1
|
Zeunik R, Ryuzoji AF, Peariso A, Wang X, Lannan M, Spindler LJ, Knierman M, Copeland V, Patel C, Wen Y. Investigation of immune responses to oxidation, deamidation, and isomerization in therapeutic antibodies using preclinical immunogenicity risk assessment assays. J Pharm Sci 2022; 111:2217-2229. [DOI: 10.1016/j.xphs.2022.05.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/10/2022] [Revised: 05/07/2022] [Accepted: 05/08/2022] [Indexed: 01/30/2023]
|
2
|
Zhou Y, Penny HL, Kroenke MA, Bautista B, Hainline K, Chea LS, Parnes J, Mytych DT. Immunogenicity assessment of bispecific antibody-based immunotherapy in oncology. J Immunother Cancer 2022; 10:e004225. [PMID: 35444060 PMCID: PMC9024276 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2021-004225] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/28/2022] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
With increasing numbers of bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) and multispecific products entering the clinic, recent data highlight immunogenicity as an emerging challenge in the development of such novel biologics. This review focuses on the immunogenicity risk assessment (IgRA) of BsAb-based immunotherapies for cancer, highlighting several risk factors that need to be considered. These include the novel scaffolds consisting of bioengineered sequences, the potentially synergistic immunomodulating mechanisms of action (MOAs) from different domains of the BsAb, as well as several other product-related and patient-related factors. In addition, the clinical relevance of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) against selected BsAbs developed as anticancer agents is reviewed and the advances in our knowledge of tools and strategies for immunogenicity prediction, monitoring, and mitigation are discussed. It is critical to implement a drug-specific IgRA during the early development stage to guide ADA monitoring and risk management strategies. This IgRA may include a combination of several assessment tools to identify drug-specific risks as well as a proactive risk mitigation approach for candidate or format selection during the preclinical stage. The IgRA is an on-going process throughout clinical development. IgRA during the clinical stage may bridge the gap between preclinical immunogenicity prediction and clinical immunogenicity, and retrospectively guide optimization efforts for next-generation BsAbs. This iterative process throughout development may improve the reliability of the IgRA and enable the implementation of effective risk mitigation strategies, laying the foundation for improved clinical success.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yanchen Zhou
- Clinical Immunology, Amgen Inc, South San Francisco, California, USA
| | | | - Mark A Kroenke
- Clinical Immunology, Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, California, USA
| | - Bianca Bautista
- Clinical Immunology, Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, California, USA
| | - Kelly Hainline
- Clinical Immunology, Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, California, USA
| | - Lynette S Chea
- Clinical Immunology, Amgen Inc, South San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Jane Parnes
- Early Development, Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, California, USA
| | - Daniel T Mytych
- Clinical Immunology, Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ducret A, Ackaert C, Bessa J, Bunce C, Hickling T, Jawa V, Kroenke MA, Lamberth K, Manin A, Penny HL, Smith N, Terszowski G, Tourdot S, Spindeldreher S. Assay format diversity in pre-clinical immunogenicity risk assessment: Toward a possible harmonization of antigenicity assays. MAbs 2021; 14:1993522. [PMID: 34923896 PMCID: PMC8726688 DOI: 10.1080/19420862.2021.1993522] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
A major impediment to successful use of therapeutic protein drugs is their ability to induce anti-drug antibodies (ADA) that can alter treatment efficacy and safety in a significant number of patients. To this aim, in silico, in vitro, and in vivo tools have been developed to assess sequence and other liabilities contributing to ADA development at different stages of the immune response. However, variability exists between similar assays developed by different investigators due to the complexity of assays, a degree of uncertainty about the underlying science, and their intended use. The impact of protocol variations on the outcome of the assays, i.e., on the immunogenicity risk assigned to a given drug candidate, cannot always be precisely assessed. Here, the Non-Clinical Immunogenicity Risk Assessment working group of the European Immunogenicity Platform (EIP) reviews currently used assays and protocols and discusses feasibility and next steps toward harmonization and standardization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Axel Ducret
