CAR-T cell therapy in India requires a paradigm shift in training, education and health care processes.

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy has revolutionized the treatment of some kinds of cancers. Hundreds of companies and academic institutions are collaborating to develop gene-modified cell therapies using novel targets, different cell types, and manufacturing processes of autologous and allogenic cell therapies. The individualized, custom-made autologous CAR-T cell production platform remains a significant limiting factor for its large-scale clinical application. In this respect, the advances in standardization and automation of the process can have considerable impact on cost reduction. Development of off-the-shelf, ready-to-use universal killer cells can enable scaling up. Despite the wide use of this cell therapy in the United States, Europe and China, its development is limited in developing countries in Southeast Asia, Africa and Latin America. In this review, we focus on good manufacturing practices-compliant manufacturing requirements, operational logistics, and regulatory processes that need to be considered for high-quality gene-modified cell therapies from an Indian perspective. We also list the potential strategies to overcome challenges associated with translation to affordability and scalability.

Immune Suppression During Preclinical Drug Development Mitigates Immunogenicity-Mediated Impact on Therapeutic Exposure.

In the clinical setting, anti-drug antibodies (ADA) against biotherapeutics can influence patient safety and interfere with product efficacy. High immunogenicity has been addressed in clinic by concomitant immune suppression, such as co-administration of methotrexate with enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) and combination tacrolimus/sirolimus treatment for prophylaxis against organ transplant rejection. This study investigates the use of such immune suppressants in mitigating ADA responses to a fully human monoclonal antibody (mAb1) in preclinical animal studies. Three groups of Sprague Dawley rats (n = 18) were treated with low (0.01 mg/kg), moderate (50 mg/kg), or high (300 mg/kg) doses of mAb1. Experimental groups also received either methotrexate or tacrolimus/sirolimus immune suppressive regimens. ELISA-based methods were utilized to measure and characterize ADA and mAb1 pharmacokinetics (PK). Results demonstrated a stepwise increase in immunogenicity with mAb1 dosage. Methotrexate significantly lowered incidence of anti-variable region antibodies at moderate mAb1 dose (P < 0.05), while tacrolimus/sirolimus did likewise at moderate and high doses (P < 0.01) of mAb1. Except for low-dose mAb1 + methotrexate, all immunosuppressed groups displayed more than a 70-fold decrease in ADA magnitude (P < 0.05). This abrogation in ADA response correlated with more mAb1 in circulation by week 4 for moderate- and high-dosed mAb1 groups. These data provide an approach to mitigate preclinical immunogenicity by the use of immunosuppressant regimens. Such preconditioning can support preclinical drug development of human therapeutics that are antigenic to animals. Similar approaches could be investigated for wider application to novel therapeutics.

Considerations for optimization and validation of an in vitro PBMC derived T cell assay for immunogenicity prediction of biotherapeutics.

An immune response to a biotherapeutic can be induced when the therapeutic is processed and presented by antigen presenting cell to T helper cells. This study evaluates the performance of an in vitro assay that can elicit antigen specific effector T cell responses. Two biotherapeutics with known clinical immunogenicity [FPX1 and FPX2] were assessed for their ability to induce antigen-specific IFN-γ secreting T cells in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC). The 24 amino acid peptide component of FPX1 elicited an antigen-specific response in 16/34 (47%) individual naïve healthy donors. This in vitro effect was consistent with high rate of immunogenicity which was observed when this drug was administered in clinical trials. FPX2 did not induce antigen-specific T cells in vitro, which correlates with the low rate of development of anti-drug antibody responses to this molecule in the clinic. The assay has the potential to predict immunogenicity and help in the selection of biotherapeutics at the early development stage of a clinical candidate.