Detection of infliximab, adalimumab, and anti-drug antibodies: Development and validation of new monotest, automated assays on multiparametric instrument

Objective

To convert manual ELISA kits to fully automated immunoassays that quantify serum drug levels and anti-drug antibodies levels of infliximab and adalimumab (CHORUS Promonitor kits).

Desing and methods

CHORUS Promonitor INFLIXIMAB, CHORUS Promonitor ADALIMUMAB, CHORUS Promonitor ANTI-INFLIXIMAB, and CHORUS Promonitor ANTI-ADALIMUMAB kits were compared with the corresponding Promonitor kits to determine sensitivity and specificity of the assays. For the automated assays, the entire procedure -from samples dilution to final readouts-was performed by CHORUS TRIO instrument (DIESSE, Italy). Residual human serum samples from clinical laboratory investigations and samples resulting from the addition of specific drugs (IFX or ADL) or anti-drug antibodies (anti-IFX or anti-ADL) were used for the characterization and validation of the tests.

Results

CHORUS Promonitor kits showed an excellent agreement (Cohen's coefficient = 1) with the Promonitor kits and were linear within predefined ranges. All assays were accurate and repeatable, as an acceptable variability were observed within runs, between runs, lots, and instruments. No difference in detecting the reference drug or biosimilars emerged.

Conclusion

During preclinical development, these kits resulted as sensitive, specific, accurate, and able to quantify either the reference drug or the corresponding biosimilars. All these features support their use in clinical practice for therapeutic drug monitoring of patients with inflammatory diseases under treatment with IFX or ADL.

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.

Point-of-care therapeutic drug monitoring of tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors using a single step immunoassay

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of tumor necrosis factor-α (TNFα)-inhibitors adalimumab and infliximab is important to establish optimal drug dose and maximize treatment efficacy. Currently, TDM is primarily performed with ELISA techniques in clinical laboratories, resulting in a long sample-to-result workflow. Point-of-care (POC) detection of these therapeutic antibodies could significantly decrease turnaround times and allow for user-friendly home-testing. Here, we adapted the recently developed bioluminescent dRAPPID (dimeric Ratiometric Plug-and-Play Immunodiagnostics) sensor platform to allow POC TDM of infliximab and adalimumab. We applied the two best performing dRAPPID sensors, with limit-of-detections of 1 pM and 17 pM, to measure the infliximab and adalimumab levels in 49 and 40 patient serum samples, respectively. The analytical performance of dRAPPID was benchmarked with commercial ELISAs and yielded Pearson's correlation coefficients of 0.93 and 0.94 for infliximab and adalimumab, respectively. Furthermore, a dedicated bioluminescence reader was fabricated and used as a readout device for the TDM dRAPPID sensors. Subsequently, infliximab and adalimumab patient serum samples were measured with the TDM dRAPPID sensors and bioluminescence reader, yielding Pearson's correlation coefficients of 0.97 and 0.86 for infliximab and adalimumab, respectively, and small proportional differences with ELISA (slope was 0.97 ± 0.09 and 0.96 ± 0.20, respectively). The adalimumab and infliximab dRAPPID sensors, in combination with the dedicated bioluminescence reader, allow for ease-of-use TDM with a fast turnaround time and show potential for POC TDM outside of clinical laboratories.

A Review of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease Receiving Combination Therapy

Background: Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) impacts millions worldwide, presenting a major challenge to healthcare providers and patients. The advent of biologic therapies has enhanced the prognosis, but many patients exhibit primary or secondary non-response, underscoring the need for rigorous monitoring and therapy optimization to improve outcomes. Objective: This narrative review seeks to understand the role of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in optimizing treatment for IBD patients, especially for those on combination therapies of biologics and immunomodulators. Methods: A comprehensive synthesis of the current literature was undertaken, focusing on the application, benefits, limitations, and future directions of TDM in patients receiving a combination of biologic therapies and immunomodulators. Results: While biological therapies have improved outcomes, rigorous monitoring and therapy optimization are needed. TDM has emerged as a pivotal strategy, enhancing outcomes cost-effectively while reducing adverse events. While most data pertain to monotherapies, TDM's applicability also extends to combination therapy. Conclusion: TDM plays a crucial role in the treatment optimization of IBD patients on combination therapies. Further research is needed to fully understand its potential and limitations in the broader context of IBD management.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Anti-TNFα Inhibitors: A Matter of Cut-Off Ranges

