Cytokine release: A workshop proceedings on the state-of-the-science, current challenges and future directions.

In October 2013, the International Life Sciences Institute - Health and Environmental Sciences Institute Immunotoxicology Technical Committee (ILSI-HESI ITC) held a one-day workshop entitled, "Workshop on Cytokine Release: State-of-the-Science, Current Challenges and Future Directions". The workshop brought together scientists from pharmaceutical, academic, health authority, and contract research organizations to discuss novel approaches and current challenges for the use of in vitro cytokine release assays (CRAs) for the identification of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) potential of novel monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapeutics. Topics presented encompassed a regulatory perspective on cytokine release and assessment, case studies regarding the translatability of preclinical cytokine data to the clinic, and the latest state of the science of CRAs, including comparisons between mAb therapeutics within one platform and across several assay platforms, a novel physiological assay platform, and assay optimization approaches such as determination of FcR expression profiles and use of statistical tests. The data and approaches presented confirmed that multiple CRA platforms are in use for identification of CRS potential and that the choice of a particular CRA platform is highly dependent on the availability of resources for individual laboratories (e.g. positive and negative controls, number of human blood donors), the assay through-put required, and the mechanism-of-action of the therapeutic candidate to be tested. Workshop participants agreed that more data on the predictive performance of CRA platforms is needed, and current efforts to compare in vitro assay results with clinical cytokine assessments were discussed. In summary, many laboratories continue to focus research efforts on the improvement of the translatability of current CRA platforms as well explore novel approaches which may lead to more accurate, and potentially patient-specific, CRS prediction in the future.

Biosimilars: what clinicians should know.

Biosimilar medicinal products (biosimilars) have become a reality in the European Union and will soon be available in the United States. Despite an established legal pathway for biosimilars in the European Union since 2005 and increasing and detailed regulatory guidance on data requirements for their development and licensing, many clinicians, particularly oncologists, are reluctant to consider biosimilars as a treatment option for their patients. Major concerns voiced about biosimilars relate to their pharmaceutical quality, safety (especially immunogenicity), efficacy (particularly in extrapolated indications), and interchangeability with the originator product. In this article, the members and experts of the Working Party on Similar Biologic Medicinal Products of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) address these issues. A clear understanding of the scientific principles of the biosimilar concept and access to unbiased information on licensed biosimilars are important for physicians to make informed and appropriate treatment choices for their patients. This will become even more important with the advent of biosimilar monoclonal antibodies. The issues also highlight the need for improved communication between physicians, learned societies, and regulators.

Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor α Therapeutics Differentially Affect Leishmania Infection of Human Macrophages.

Tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) drives the pathophysiology of human autoimmune diseases and consequently, neutralizing antibodies (Abs) or Ab-derived molecules directed against TNFα are essential therapeutics. As treatment with several TNFα blockers has been reported to entail a higher risk of infectious diseases such as leishmaniasis, we established an in vitro model based on Leishmania-infected human macrophages, co-cultured with autologous T-cells, for the analysis and comparison of anti-TNFα therapeutics. We demonstrate that neutralization of soluble TNFα (sTNFα) by the anti-TNFα Abs Humira®, Remicade®, and its biosimilar Remsima® negatively affects infection as treatment with these agents significantly reduces Leishmania-induced T-cell proliferation and increases the number of infected macrophages. By contrast, we show that blockade of sTNFα by Cimzia® does not affect T-cell proliferation and infection rates. Moreover, compared to Remicade®, treatment with Cimzia® does not impair the expression of cytolytic effector proteins in proliferating T-cells. Our data demonstrate that Cimzia® supports parasite control through its conjugated polyethylene glycol (PEG) moiety as PEGylation of Remicade® improves the clearance of intracellular Leishmania. This effect can be linked to complement activation, with levels of complement component C5a being increased upon treatment with Cimzia® or a PEGylated form of Remicade®. Taken together, we provide an in vitro model of human leishmaniasis that allows direct comparison of different anti-TNFα agents. Our results enhance the understanding of the efficacy and adverse effects of TNFα blockers and they contribute to evaluate anti-TNFα therapy for patients living in countries with a high prevalence of leishmaniasis.

Nivolumab Enhances In Vitro Effector Functions of PD-1+ T-Lymphocytes and Leishmania-Infected Human Myeloid Cells in a Host Cell-Dependent Manner.

Functional impairment of T-cells and a concomitant augmented expression of programmed death-1 (PD-1) have been observed in visceral leishmaniasis patients, as well as in experimental models for visceral and cutaneous leishmaniasis. The PD-1/PD-1-ligand (PD-1/PD-L) interaction negatively regulates T-cell effector functions, which are required for parasite control during leishmaniasis. The aim of this study was to elucidate the impact of the PD-1/PD-L axis in a human primary in vitro infection model of Leishmania major (Lm). Blocking the PD-1/PD-L interaction with nivolumab increased T-cell proliferation and release of the proinflammatory cytokines TNFα and IFNγ during the cocultivation of Lm-infected human monocyte-derived macrophages (hMDMs) or dendritic cells (hMDDC) with autologous PD-1+-lymphocytes. As a consequence Lm infection decreased, being the most pronounced in hMDDC, compared to proinflammatory hMDM1 and anti-inflammatory hMDM2. Focusing on hMDDC, we could partially reverse effects mediated by PD-1 blockade by neutralizing TNFα but not by neutralizing IFNγ. Furthermore, PD-1 blockade increased intracellular expression of perforin, granulysin, and granzymes in proliferating CD4+-T-cells, which might be implicated in reduction of Lm-infected cells. In all, our data describe an important role for the PD-1/PD-L axis upon Lm infection using a human primary cell system. These data contribute to a better understanding of the PD-1-induced T-cell impairment during disease and its influence on immune effector mechanisms to combat Lm infection.

Biosimilars entering the clinic without animal studies. A paradigm shift in the European Union.

The concept of biosimilars has spread from Europe to other regions throughout the world, and many regions have drafted regulatory guidelines for their development. Recently, a paradigm shift in regulatory thinking on the non-clinical development of biosimilars has emerged in Europe: In vivo testing should follow a step-wise approach rather than being performed by default. To not require animal testing at all in some instances can well be seen as a revolutionary, but science-based, step. Here, we describe the internal discussions that led to this paradigm shift. The mainstay for the establishment of biosimilarity is the pharmaceutical comparability based on extensive physicochemical and biological characterization. Pharmacodynamic comparability can be evaluated in in vitro assays, whereas pharmacokinetic comparability is best evaluated in clinical studies. It is considered highly unlikely that new safety issues would arise when comparability has been demonstrated based on physicochemical and in vitro comparative studies.

Challenges and approaches for the development of safer immunomodulatory biologics.

Immunomodulatory biologics, which render their therapeutic effects by modulating or harnessing immune responses, have proven their therapeutic utility in several complex conditions including cancer and autoimmune diseases. However, unwanted adverse reactions--including serious infections, malignancy, cytokine release syndrome, anaphylaxis and hypersensitivity as well as immunogenicity--pose a challenge to the development of new (and safer) immunomodulatory biologics. In this article, we assess the safety issues associated with immunomodulatory biologics and discuss the current approaches for predicting and mitigating adverse reactions associated with their use. We also outline how these approaches can inform the development of safer immunomodulatory biologics.