- Roche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Chloé Ackaert
- ImmunXperts SA (A Nexelis Group Company), Gosselies, Belgium
| | - Juliana Bessa
- Roche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, Basel, Switzerland
| | | | - Timothy Hickling
- Roche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Vibha Jawa
- Biotherapeutics and Bioanalysis Non-Clinical Development, Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA
| | - Mark A Kroenke
- Clinical Immunology-Translational Medicine, Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA
| | - Kasper Lamberth
- Analysis & Characterisation, Global Research Technologies, Novo Nordisk A/S, Måløv, Denmark
| | - Anaïs Manin
- Abzena, Babraham Research Campus, Cambridge, UK
| | - Hweixian L Penny
- Clinical Immunology-Translational Medicine, Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA
| | - Noel Smith
- Lonza Biologics, Chesterford Research Park, Saffron Walden, UK
| | - Grzegorz Terszowski
- Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Liao K, Chen K, Brett S, Gehman A, Schwartz AM, Gunn GR, DeWall SL. Characterization of the robust humoral immune response to GSK2618960, a humanized anti-IL-7 receptor monoclonal antibody, observed in healthy subjects in a Phase 1 study. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0249049. [PMID: 33755713 PMCID: PMC7987154 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249049] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2020] [Accepted: 03/08/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Interleukin-7 (IL-7) signaling modulates T cell activity and is implicated in numerous autoimmune diseases. An anti-IL-7 receptor monoclonal antibody (GSK2618960) biotherapeutic was evaluated in healthy subjects for safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD) and immunogenicity in a single-dose escalation phase I study. We found that antibodies against GSK2618960 (i.e., anti-drug antibodies or ADA) developed in 83% and 100% of GSK2618960-treated subjects in the 0.6 and 2.0 mg/kg dose cohorts, respectively. Of the ADA positive subjects, 64% (7 of 11) had detectable neutralizing activity. Further investigation revealed the presence of GSK2618960-specific memory B cells, indicating the development of immunological memory for the ADAs. Ex vivo stimulation of peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) samples demonstrated a relatively strong CD4+ T cell proliferation response to GSK2618960 as compared to the control anti-RSV antibody (which is known to have only low immunogenic potential), confirming the high immunogenic potential of GSK2618960. Furthermore, GSK2618960 was found to bind in vitro monocyte-derived dendritic cells (DCs). GSK2618960 treatment of PBMCs increased the proportion of DC cells showing an increase in expression of CD83, CD86 and CD209, which indicated enhanced DC differentiation and activation relative to the isotype control anti-β amyloid antibody. Collectively, the evidence supports that the high incidence of observed clinical immunogenicity was likely related to the receptor-mediated activity by GSK2618960.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karen Liao
- Immunogenicity Group, GlaxoSmithKline, Collegeville, Pennsylvania, United States of America
| | - Keguan Chen
- Immunogenicity Group, GlaxoSmithKline, Collegeville, Pennsylvania, United States of America
| | - Sara Brett
- Oncology Cell Therapy, Oncology R&D, Stevenage, United Kingdom
| | - Andrew Gehman
- Research Statistics, GlaxoSmithKline, Collegeville, Pennsylvania, United States of America
| | - Ann M Schwartz
- Immunogenicity Group, GlaxoSmithKline, Collegeville, Pennsylvania, United States of America
| | - George R Gunn
- Immunogenicity Group, GlaxoSmithKline, Collegeville, Pennsylvania, United States of America
| | - Stephen L DeWall
- Immunogenicity Group, GlaxoSmithKline, Collegeville, Pennsylvania, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Abstract
Therapeutic protein drugs have significantly improved the management of many severe and chronic diseases. However, their development and optimal clinical application are complicated by the induction of unwanted immune responses. Therapeutic protein-induced antidrug antibodies can alter drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics leading to impaired efficacy and occasionally serious safety issues. There has been a growing interest over the past decade in developing methods to assess the risk of unwanted immunogenicity during preclinical drug development, with the aim to mitigate the risk during the molecular design phase, clinical development and when products reach the market. Here, we discuss approaches to therapeutic protein immunogenicity risk assessment, with attention to assays and in vivo models used to mitigate this risk.
Collapse
|