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is a useful tool for optimising the use of anti-TNFα inhibitors in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). Recently, point-of-care methods for the quantification of drug levels and anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) have been developed to overcome the limitations of conventional enzyme-linked immunoabsorbent assays (ELISAs). Here, we evaluated the performance, interchangeability, and agreement between an automated ELISA-based immunoassay (CHORUS Promonitor) and the lateral flow assay (RIDA^®QUICK) for the quantification of infliximab (IFX, n = 65) and adalimumab (ADM, n = 58) plasma levels in IBD patients. Thirty-two samples for IFX and twenty-three samples for ADM that tested positively for the presence of ADAs were also used. Overall, data analysis showed a good agreement of ADM trough concentrations (R² = 0.75) between the two assays as well as for ADA measurement (K > 0.8). However, IFX levels highlighted a weak correlation (R² = 0.58) between the two kits, with the RIDA^®QUICK assay overestimating IFX plasma values by 30% when compared to the CHORUS Promonitor kit. Results from this study show that the two assays are not quantitatively and qualitatively interchangeable due to substantial discrepancies in some results. Accordingly, the same assay should be used for the longitudinal follow-up of IBD patients.

Adalimumab Serum Concentrations, Clinical and Endoscopic Disease Activity in Crohn's Disease: A Cross-Sectional Multicentric Latin American Study

Despite some variability in ideal serum Adalimumab (ADA) concentrations, there is increasing evidence that higher concentrations of anti-TNF-α agents can be associated with sustained efficacy, and low or undetectable levels may lead to loss of response. This study aims to correlate serum ADA concentrations with clinical and endoscopic activity in patients with Crohn's disease (CD). A cross-sectional and multicentric study was performed with patients with CD, who used ADA for at least 24 weeks. Patients were allocated into groups according to the presence of clinical or endoscopic disease activity. Serum ADA concentrations were measured and compared between groups. Overall, 89 patients were included. A total of 27 patients had clinically active CD and 62 were in clinical remission. Forty patients had endoscopic disease activity and 49 were in endoscopic remission. The mean serum ADA concentration was 10.2 μg/mL in patients with clinically active CD and 14.3 μg/mL in patients in clinical remission (p = 0.395). The mean serum ADA concentration in patients with endoscopic activity was 11.3 μg/mL as compared to 14.5 μg/mL in those with endoscopic remission (p = 0.566). There was no difference between serum ADA concentrations regarding clinical or endoscopic activity in CD, as compared to patients in remission.

EULAR points to consider for therapeutic drug monitoring of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases

OBJECTIVE

To develop EULAR points-to-consider for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).

METHODS

The points-to-consider were developed in accordance with EULAR standardised operation procedures by a multidisciplinary task force from eight European countries, based on a systematic literature review and expert consensus. Level of evidence and strength of the points-to-consider were determined, and mean levels of agreement among the task force were calculated using a 10-point rating scale.

RESULTS

Six overarching principles and 13 points-to-consider were formulated. The level of agreement among the task force for the overarching principles and points-to-consider ranged from 8.4 to 9.9.The overarching principles define TDM and its subtypes, and reinforce the underlying pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic principles, which are relevant to all biopharmaceutical classes. The points-to-consider highlight the clinical utility of the measurement and interpretation of biopharmaceutical blood concentrations and antidrug antibodies in specific clinical scenarios, including factors that influence these parameters. In general, proactive use of TDM is not recommended but reactive TDM could be considered in certain clinical situations. An important factor limiting wider adoption of TDM is the lack of both high quality trials addressing effectiveness and safety of TDM and robust economic evaluation in patients with RMDs. Future research should focus on providing this evidence, as well as on further understanding of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of biopharmaceuticals.

CONCLUSION

These points-to-consider are evidence-based and consensus-based statements for the use of TDM of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory RMDs, addressing the clinical utility of TDM.

