Abuse liability assessment for biologic drugs - All molecules are not created equal.

The development of novel drug candidates involves the thorough evaluation of potential efficacy and safety. To facilitate the safety assessment in light of global increases in prescription drug misuse/abuse, health authorities have developed guidance documents which provide a framework for evaluating the abuse liability of candidate therapeutics. The guidances do not distinguish between small molecules and biologics/biotherapeutics; however, there are key differences between these classes of therapeutics which are important drivers of concern for abuse. An analysis of these properties, including ability to distribute to the central nervous system, pharmacokinetic properties (e.g., half-life and metabolism), potential for off-target binding, and the physiochemical characteristics of biologic drug products suggests that the potential for abuse of a biologic is limited. Many marketed antibodies and recombinant proteins have been associated with adverse effects such as headache and dizziness. However, biologics have not historically engendered the rapid-onset psychoactive effects typically present for drugs of abuse, thus further underscoring their low risk for abuse potential. The factors to be taken into consideration before conducting nonclinical abuse liability studies with biologics are described herein; importantly, the aggregate assessment of these factors leads to the conclusion that abuse liability studies are unlikely to be necessary for this class of therapeutics.

Inflammation and immunogenicity limit the utility of the rabbit as a nonclinical species for ocular biologic therapeutics.

The nonclinical safety evaluation of therapeutic drug candidates is commonly conducted in two species (rodent and non-rodent) in keeping with international health authority guidance. Biologic drugs typically have restricted species cross-reactivity, necessitating the evaluation of safety in non-human primates and thus limiting the utility of lower order species. Safety studies of cross-reactive ocular biologic drug candidates have been conducted in rabbits as a second toxicology species, despite the fact that rabbits are not a rodent species. Such studies are often confounded by the development of anti-drug antibodies and severe ocular inflammation, the latter requiring studies to be terminated prematurely for animal welfare reasons. Notably, these confounding factors preclude the interpretation of safety. Nonclinical toxicology programs should be designed with consideration of ethical animal use and 3Rs principles (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement). The experience of several pharmaceutical sponsors, demonstrating that toxicology studies of ocular (intravitreal and topical ocular) biologic drug candidates in the rabbit are of limited interpretive value, calls into question the utility of such studies in this species and indicates that such studies should not be conducted.

Host cell proteins in biotechnology-derived products: A risk assessment framework.

To manufacture biotechnology products, mammalian or bacterial cells are engineered for the production of recombinant therapeutic human proteins including monoclonal antibodies. Host cells synthesize an entire repertoire of proteins which are essential for their own function and survival. Biotechnology manufacturing processes are designed to produce recombinant therapeutics with a very high degree of purity. While there is typically a low residual level of host cell protein in the final drug product, under some circumstances a host cell protein(s) may copurify with the therapeutic protein and, if it is not detected and removed, it may become an unintended component of the final product. The purpose of this article is to enumerate and discuss factors to be considered in an assessment of risk of residual host cell protein(s) detected and identified in the drug product. The consideration of these factors and their relative ranking will lead to an overall risk assessment that informs decision-making around how to control the levels of host cell proteins.

Balancing Efficacy and Safety of an Anti-DLL4 Antibody through Pharmacokinetic Modulation.

PURPOSE: Although agents targeting Delta-like ligand 4 (DLL4) have shown great promise for angiogenesis-based cancer therapy, findings in recent studies have raised serious safety concerns. To further evaluate the potential for therapeutic targeting of the DLL4 pathway, we pursued a novel strategy to reduce toxicities related to DLL4 inhibition by modulating the pharmacokinetic (PK) properties of an anti-DLL4 antibody. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The F(ab')2 fragment of anti-DLL4 antibody (anti-DLL4 F(ab')2) was generated and assessed in efficacy and toxicity studies. RESULTS: Anti-DLL4 F(ab')2 enables greater control over the extent and duration of DLL4 inhibition, such that intermittent dosing of anti-DLL4 F(ab')2 can maintain significant antitumor activity while markedly mitigating known toxicities associated with continuous pathway inhibition. CONCLUSIONS: PK modulation has potentially broad implications for development of antibody-based therapeutics. Our safety studies with anti-DLL4 F(ab')2 also provide new evidence reinforcing the notion that the DLL4 pathway is extremely sensitive to pharmacologic perturbation, further underscoring the importance of exercising caution to safely harness this potent pathway in humans.