The use of recovery animals in nonclinical safety assessment studies with monoclonal antibodies: further 3Rs opportunities remain.

Assessment of reversibility from nonclinical toxicity findings in animals with potential adverse clinical impact is required during pharmaceutical development, but there is flexibility around how and when this is performed and if recovery animals are necessary. For monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and in accordance with ICH S6(R1) if inclusion of recovery animals is warranted, this need only occur in one study. Data on study designs for first-in-human (FIH)-enabling and later-development toxicity studies were shared from a recent collaboration between the NC3Rs, EPAA, Netherlands Medicines Evaluation Board (MEB) and 14 pharmaceutical companies. This enabled a review of practices on recovery animal use during mAb development and identification of opportunities to reduce research animal use. Recovery animals were included in 68% of FIH-enabling and 69% of later-development studies, often in multiple studies in the same program. Recovery groups were commonly in control plus one test article-dosed group or in all dose groups (45% of studies, each design). Based on the shared data review and conclusions, limiting inclusion of recovery to a single nonclinical toxicology study and species, study design optimisation and use of existing knowledge instead of additional recovery groups provide opportunities to further reduce animal use within mAb development programs.

Challenges of non-clinical safety testing for biologics: A Report of the 9th BioSafe European Annual General Membership Meeting.

New challenges and other topics in non-clinical safety testing of biotherapeutics were presented and discussed at the nineth European BioSafe Annual General Membership meeting in November 2019. The session topics were selected by European BioSafe organization committee members based on recent company achievements, agency interactions and new data obtained in the non-clinical safety testing of biotherapeutics, for which data sharing would be of interest and considered as valuable information. The presented session topics ranged from strategies of in vitro testing, immunogenicity prediction, bioimaging, and developmental and reproductive toxicology (DART) assessments to first-in-human (FIH) dose prediction and bioanalytical challenges, reflecting the entire space of different areas of expertise and different molecular modalities. During the 9th meeting of the European BioSafe members, the following topics were presented and discussed in 6 main sessions (with 3 or 4 presentations per session) and in three small group breakout sessions: 1) DART assessment with biotherapeutics: what did we learn and where to go?; 2) Non-animal testing strategies; 3) Seeing is believing: new frontiers in imaging; 4) Predicting immunogenicity during early drug development: hope or despair?; 5) Challenges in FIH dose projections; and 6) Non-canonical biologics formats: challenges in bioanalytics, PKPD and biotransformation for complex biologics formats. Small group breakout sessions were organized for team discussion about 3 specific topics: 1) Testing of cellular immune function in vitro and in vivo; 2) MABEL approach (toxicology and pharmacokinetic perspective); and 3) mRNA treatments. This workshop report presents the sessions and discussions at the meeting.

Nonclinical Development of Biologics: Integrating Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics to Create Smarter and More Flexible Nonclinical Safety Programs Optimizing Animal Use.

Safety assessment of biological drugs has its challenges due to the multiple new different modalities, for example, antibody-drug conjugates, bispecifics, nanobodies, fusion proteins and advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs), their different pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, and their ability to trigger immunogenicity and toxicity. In the public and in the pharmaceutical industry, there is a strong and general desire to reduce the number of animals used in research and development of drugs and in particular reducing the use of nonhuman primates. Important discussions and activities are ongoing investigating the smarter designs of early research and dose range finding studies, reuse of animals, and replacing animal experiments with in vitro studies. Other important challenges include absence of a relevant species and design of studies and developing genetically modified animals for special investigative toxicology studies. Then, the learnings and challenges from the development of the first ATMPs are available providing valuable insights in the development path for these new potentially transformative treatments. Finally, development of strategies for assessment of immunogenicity and prediction of translation of immunogenicity and associated findings to the clinic. On this, the eighth meeting for the European BioSafe members, these challenges served as the basis for the presentations and discussions during the meeting. This article serves as the workshop report reviewing the presentations and discussions at the meeting.

Biotherapeutics in non-clinical development: Strengthening the interface between safety, pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics and manufacturing.

Biological drugs comprise a wide field of different modalities with respect to structure, pharmacokinetics and pharmacological function. Considerable non-clinical experience in the development of proteins (e.g. insulin) and antibodies has been accumulated over the past thirty years. In order to improve the efficacy and the safety of these biotherapeutics, Fc modifications (e.g. Fc silent antibody versions), combinations (antibody-drug conjugates, protein-nanoparticle combinations), and new constructs (darpins, fynomers) have been introduced. In the last decade, advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) in research and development have become a considerable and strongly growing part of the biotherapeutic portfolio. ATMPs consisting of gene and cell therapy modalities or even combinations of them, further expand the level of complexity, which already exists in non-clinical development strategies for biological drugs and has thereby led to a further diversification of expertise in safety and PKPD assessment of biological drugs. It is the fundamental rationale of the BioSafe meetings, held yearly in the EU and in the US, to convene experts on a regular basis and foster knowledge exchange and mutual understanding in this fast growing area. In order to reflect at least partially the variety of the biotherapeutics field, the 2016 EU BioSafe meeting addressed the following topics in six sessions: (i) In vitro Meets in vivo to Leverage Biologics Development (ii) New developments and regulatory considerations in the cell and gene therapy field (iii) CMC Challenges with Biologics development (iv) Minipigs in non-clinical safety assessment (v) Opportunities of PKPD Assessment in Less Common Administration Routes In the breakout sessions the following questions were discussed: (i) Cynomolgus monkey as a reprotoxicology Species: Impact of Immunomodulators on Early Pregnancy Maintenance (ii) Safety Risk of Inflammation and Autoimmunity Induced by Immunomodulators (iii) Experience with non-GMP Material in Pivotal Non-clinical Safety Studies to Support First in Man (FiM) Trials (iv) Safety Assessment of Combination Products for Non-oncology.

Safety and immunotoxicity assessment of immunomodulatory monoclonal antibodies.

Most therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) licensed for human use or in clinical development are indicated for treatment of patients with cancer and inflammatory/autoimmune disease and as such, are designed to directly interact with the immune system. A major hurdle for the development and early clinical investigation of many of these immunomodulatory mAbs is their inherent risk for adverse immune-mediated drug reactions in humans such as infusion reactions, cytokine storms, immunosuppression and autoimmunity. A thorough understanding of the immunopharmacology of a mAb in humans and animals is required to both anticipate the clinical risk of adverse immunotoxicological events and to select a safe starting dose for first-in-human (FIH) clinical studies. This review summarizes the most common adverse immunotoxicological events occurring in humans with immunomodulatory mAbs and outlines non-clinical strategies to define their immunopharmacology and assess their immunotoxic potential, as well as reduce the risk of immunotoxicity through rational mAb design. Tests to assess the relative risk of mAb candidates for cytokine release syndrome, innate immune system (dendritic cell) activation and immunogenicity in humans are also described. The importance of selecting a relevant and sensitive toxicity species for human safety assessment in which the immunopharmacology of the mAb is similar to that expected in humans is highlighted, as is the importance of understanding the limitations of the species selected for human safety assessment and supplementation of in vivo safety assessment with appropriate in vitro human assays. A tiered approach to assess effects on immune status, immune function and risk of infection and cancer, governed by the mechanism of action and structural features of the mAb, is described. Finally, the use of immunopharmacology and immunotoxicity data in determining a minimum anticipated biologic effect Level (MABEL) and in the selection of safe human starting dose is discussed.