Microcapsules based on biological macromolecules for intestinal health: A review

Intestinal dysfunction is becoming increasingly associated with neurological and endocrine issues, raising concerns about its impact on world health. With the introduction of several breakthrough technologies for detecting and treating intestinal illnesses, significant progress has been made in the previous few years. On the other hand, traditional intrusive diagnostic techniques are expensive and time-consuming. Furthermore, the efficacy of conventional drugs (not capsules) is reduced since they are more likely to degrade before reaching their target. In this context, microcapsules based on different types of biological macromolecules have been used to encapsulate active drugs and sensors to track intestinal ailments and address these issues. Several biomacromolecules/biomaterials (natural protein, alginate, chitosan, cellulose and RNA etc.) are widely used for make microcapsules for intestinal diseases, and can significantly improve the therapeutic effect and reduce adverse reactions. This article systematically summarizes microencapsulated based on biomacromolecules material for intestinal health control and efficacy enhancement. It also discusses the application and mechanism research of microencapsulated biomacromolecules drugs in reducing intestinal inflammation, in addition to covering the preparation techniques of microencapsulated drug delivery systems used for intestinal health. Microcapsule delivery systems' limits and potential applications for intestinal disease diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance were highlighted.

Therapeutic drug monitoring in inflammatory bowel diseases. Position statement of the Spanish Working Group on Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis

The treatment of inflammatory bowel disease has undergone a significant transformation following the introduction of biologic drugs. Thanks to these drugs, treatment goals have evolved from clinical response and remission to more ambitious objectives, such as endoscopic or radiologic remission. However, even though biologics are highly effective, a significant percentage of patients will not achieve an initial response or may lose it over time. We know that there is a direct relationship between the trough concentrations of the biologic and its therapeutic efficacy, with more demanding therapeutic goals requiring higher drug levels, and inadequate exposure being common. Therapeutic drug monitoring of biologic medications, along with pharmacokinetic models, provides us with the possibility of offering a personalized approach to treatment for patients with IBD. Over the past few years, relevant information has accumulated regarding its utility during or after induction, as well as in the maintenance of biologic treatment, in reactive or proactive strategies, and prior to withdrawal or treatment de-escalation. The aim of this document is to establish recommendations regarding the utility of therapeutic drug monitoring of biologics in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, in different clinical practice scenarios, and to identify areas where its utility is evident, promising, or controversial.

Performance of a New Rapid Point-of-Care Test for Infliximab Levels in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Comparison to ELISA

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic drug monitoring of infliximab levels in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) optimizes patients' treatment. The reference technique is based on enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) although point of care (POC) assays are being developed.

AIMS

To assess the performance of a new rapid immunochromatographic POC assay (Promonitor Quick IFX) compared with ELISA technique to measure infliximab levels in patients with IBD.

METHODS

A prospective, observational, unicentric study was performed on capillary blood samples from patients with IBD before infliximab infusion (trough levels). Infliximab levels and anti-infliximab antibodies were measured using the ELISA technique (Promonitor IFX) and the POC assay. Correlation between both techniques was assessed by Pearson's coefficient. Quantitative differences were evaluated by Bland-Altman analysis. Samples were stratified according to infliximab therapeutic ranges (< 3 μg/mL, 3-8 μg/mL, and > 8 μg/mL).

RESULTS

A total of 135 experimental samples were assessed. Infliximab levels showed a high correlation between POC and ELISA tests (r = 0.84, P < 0.001). The mean difference between tests was 1.46 μg/mL (P < 0.001), being minimal for concentrations < 8 μg/mL. POC and ELISA assays showed an overall concordance of 87.4%. Most samples were in the same therapeutic range, which lead to equivalent therapeutic decisions. POC and ELISA assays detected the presence of anti-infliximab antibodies in 2.2% and 3.7% of the samples, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

POC assay results in blood samples from patients with IBD were comparable to those obtained with the reference ELISA technique. The POC assay could be considered for routine testing based on its ease of use and rapidity.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease: a systematic literature review informing EULAR points to consider

The objectives of this review were to collect and summarise evidence on therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases and to inform the EULAR Task Force for the formulation of evidence-based points to consider. A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed, covering technical aspects and (clinical) utility of TDM, to answer 13 research questions. MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane were searched until July 2020. American College of Rheumatology and EULAR abstracts were also considered for inclusion. Data were extracted in evidence tables and risk of bias assessment was performed. For the search on technical aspects, 678 records were identified, of which 22 papers were selected. For the clinical utility search, 3846 records were identified, of which 108 papers were included. Patient-related factors associated with biopharmaceutical blood concentrations included body weight, methotrexate comedication and disease activity. The identification of a target range was hampered by study variability, mainly disease activity measures and study type. Evidence was inconsistent for multiple clinical situations in which TDM is currently applied. However, for some particular scenarios, including prediction of future treatment response, non-response to treatment, tapering and hypersensitivity reactions, robust evidence was found. There is currently no evidence for routine use of proactive TDM, in part because published cost-effectiveness analyses do not incorporate the current landscape of biopharmaceutical costs and usage. This SLR yields evidence in favour of TDM of biopharmaceuticals in some clinical scenarios, but evidence is insufficient to support implementation of routine use of TDM.

