Current In Vitro Assays for Prediction of T Cell Mediated Immunogenicity of Biotherapeutics and Manufacturing Impurities

Assessing the immunogenicity risk of salmon calcitonin peptide impurities using in silico and in vitro methods

Advances in synthetic peptide synthesis have enabled rapid and cost-effective peptide drug manufacturing. For this reason, peptide drugs that were first produced using recombinant DNA (rDNA) technology are now being produced using solid- and liquid-phase peptide synthesis. While peptide synthesis has some advantages over rDNA expression methods, new peptide-related impurities that differ from the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) may be generated during synthesis. These impurity byproducts of the original peptide sequence feature amino acid insertions, deletions, and side-chain modifications that may alter the immunogenicity risk profile of the drug product. Impurities resulting from synthesis have become the special focus of regulatory review and approval for human use, as outlined in the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research guidance document, "ANDAs for Certain Highly Purified Synthetic Peptide Drug Products That Refer to Listed Drugs of rDNA Origin," published in 2021. This case study illustrates how in silico and in vitro methods can be applied to assess the immunogenicity risk of impurities that may be present in synthetic generic versions of the salmon calcitonin (SCT) drug product. Sponsors of generic drug abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) should consider careful control of these impurities (for example, keeping the concentration of the immunogenic impurities below the cut-off recommended by FDA regulators). Twenty example SCT impurities were analyzed using in silico tools and assessed as having slightly more or less immunogenic risk potential relative to the SCT API peptide. Class II human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-binding assays provided independent confirmation that a 9-mer sequence present in the C-terminus of SCT binds promiscuously to multiple HLA DR alleles, while T-cell assays confirmed the expected T-cell responses to SCT and selected impurities. In silico analysis combined with in vitro assays that directly compare the API to each individual impurity peptide may be a useful approach for assessing the potential immunogenic risk posed by peptide impurities that are present in generic drug products.

Immunogenicity Risk Assessment of Process-Related Impurities in An Engineered T Cell Receptor Cellular Product

Cell therapies such as genetically modified T cells have emerged as a promising and viable treatment for hematologic cancers and are being aggressively pursued for a wide range of diseases and conditions that were previously difficult to treat or had no cure. The process development requires genetic modifications to T cells to express a receptor (engineered T cell receptor (eTCR)) of specific binding qualities to the desired target. Protein reagents utilized during the cell therapy manufacturing process, to facilitate these genetic modifications, are often present as process-related impurities at residual levels in the final drug product and can represent a potential immunogenicity risk upon infusion. This manuscript presents a framework for the qualification of an assay for assessing the immunogenicity risk of AA6 and Cas9 residuals. The same framework applies for other residuals; however, AAV6 and Cas9 were selected as they were residuals from the manufacturing of an engineered T cell receptor cellular product in development. The manuscript: 1) elucidates theoretical risks, 2) summarizes analytical data collected during process development, 3) describes the qualification of an in vitro human PBMC cytokine release assay to assess immunogenicity risk from cellular product associated process residuals; 4) identifies a multiplexed inflammatory innate and adaptive cytokine panel with pre-defined criteria using relevant positive controls; and 5) discusses qualification challenges and potential solutions for establishing meaningful thresholds. The assessment is not only relevant to establishing safe exposure levels of these residuals but also in guiding risk assessment and CMC strategy during the conduct of clinical trials.

A time-resolved meta-analysis of consensus gene expression profiles during human T-cell activation

BACKGROUND

The coordinated transcriptional regulation of activated T-cells is based on a complex dynamic behavior of signaling networks. Given an external stimulus, T-cell gene expression is characterized by impulse and sustained patterns over the course. Here, we analyze the temporal pattern of activation across different T-cell populations to develop consensus gene signatures for T-cell activation.

RESULTS

Here, we identify and verify general biomarker signatures robustly evaluating T-cell activation in a time-resolved manner. We identify time-resolved gene expression profiles comprising 521 genes of up to 10 disjunct time points during activation and different polarization conditions. The gene signatures include central transcriptional regulators of T-cell activation, representing successive waves as well as sustained patterns of induction. They cover sustained repressed, intermediate, and late response expression rates across multiple T-cell populations, thus defining consensus biomarker signatures for T-cell activation. In addition, intermediate and late response activation signatures in CAR T-cell infusion products are correlated to immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome.

CONCLUSION

This study is the first to describe temporally resolved gene expression patterns across T-cell populations. These biomarker signatures are a valuable source, e.g., monitoring transcriptional changes during T-cell activation with a reasonable number of genes, annotating T-cell states in single-cell transcriptome studies, or assessing dysregulated functions of human T-cell immunity.

