1
|
Tourdot S, Bloem K, Champion L, De Groot AS, Ducret A, Garidel P, Grudzinska-Goebel J, Gutknecht M, Hickling T, Horling F, Ichetovkin M, Johnson A, Jyamubandi I, Karle A, Kromminga A, Kurtulmus EA, Loeff F, Maillere B, Michaut L, Minelli F, Nielsen M, Nayak V, Nelson R, Pallardy M, Pattyn S, Pedras-Vasconelos J, Pepermans E, Poyau A, Reichel M, Rosenberg A, Sauna Z, Saxena M, Smith N, Snoeck V, Thoo L, Tovey M, Verthelyi D, Wuttke R, Yerly D, Kramer D. Proceedings of the 15 th European immunogenicity platform open symposium on immunogenicity of biopharmaceuticals. MAbs 2025; 17:2487604. [PMID: 40181240 DOI: 10.1080/19420862.2025.2487604] [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] [Received: 12/31/2024] [Revised: 03/26/2025] [Accepted: 03/27/2025] [Indexed: 04/05/2025] Open
Abstract
The European Immunogenicity Platform (EIP) celebrated the 15th edition of its Open Symposium on Immunogenicity of Biopharmaceuticals and its associated one-day workshop on 22-24 February 2024 in Lisbon. The meeting attracted experts and newcomers across industry, regulatory agencies, and academia, who actively participated in 3 days of discussion on risk assessment, monitoring, and mitigation of unwanted immunogenicity of biologics. Besides oral presentations, poster sessions were held to maximize scientific exchange and networking opportunities. Therapeutic proteins and emerging gene and cell-based therapies present promising therapeutic options for addressing unmet medical needs or when conventional treatment approaches have failed. Nonetheless, the development of an immune response against these therapeutic agents is a significant concern, as it occurs in a considerable number of cases across various products and indications. The specific anti-drug antibodies that develop can lead to adverse safety events, inhibition of drug activity, or accelerated clearance, all of which result in a loss of treatment efficacy. The EIP serves as a forum for experts and newcomers in the immunogenicity field, fostering discussion among scientists from industry and academia, encouraging interactions with regulatory agencies, and disseminating knowledge and advancements in immunogenicity sciences to the broader scientific community. This report covers the main topics discussed during the EIP 15th Open Symposium on Immunogenicity of Biopharmaceuticals, and the one-day workshop on practical aspects of immunogenicity held prior to the conference. Key topics included immunogenicity testing, clinical relevance of immunogenicity, immunogenicity risk assessment and mitigation, and current regulatory considerations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie Tourdot
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics and Metabolism, Pfizer Inc., Andover, MA, USA
| | - Karien Bloem
- Sanquin Diagnostic Services, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Lysie Champion
- Bioanalytical Services, Celerion Switzerland AG, Fehraltorf, Switzerland
| | | | - Axel Ducret
- Roche Pharma Research and Early Development (pRED), Roche Innovation Center Basel, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Patrick Garidel
- IU-TIP, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co KG, Biberach/Riss, Germany
| | | | - Michael Gutknecht
- Immunogenicity and Mechanistic Immunology, Biomedical Research, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Timothy Hickling
- Pharma Research and Early Development, Roche Innovation Centre Welwyn, Roche, Welwyn Garden City, UK
| | | | - Marina Ichetovkin
- Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics, Metabolism, and Bioanalytics, Regulated Bioanalytics, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA
| | - Alison Johnson
- Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals Inc., Ridgefield, CT, USA
| | | | - Anette Karle
- Immunogenicity and Mechanistic Immunology, Biomedical Research, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Floris Loeff
- R&D, Sanquin Diagnostic Services, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bernard Maillere
- Département Médicaments et Technologies pour la Santé, Université de Paris-Saclay, CEA, SIMoS, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
| | - Lydia Michaut
- PK Sciences, Novartis Biomedical Research, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Francesca Minelli
- NBE-DMPK Innovative BioAnalytics, RBM Merck S.p.A., An Affiliate of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany
- Department of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Turin, Torino, Italy
| | - Morten Nielsen
- Department of Health Technology, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark
| | - Vivek Nayak
- Precision Medicine, UCB, Braine-l'Alleud, Belgium
| | | | - Marc Pallardy
- INSERM, Inflammation, Microbiome and Immunosurveillance, University Paris-Saclay, Orsay, France
| | - Sofie Pattyn
- In Vitro Immunology, RIqvia Laboratories, Gosselies, Belgium
| | - Joao Pedras-Vasconelos
- Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Office of Pharmaceutical Quality, Office of Product Quality Assessment III, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| | | | - Alain Poyau
- LBA Method Development, KCAS Bio, Lyon, France
| | | | | | - Zuben Sauna
- Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| | - Manisha Saxena
- PK Sciences - Translational Medicine, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Lester Thoo
- Adverse Drug Reaction - Analysis & Consulting, ADR-AC GmbH, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Michael Tovey
- Chief Scientific Advisor Svar Life Science AB, Villejuif, France
| | - Daniela Verthelyi
- Division IV, Office of Pharmaceutical Quality Research, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| | - Rene Wuttke
- Translational Medicine, Bioanalysis, Debiopharm International SA, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Daniel Yerly
- Adverse Drug Reaction - Analysis & Consulting, ADR-AC GmbH, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Daniel Kramer
- Translational Medicine Unit, Sanofi, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Cheng CA, Jiang AL, Liu YR, Chang LC. Investigation of Immunogenicity Assessment of Biosimilar Monoclonal Antibodies in the United States. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2023; 114:1274-1284. [PMID: 37634125 DOI: 10.1002/cpt.3033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2023] [Accepted: 08/18/2023] [Indexed: 08/28/2023]