Comparison of a Point-of-Care Testing with Enzyme-Multiplied Immunoassay Technique and Liquid Chromatography Combined With Tandem Mass Spectrometry Methods for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Mycophenolic Acid: A Preliminary Study

BACKGROUND

For mycophenolic acid (MPA), therapeutic drug monitoring is an essential tool for dosage optimization in transplant recipients and autoimmune diseases. In China, a new commercial kit using an immunochromatographic assay (FICA) with a point-of-care testing system was approved for therapeutic drug monitoring of MPA. However, corroboration between FICA and clinically used assays remains unknown. The authors evaluated MPA concentrations in heart transplant recipients obtained by FICA, high-performance liquid chromatography combined with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), and enzyme-multiplied immunoassay technique (EMIT).

METHODS

Nine heart transplant recipients administered a single mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) dose, and 4 administered multiple MMF doses were enrolled. MPA samples were collected before administration, and after 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 hours, and assessed by 2 immunoassays (EMIT and FICA) and LC-MS/MS. Consistency between methods was evaluated using Passing-Bablok regression and Bland-Altman analysis.

RESULTS

For Passing-Bablok regression between FICA and LC-MS/MS, FICA = 0.784 LC-MS/MS + 0.360 (95% CI slope: 0.739 to 0.829, 95% CI intercept: 0.174-0.545). Regardless of a significant observed correlation coefficient (R2 = 0.9126), statistical analyses revealed a significant difference between FICA and the reference LC-MS/MS method. The mean absolute bias was 0.69 mcg/mL between FICA and LC-MS/MS. Bland-Altman plots showed a mean bias of -0.23 mcg/mL (±1.96 SD, -2.19 to 1.72 mcg/mL) and average relative bias of 14.73% (±1.96 SD, -67.91% to 97.37%) between FICA and LC-MS/MS. Unsatisfactory consistency was observed between EMIT and LC-MS/MS, and FICA and EMIT. Differences between pharmacokinetic parameters after a single or 7 days of MMF administration, by LC-MS/MS and FICA, were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The consistency of the new FICA using a point-of-care testing device with LC-MS/MS and EMIT was inadequate, and the accuracy of EMIT and LC-MS/MS was inappropriate. Clinicians should be informed when switching MPA detection methods to avoid misleading results.

Rapid point-of-care anti-infliximab antibodies detection in clinical practice: comparison with ELISA and potential for improving therapeutic drug monitoring in IBD patients

Anti-drug antibodies can interfere with the activity of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents by increasing drug clearance via direct neutralization. The presence of anti-drug antibodies is clinically relevant when trough drug concentrations are undetectable or sub-therapeutic. However, traditional immunoassay is not easily and rapidly accessible, making the translation of the results into treatment adjustment difficult. The availability of a point-of-care (POC) test for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) might represent an important step forward for improving the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients in clinical practice. In this pilot study, we compared the results obtained with POC tests with those obtained by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in a group of IBD patients treated with Infliximab (IFX). We showed that POC test can reliably detect presence of antibody-to-IFX with 100% of specificity and 76% sensitivity, in strong agreement with the ELISA test (k-coefficient = 0.84).

Comparison of a new rapid method for the determination of adalimumab serum levels with two established ELISA kits

Background

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of adalimumab (ADA) in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) has gained increased attention since several studies showed a correlation between drug levels and mucosal healing. The limitations of routine usage of enzyme-linked immunoabsorbent assay (ELISA) kits for measuring serum ADA concentrations have prompted the development of rapid methods, such as Quantum Blue (QB). We evaluated the interchangeability and agreement between the QB method and two established ELISA kits, Promonitor (PM) and Lisa-Tracker (LT).

Methods

Fifty samples from patients with IBD were included. Quantitative analysis was performed using the ANOVA test for repeated measures, Deming regression and the Bland-Altman plot. Clinical implications were evaluated by concordance in classifying patients into therapeutic windows according to the proposed cut-off levels for subtherapeutic (either <5 or <7.5 μg/mL) and supratherapeutic (>12 μg/mL) ranges.

Results

Statistical differences were detected between the QB method and the two ELISA kits, with QB overestimating ADA serum values compared to them. A lack of interchangeability was observed between methods, with greater differences as ADA levels increased. An analysis of a sub-set of samples with ADA values below 9 μg/mL (n = 25) showed that QB fulfilled the criteria to be interchangeable with the LT assay. Concordance for patient classification into ADA therapeutic windows was better for QB vs. LT than for QB vs. PM, with high agreement (>75%) for subtherapeutic levels among the three methods.

Conclusions

Although quantitative differences existed between the rapid method and ELISA kits that hampered their interchangeability, the agreement for identifying patients with subtherapeutic values of ADA was high.