Expanding the MAPPs Assay to Accommodate MHC-II Pan Receptors for Improved Predictability of Potential T Cell Epitopes

A critical step in the immunogenicity cascade is attributed to human leukocyte antigen (HLA) II presentation triggering T cell immune responses. The liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS)-based major histocompatibility complex (MHC) II-associated peptide proteomics (MAPPs) assay is implemented during preclinical risk assessments to identify biotherapeutic-derived T cell epitopes. Although studies indicate that HLA-DP and HLA-DQ alleles are linked to immunogenicity, most MAPPs studies are restricted to using HLA-DR as the dominant HLA II genotype due to the lack of well-characterized immunoprecipitating antibodies. Here, we address this issue by testing various commercially available clones of MHC-II pan (CR3/43, WR18, and Tü39), HLA-DP (B7/21), and HLA-DQ (SPV-L3 and 1a3) antibodies in the MAPPs assay, and characterizing identified peptides according to binding specificity. Our results reveal that HLA II receptor-precipitating reagents with similar reported specificities differ based on clonality and that MHC-II pan antibodies do not entirely exhibit pan-specific tendencies. Since no individual antibody clone is able to recover the complete HLA II peptide repertoire, we recommend a mixed strategy of clones L243, WR18, and SPV-L3 in a single immunoprecipitation step for more robust compound-specific peptide detection. Ultimately, our optimized MAPPs strategy improves the predictability and additional identification of T cell epitopes in immunogenicity risk assessments.

In vitro and in vivo immunogenicity assessment of protein aggregate characteristics

The immunogenicity risk of therapeutic protein aggregates has been extensively investigated over the past decades. While it is established that not all aggregates are equally immunogenic, the specific aggregate characteristics, which are most likely to induce an immune response, remain ambiguous. The aim of this study was to perform comprehensive in vitro and in vivo immunogenicity assessment of human insulin aggregates varying in size, structure and chemical modifications, while keeping other morphological characteristics constant. We found that flexible aggregates with highly altered secondary structure were most immunogenic in all setups, while compact aggregates with native-like structure were found to be immunogenic primarily in vivo. Moreover, sub-visible (1-100 µm) aggregates were found to be more immunogenic than sub-micron (0.1-1 µm) aggregates, while chemical modifications (deamidation, ethylation and covalent dimers) were not found to have any measurable impact on immunogenicity. The findings highlight the importance of utilizing aggregates varying in few characteristics for assessment of immunogenicity risk of specific morphological features and may provide a workflow for reliable particle analysis in biotherapeutics.

Validation of a Dendritic Cell and CD4+ T Cell Restimulation Assay Contributing to the Immunogenicity Risk Evaluation of Biotherapeutics

Immunogenicity, defined as the ability to provoke an immune response, can be either wanted (i.e., vaccines) or unwanted. The latter refers to an immune response to protein or peptide therapeutics, characterized by the production of anti-drug antibodies, which may affect the efficacy and/or the safety profiles of these drugs. Consequently, evaluation of the risk of immunogenicity early in the development of biotherapeutics is of critical importance for defining their efficacy and safety profiles. Here, we describe and validate a fit-for-purpose FluoroSpot-based in vitro assay for the evaluation of drug-specific T cell responses. A panel of 24 biotherapeutics with a wide range of clinical anti-drug antibody response rates were tested in this assay. We demonstrated that using suitable cutoffs and donor cohort sizes, this assay could identify most of the compounds with high clinical immunogenicity rates (71% and 78% for sensitivity and specificity, respectively) while we characterized the main sources of assay variability. Overall, these data indicate that the dendritic cell and CD4+ T cell restimulation assay published herein could be a valuable tool to assess the risk of drug-specific T cell responses and contribute to the selection of clinical candidates in early development.

In vitro immunogenicity prediction: bridging between innate and adaptive immunity

Development of antidrug antibodies (ADAs) is an undesirable potential outcome of administration of biotherapeutics and involves the innate and adaptive immune systems. ADAs can have detrimental clinical consequences: they can reduce biotherapeutic efficacy or produce adverse events. Because animal models are considered poor predictors of immunogenicity in humans, in vitro assays with human innate and adaptive immune cells are commonly used alternatives that can reveal cell-mediated unwanted immune responses. Multiple methods have been developed to assess the immune cell response following exposure to biotherapeutics and estimate the potential immunogenicity of biotherapeutics. This review highlights the role of innate and adaptive immune cells as the drivers of immunogenicity and summarizes the use of these cells in assays to predict clinical ADA.

Managing the Impact of Immunogenicity in an Era of Immunotherapy: From Bench to Bedside

Biotherapeutics have revolutionized our ability to treat life-threatening diseases. Despite clinical success, the use of biotherapeutics has sometimes been limited by the immune response mounted against them in the form of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs). The multifactorial nature of immunogenicity has prevented a standardized approach for assessing this and each of the assessment methods developed so far does not exhibit high enough reliability to be used alone, due to limited predictiveness. This prompted the Roche Pharma Research and Early Development (pRED) Immunogenicity Working Group to establish an internal preclinical immunogenicity toolbox of in vitro/in vivo approaches and accompanying guidelines for a harmonized assessment and management of immunogenicity in early development. In this article, the complex factors influencing immunogenicity and their associated clinical ramifications are discussed to highlight the importance of an end-to-end approach conducted from lead optimization to clinical candidate selection. We then examine the impact of the resulting lead candidate categorization on the design and implementation of a multi-tiered ADA/immunogenicity assay strategy prior to phase I (entry into human) through early clinical development. Ultimately, the Immunogenicity Toolbox ensures that Roche pRED teams are equipped to address immunogenicity in a standardized manner, paving the way for lifesaving products with improved safety and efficacy.