Abstract
Immunogenicity is critical for biologics. However, reference biologics labeling documents do not necessarily mention immunogenicity impact, rendering the development of biosimilars more challenging. We aimed to investigate the comparative assessment of immunogenicity profiles between biosimilars and their respective reference biologics in the review reports of the biosimilar monoclonal antibody applications approved by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as of March 13, 2022, covering 22 applications approved between April 5, 2016, and December 17, 2021. The maximum differences in anti-drug antibody (ADA) and neutralizing antibody (NAb) incidences between biosimilars and reference products mostly fell within ± 15% (-13.6% to 12%) and ± 20% (-17.4% to 17.1%, except extreme values of -23.4% and 66.7%), respectively. In comparison with antineoplastic agents, more immunosuppressants had ADA-positive (11/11, 100.0% vs. 8/10, 80.0%)/NAb-positive (11/11, 100.0% vs. 3/10, 30.0%) subjects, and the distribution of the aforementioned incidence differences was wider. The investigated biosimilars with available data for analysis demonstrated a high degree of consistency with their reference products in terms of the impact on pharmacokinetic parameters. No increase in immunogenicity was found in available switching studies. Most (16/22, 72.7%) biosimilars were issued post-marketing requirements that were not directly related to immunogenicity concerns. The FDA considered the totality of evidence assessing clinical consequences of immunogenicity differences, if any. Additional information on titers and subgroup analysis may be warranted to elucidate the critical attributes of immunogenicity impact and to aid in forming cost-effective strategies for biosimilar development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ching-An Cheng
- School of Pharmacy, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Ai-Lei Jiang
- School of Pharmacy, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Yu-Ru Liu
- School of Pharmacy, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Lin-Chau Chang
- School of Pharmacy, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Jiang AL, Breder CD, Chang LC. Investigation of Factors Associated with Immunogenicity Labeling Updates and Characteristics of Biologics License Applications. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2021; 110:1381-1388. [PMID: 34383294 DOI: 10.1002/cpt.2393] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/08/2021] [Accepted: 07/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Immunogenicity, the potential to elicit an anti-drug immune response, is a critical concern in developing biological products, but its consequences are difficult to predict with animal studies. The aims of the present study are to investigate the evolution of immunogenicity information in labeling and to identify attributes associated with immunogenicity labeling updates. Biologics License Applications (BLAs) approved by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, United States Food and Drug Administration between 2008 and 2017 were studied. A majority of BLAs described the incidence/prevalence of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) (94.9%) and neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) (68.4%) in their original labeling documents. However, less than one-third of the BLAs mentioned the impact of ADAs/NAbs in the original (20.3%) and most recent (29.1%) labeling documents. BLAs with a priority review status (57.4% versus 33.3%), orphan designation (61.5% versus 34.2%), or a mention of ADA impact in the latest label (69.6% versus 38.9%) had higher percentages of applications with postmarketing requirements (PMRs) directly related to immunogenicity concerns in comparison with applications without those characteristics. Among the BLAs with updated immunogenicity information, the mean time to the first update was 1077 days, while that for BLAs with accelerated approval was shorter (709.1 ± 492.2 days versus 1173.8 ± 661.8 days). The results suggest that there is a substantial amount of critical information lacking in the original labeling documents and an overdependence on PMRs for more evidence. Additional efforts should be made to investigate the impact of ADAs to provide timely information for improved patient care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ai-Lei Jiang
- School of Pharmacy, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Christopher D Breder
- Advanced Academic Programs, Krieger School of Arts and Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Lin-Chau Chang
- School of Pharmacy, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Lucas AT, Moody A, Schorzman AN, Zamboni WC. Importance and Considerations of Antibody Engineering in Antibody-Drug Conjugates Development from a Clinical Pharmacologist's Perspective. Antibodies (Basel) 2021; 10:30. [PMID: 34449544 PMCID: PMC8395454 DOI: 10.3390/antib10030030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2021] [Revised: 07/04/2021] [Accepted: 07/16/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) appear to be in a developmental boom, with five FDA approvals in the last two years and a projected market value of over $4 billion by 2024. Major advancements in the engineering of these novel cytotoxic drug carriers have provided a few early success stories. Although the use of these immunoconjugate agents are still in their infancy, valuable lessons in the engineering of these agents have been learned from both preclinical and clinical failures. It is essential to appreciate how the various mechanisms used to engineer changes in ADCs can alter the complex pharmacology of these agents and allow the ADCs to navigate the modern-day therapeutic challenges within oncology. This review provides a global overview of ADC characteristics which can be engineered to alter the interaction with the immune system, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles, and therapeutic index of ADCs. In addition, this review will highlight some of the engineering approaches being explored in the creation of the next generation of ADCs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew T. Lucas
- Division of Pharmacotherapy and Experimental Therapeutics, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA; (A.T.L.); (A.N.S.)