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.

The First WHO International Standard for Adalimumab: Dual Role in Bioactivity and Therapeutic Drug Monitoring

The expanded availability of adalimumab products continues to widen patient access and reduce costs with substantial benefit to healthcare systems. However, the long-term success of these medicines is highly dependent on maintaining consistency in quality, safety and efficacy while minimizing any risk of divergence during life-cycle management. In recognition of this need and demand from global manufacturers, the World Health Organization (WHO) Expert Committee on Biological standardization established the WHO 1^st International standard (IS) for Adalimumab (coded 17/236) in October 2019 with a defined unitage ascribed to each of the individual bioactivities evaluated in the study namely, TNF-α binding, TNF-α neutralization, complement dependent cytotoxicity and antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity. For development of the IS, two candidate standards were manufactured as per WHO recommendations. Analysis of extensive datasets generated by testing of a common set of samples including the candidate standards by multiple stakeholders including regulatory agencies using their own qualified assays in a large international collaborative study showed comparable biological activity for the tested candidates for the different activities. Use of a common standard significantly decreased the variability of bioassays and improved agreement in potency estimates. Data from this study clearly supports the utility of the IS as an important tool for assuring analytical assay performance, for bioassay calibration and validation, for identifying and controlling changes in bioactivity during life-cycle management and for global harmonization of adalimumab products. In addition, in a separate multi-center study which included involvement of hospital and clinical diagnostic laboratories, the suitability of the adalimumab IS for therapeutic drug monitoring assays was examined by analysis of data from testing of a common blind coded panel of adalimumab spiked serum samples representative of the clinical scenario along with the IS and in-house standards in diverse immunoassays/platforms. Both commercially available and in-house assays that are routinely used for assessing adalimumab trough levels were included. Excellent agreement in estimates for adalimumab content in the spiked samples was observed regardless of the standard or the method with inter-laboratory variability also similar regardless of the standard employed. This data, for the first time, provides support for the extended applicability of the IS in assays in use for therapeutic drug monitoring based on the mass content of the IS. The adalimumab IS, in fulfilling clinical demand, can help toward standardizing and harmonizing clinical monitoring assays for informed clinical decisions and/or personalized treatment strategies for better patient outcomes. Collectively, a significant role for the adalimumab IS in assuring the quality, safety and efficacy of adalimumab products globally is envisaged.

Comparison of a new rapid method for determination of serum anti-adalimumab and anti-infliximab antibodies with two established ELISA kits

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab (ADL), infliximab (IFX) and their biosimilars are widely used biological drugs. Some patients, however, generate neutralizing antibodies that hamper the effectiveness of these drugs. Evidence shows therapeutic drug monitoring of serum levels ADL/IFX and anti-drug antibodies (ADA) is useful to improve treatment effectiveness. We evaluated a new rapid quantitative method, Quantum Blue (QB), for determining serum anti-ADL and anti-IFX antibodies (Research Use Only labelling) by comparing it with two established ELISA kits, Promonitor (PM) and Lisa-Tracker (LT).

METHODS

Eighty samples (40 for each drug type) were analysed. Percentage of agreement and kappa statistic were used to compare positive/negative ADA results. Clinical implications for drug treatment in the patients with discordant results were evaluated. The Chi-square test was used to analyze differences for ADA detection in patients with disease flare and without concomitant immunosuppressant treatment.

RESULTS

Agreement exceeded 80 % among anti-ADL methods. Although LT ELISA showed a lower capacity in detecting anti-ADL antibodies, discrepancies were found for levels close to the cut-off concentration, thus having minimal impact on clinical decisions. Conversely, QB anti-IFX displayed low agreement with PM and LT ELISA kits (67.5 % and 50 %, respectively), and was unable to detect high levels of antibodies, therefore having major clinical implications. Agreement between PM and LT ELISA anti-IFX kits was 82.5 % with all discordant results being undetected for PM and slightly positive for LT.

CONCLUSION

QB anti-ADL shows similar performance to ELISA kits while QB anti-IFX needs further improvements to achieve reliable antibody detection.