Engineering therapeutic antibodies for patient safety: tackling the immunogenicity problem

Established monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) allow treatment of cancers, autoimmune diseases and other severe illnesses. Side effects either arise due to interaction with the target protein and its biology or result from of the patient's immune system reacting to the foreign protein. This immunogenic reaction against therapeutic antibodies is dependent on various factors. The presence of non-human sequences can trigger immune responses as well as chemical and post-translational modifications of the antibody. However, even fully human antibodies can induce immune response through T cell epitopes or aggregates. In this review, we briefly describe, how therapeutic antibodies can interact with the patient's immune system and summarize recent advancements in protein engineering and in silico methods to reduce immunogenicity of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies.

Immunogenicity risk assessment for biotherapeutics through in vitro detection of CD134 and CD137 on T helper cells

Biotherapeutics, which are biologic medications that are natural or bioengineered products of living cells, have revolutionized the treatment of many diseases. However, unwanted immune responses still present a major challenge to their widespread adoption. Many patients treated with biotherapeutics develop antigen-specific anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) that may reduce the efficacy of the therapy or cross-react with the endogenous counterpart of a protein therapeutic, or both. Here, we describe an in vitro method for assessing the immunogenic risk of a biotherapeutic. We found a correlation between clinical immunogenicity and the frequency with which a biotherapeutic stimulated an increase in CD134, CD137, or both cell surface markers on CD4+ T cells. Using high-throughput flow cytometry, we examined the effects of 14 biotherapeutics with diverse rates of clinical immunogenicity on peripheral blood mononuclear cells from 120 donors with diverse human leukocyte antigen class II-encoding alleles. Biotherapeutics with high rates of ADA development in the clinic had higher proportions of CD4+ T cells positive for CD134 or CD137 than biotherapeutics with low clinical immunogenicity. This method provides a rapid and simple preclinical test of the immunogenic potential of a new candidate biotherapeutic or biosimilar. Implementation of this approach during biotherapeutic research and development enables rapid elimination of candidates that are likely to cause ADA-related adverse events and detrimental consequences.

The Impact of Product and Process Related Critical Quality Attributes on Immunogenicity and Adverse Immunological Effects of Biotherapeutics

The pharmaceutical industry has experienced great successes with protein therapeutics in the last two decades and with novel modalities, including cell therapies and gene therapies, more recently. Biotherapeutics are complex in structure and present challenges for discovery, development, regulatory, and life cycle management. Biotherapeutics can interact with the immune system that may lead to undesired immunological responses, including immunogenicity, hypersensitivity reactions (HSR), injection site reactions (ISR), and others. Many product and process related critical quality attributes (CQAs) have the potential to trigger or augment such immunological responses to the product. Tremendous efforts, both clinically and preclinically, have been invested to understand the impact of product and process related CQAs on adverse immunological effects. The information and knowledge are critical for the implementation of Quality by Design (QbD), which requires risk assessment and establishment of specifications and control strategies for CQAs. A quality target product profile (QTPP) that identifies the key CQAs through process development can help assign severity scores based on safety, immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of the molecule. Gaps and future directions related to biotherapeutics and emerging novel modalities are presented.

T-Cell Dependent Immunogenicity of Protein Therapeutics Pre-clinical Assessment and Mitigation-Updated Consensus and Review 2020

Immune responses to protein and peptide drugs can alter or reduce their efficacy and may be associated with adverse effects. While anti-drug antibodies (ADA) are a standard clinical measure of protein therapeutic immunogenicity, T cell epitopes in the primary sequences of these drugs are the key drivers or modulators of ADA response, depending on the type of T cell response that is stimulated (e.g., T helper or Regulatory T cells, respectively). In a previous publication on T cell-dependent immunogenicity of biotherapeutics, we addressed mitigation efforts such as identifying and reducing the presence of T cell epitopes or T cell response to protein therapeutics prior to further development of the protein therapeutic for clinical use. Over the past 5 years, greater insight into the role of regulatory T cell epitopes and the conservation of T cell epitopes with self (beyond germline) has improved the preclinical assessment of immunogenic potential. In addition, impurities contained in therapeutic drug formulations such as host cell proteins have also attracted attention and become the focus of novel risk assessment methods. Target effects have come into focus, given the emergence of protein and peptide drugs that target immune receptors in immuno-oncology applications. Lastly, new modalities are entering the clinic, leading to the need to revise certain aspects of the preclinical immunogenicity assessment pathway. In addition to drugs that have multiple antibody-derived domains or non-antibody scaffolds, therapeutic drugs may now be introduced via viral vectors, cell-based constructs, or nucleic acid based therapeutics that may, in addition to delivering drug, also prime the immune system, driving immune response to the delivery vehicle as well as the encoded therapeutic, adding to the complexity of assessing immunogenicity risk. While it is challenging to keep pace with emerging methods for the preclinical assessment of protein therapeutics and new biologic therapeutic modalities, this collective compendium provides a guide to current best practices and new concepts in the field.