- Carolina Center of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA;
| | - Amber Moody
- Carolina Center of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA;
| | - Allison N. Schorzman
- Division of Pharmacotherapy and Experimental Therapeutics, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA; (A.T.L.); (A.N.S.)
| | - William C. Zamboni
- Division of Pharmacotherapy and Experimental Therapeutics, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA; (A.T.L.); (A.N.S.)
- Carolina Center of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA;
- Glolytics, LLC, Chapel Hill, NC 27517, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Perpoil A, Grimandi G, Birklé S, Simonet JF, Chiffoleau A, Bocquet F. Public Health Impact of Using Biosimilars, Is Automated Follow up Relevant? INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2020; 18:ijerph18010186. [PMID: 33383867 PMCID: PMC7796345 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18010186] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2020] [Revised: 12/17/2020] [Accepted: 12/19/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Biologic reference drugs and their copies, biosimilars, have a complex structure. Biosimilars need to demonstrate their biosimilarity during development but unpredictable variations can remain, such as micro-heterogeneity. The healthcare community may raise questions regarding the clinical outcomes induced by this micro-heterogeneity. Indeed, unwanted immune reactions may be induced for numerous reasons, including product variations. However, it is challenging to assess these unwanted immune reactions because of the multiplicity of causes and potential delays before any reaction. Moreover, safety assessments as part of preclinical studies and clinical trials may be of limited value with respect to immunogenicity assessments because they are performed on a standardised population during a limited period. Real-life data could therefore supplement the assessments of clinical trials by including data on the real-life use of biosimilars, such as switches. Furthermore, real-life data also include any economic incentives to prescribe or use biosimilars. This article raises the question of relevance of automating real life data processing regarding Biosimilars. The objective is to initiate a discussion about different approaches involving Machine Learning. So, the discussion is established regarding implementation of Neural Network model to ensure safety of biosimilars subject to economic incentives. Nevertheless, the application of Machine Learning in the healthcare field raises ethical, legal and technical issues that require further discussion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antoine Perpoil
- Compliance Department, Amgen SAS, 92100 Boulogne-Billancourt, France; (A.P.); (J.-F.S.)
| | - Gael Grimandi
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical and Biological Sciences, University of Nantes, 44035 Nantes, France; (G.G.); (S.B.)
- University of Nantes, INSERM UMR1229, RMeS, Regenerative Medicine and Skeleton, ONIRIS, 44322 Nantes, France
- Central Pharmacy, University Public Hospitals of Nantes, 44093 Nantes, France
| | - Stéphane Birklé
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical and Biological Sciences, University of Nantes, 44035 Nantes, France; (G.G.); (S.B.)
- Université de Nantes, CRCINA, F-44000 Nantes, France
| | - Jean-François Simonet
- Compliance Department, Amgen SAS, 92100 Boulogne-Billancourt, France; (A.P.); (J.-F.S.)
| | - Anne Chiffoleau
- Sponsor Department, University Public Hospitals of Nantes, 44093 Nantes, France;
| | - François Bocquet
- Law and Social Change Laboratory, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, University of Nantes, CNRS UMR6297, 44300 Nantes, France
- Oncology Data Factory and Analytics Department, Institut de Cancérologie de l’Ouest, 44800 Nantes-Angers, France
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|