Advances in Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Biologic Therapies for Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease

In the current era of treat-to-target strategies, therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) has emerged as a potential tool in optimizing the efficacy of biologics for children diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The incorporation of TDM into treatment algorithms, however, has proven to be complex. "Proactive" TDM is emerging as a therapeutic strategy due to a recently published pediatric RCT showing a clear benefit of "proactive" TDM in anti-TNF therapy. However, target therapeutic values for different biologics for different disease states [ulcerative colitis (UC) vs. Crohn's disease (CD)] and different periods of disease activity (induction vs. remission) require further definition. This is especially true in pediatrics where the therapeutic armamentarium is limited, and fixed weight-based dosing may predispose to increased clearance leading to decreased drug exposure and subsequent loss of response (pharmacokinetic and/or immunogenic). Model-based dosing for biologics offers an exciting insight into dose individualization thereby minimizing the chances of losing response. Similarly, point-of-care testing promises real-time assessment of drug levels and individualized decision-making. In the current clinical realm, TDM is being used to prolong drug durability and efficacy and prevent loss of response. Ongoing innovations may transform it into a personalized tool to achieve optimal therapeutic endpoints.

Monitoring vedolizumab and ustekinumab drug levels in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: hype or hope?

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) plays a vital role in implementing precision medicine in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and may contribute to increased effectiveness, lower rates of drug toxicity and cost savings. While expert panels advocate the use of reactive TDM for anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agents, TDM is not yet widely recommended for non-anti TNF biologicals. We provide an overview of the observational evidence of the value of TDM in case of vedolizumab and ustekinumab. We also shed light on obstacles that need to be addressed before establishing wide acceptance of TDM in the field of IBD. In this respect, new analytical techniques and modelling approaches are being developed to further optimize efficacy of TDM and to facilitate general acceptance of this tool in personalizing IBD management.

Point-of-Care Assays Could Be Useful for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of IBD Patients in a Proactive Strategy with Adalimumab

The objective of the study was to evaluate whether Point-of-Care (POC) assays are equivalent to ELISAs for measuring residual trough levels of adalimumab (ADA) in a cohort of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) patients. ADA trough levels obtained by POC assays were used to optimize patients in daily clinical practice. Different assays (three ELISAs (Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay) from two different suppliers and two POC assays) were compared to measure ADA trough levels in a first cohort of 31 IBD patients. All assays revealed a high correlation within the assays, ranging from 0.86 to 0.99. Cut-off values were always higher with ELISAs than with POC assays. Then, a small prospective clinical study with a second cohort of 37 IBD patients was performed to compare POC assays and ELISAs for their ability to optimize patients on the basis of the measured ADA trough levels. The use of a POC assay to monitor ADA trough levels did not improve the follow-up of patients with loss of response, as they were always optimized whatever their ADA residual rate. For patients in clinical remission, a POC assay can be useful in some clinical situations to maintain or de-escalate ADA doses according to the measured trough levels. In conclusion, different assays for ADA monitoring are quite equivalent. A POC assay could be only useful for a proactive strategy for asymptomatic patients with a sub-therapeutic dose of ADA, but new therapeutic thresholds need to be identified.

How, When, and for Whom Should We Perform Therapeutic Drug Monitoring?

The implementation of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in the inflammatory bowel disease practice has evolved over the years. In the early days, the focus was merely on measuring and reporting drug concentrations. Later, these concentrations were considered in light of target concentrations that are related to clinical response. This not only allowed passively predicting a patient's future response, but it also triggered physicians and pharmacists to actively use the information to optimize the drug dosage to induce and maintain a clinical response in the future. Although reactive TDM, testing at time of loss of response, is widely accepted in practice, especially for anti-tumor necrosis factor antibodies, there are less data for the other monoclonal antibodies belonging to other classes. Besides reactive testing, there is a movement toward proactively adjusting biologic dosing to prevent loss of response, in keeping with the tight control philosophy of inflammatory bowel disease care. This review highlights the various assays available to measure drug concentrations and antidrug antibodies, as well as algorithmic approaches to TDM, the unmet needs and required studies to enable pharmacokinetics principles to be applied in the future.