, Buffalo, New York, 14214-8033, USA
| | - Dhaval K Shah
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 455 Kapoor Hall, Buffalo, New York, 14214-8033, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Kraynov E, Kamath AV, Walles M, Tarcsa E, Deslandes A, Iyer RA, Datta-Mannan A, Sriraman P, Bairlein M, Yang JJ, Barfield M, Xiao G, Escandon E, Wang W, Rock DA, Chemuturi NV, Moore DJ. Current Approaches for Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, and Excretion Characterization of Antibody-Drug Conjugates: An Industry White Paper. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2015; 44:617-23. [PMID: 26669328 DOI: 10.1124/dmd.115.068049] [Citation(s) in RCA: 63] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/22/2015] [Accepted: 12/14/2015] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
An antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) is a unique therapeutic modality composed of a highly potent drug molecule conjugated to a monoclonal antibody. As the number of ADCs in various stages of nonclinical and clinical development has been increasing, pharmaceutical companies have been exploring diverse approaches to understanding the disposition of ADCs. To identify the key absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion (ADME) issues worth examining when developing an ADC and to find optimal scientifically based approaches to evaluate ADC ADME, the International Consortium for Innovation and Quality in Pharmaceutical Development launched an ADC ADME working group in early 2014. This white paper contains observations from the working group and provides an initial framework on issues and approaches to consider when evaluating the ADME of ADCs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eugenia Kraynov
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - Amrita V Kamath
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - Markus Walles
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - Edit Tarcsa
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - Antoine Deslandes
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - Ramaswamy A Iyer
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - Amita Datta-Mannan
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - Priya Sriraman
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - Michaela Bairlein
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - Johnny J Yang
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - Matthew Barfield
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - Guangqing Xiao
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - Enrique Escandon
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - Weirong Wang
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - Dan A Rock
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - Nagendra V Chemuturi
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| | - David J Moore
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., La Jolla, California (E.K.); Preclinical and Translational Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Genentech, South San Francisco, California (A.V.K.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma, Basel, Switzerland (M.W.); Drug Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics, and Bioanalysis Department, AbbVie, Worcester, Massachusetts (E.T.); Disposition, Safety and Animal Research, Sanofi, Vitry sur Seine, France (A.D.); Pharmaceutical Candidate Optimization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey (R.A.I.); Departments of Drug Disposition, Development, and Commercialization, Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana (A.D.-M.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Celgene Corp., Summit, New Jersey (P.S.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Bayer Pharma AG, Wuppertal, Germany (Mi.B.); Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., Boston, Massachusetts (J.J.Y.); Bioanalytical Science and Toxicokinetics, Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline R&D, Ware, United Kingdom (Ma.B.); Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and In Vitro ADME, Biogen, Cambridge, Massachusetts (G.X.); Biologics Discovery Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics and Bioanalytics Department, Merck Research Laboratories, Palo Alto, California (E.E.); Biologics Clinical Pharmacology, Janssen R&D, Spring House, Pennsylvania, (W.W.); Amgen Pharmacokinetics and Drug Metabolism, Thousand Oaks, California (D.A.R.); Seattle Genetics Inc., Seattle, Washington (N.V.C); and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, New York City, New York (D.J.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Antibody-conjugated drug assay for protease-cleavable antibody-drug conjugates. Bioanalysis 2015; 8:55-63. [PMID: 26647801 DOI: 10.4155/bio.15.230] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/16/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) require multiple assays to characterize their PK. These assays can separately evaluate the ADC by quantifying the antibody or the conjugated drug and may give different answers due to assay measurement differences, heterogeneous nature of ADCs and potential biotransformations that occur in vivo. RESULTS We present a new version of the antibody-conjugated drug assay for valine-citrulline-linked monomethylauristatin E (vcMMAE) ADCs. A stable isotope-labeled internal standard, protein A affinity capture and solid-phase cleavage of MMAE using papain was used prior to LC-MS/MS analysis. CONCLUSION The assay was used to assess the difference in ex vivo drug-linker stability of native-cysteine versus engineered cysteine ADCs and to determine the number of drugs per antibody of a native-cysteine ADC in vivo.
Collapse
|
38
|
Shah DK. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic considerations for the next generation protein therapeutics. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 2015; 42:553-71. [PMID: 26373957 DOI: 10.1007/s10928-015-9447-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2015] [Accepted: 09/10/2015] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
Increasingly sophisticated protein engineering efforts have been undertaken lately to generate protein therapeutics with desired properties. This has resulted in the discovery of the next generation of protein therapeutics, which include: engineered antibodies, immunoconjugates, bi/multi-specific proteins, antibody mimetic novel scaffolds, and engineered ligands/receptors. These novel protein therapeutics possess unique physicochemical properties and act via a unique mechanism-of-action, which collectively makes their pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) different than other established biological molecules. Consequently, in order to support the discovery and development of these next generation molecules, it becomes important to understand the determinants controlling their PK/PD. This review discusses the determinants that a PK/PD scientist should consider during the design and development of next generation protein therapeutics. In addition, the role of systems PK/PD models in enabling rational development of the next generation protein therapeutics is emphasized.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dhaval K Shah
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 455 Kapoor Hall, Buffalo, NY, 14214-8033, USA.
| |
Collapse
|