Stress testing the Centiloid: Precision and variability of PET quantification of amyloid pathology.

INTRODUCTION: Assessing the potential sources of bias and variability of the Centiloid (CL) scale is fundamental for its appropriate clinical application. METHODS: We included 533 participants from AMYloid imaging to Prevent Alzheimer's Disease (AMYPAD DPMS) and Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) cohorts. Thirty-two CL pipelines were created using different combinations of reference region (RR), RR and target types, and quantification spaces. Generalized estimating equations stratified by amyloid positivity were used to assess the impact of the quantification pipeline, radiotracer, age, brain atrophy, and harmonization status on CL. RESULTS: RR selection and RR type impact CL the most, particularly in amyloid-negative individuals. The standard CL pipeline with the whole cerebellum as RR is robust against brain atrophy and differences in image resolution, with 95% confidence intervals below ± 3.95 CL for amyloid beta positivity cutoffs (CL < 24). DISCUSSION: The standard CL pipeline is recommended for most scenarios. Confidence intervals should be considered when operationalizing CL cutoffs in clinical and research settings. HIGHLIGHTS: We developed a framework for evaluating Centiloid (CL) variability to different factors. Reference region selection and delineation had the highest impact on CL values. Whole cerebellum (WCB) and whole cerebellum plus brainstem (WCB+BSTM) as reference regions yielded consistent results across tracers. The standard CL pipeline is robust against atrophy and image resolution variation. Estimated within- and between-pipeline variability (95% confidence interval) in absolute CL units.

NAFLD and NASH biomarker qualification in the LITMUS consortium - Lessons learned.

Biomarkers have the potential to accelerate drug development, as early indicators of improved clinical response, to improve patient safety, and for personalised medicine. However, few have been approved through the biomarker qualification pathways of the regulatory agencies. This paper outlines how biomarkers can accelerate drug development, and reviews the lessons learned by the EU IMI2-funded LITMUS consortium, which has had several interactions with regulatory agencies in both the US and EU regarding biomarker qualification in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. Sharing knowledge of such interactions with the scientific community is of paramount importance to increase the chances of qualification of relevant biomarkers that may accelerate drug development, and thereby help patients, across disease indications. A qualified biomarker enables a decision to be made that all understand and support in a common framework.

DeepAmes: A deep learning-powered Ames test predictive model with potential for regulatory application.

The Ames assay is required by the regulatory agencies worldwide to assess the mutagenic potential risk of consumer products. As well as this in vitro assay, in silico approaches have been widely used to predict Ames test results as outlined in the International Council for Harmonization (ICH) guidelines. Building on this in silico approach, here we describe DeepAmes, a high performance and robust model developed with a novel deep learning (DL) approach for potential utility in regulatory science. DeepAmes was developed with a large and consistent Ames dataset (>10,000 compounds) and was compared with other five standard Machine Learning (ML) methods. Using a test set of 1,543 compounds, DeepAmes was the best performer in predicting the outcome of Ames assay. In addition, DeepAmes yielded the best and most stable performance up to when compounds were >30% outside of the applicability domain (AD). Regarding the potential for regulatory application, a revised version of DeepAmes with a much-improved sensitivity of 0.87 from 0.47. In conclusion, DeepAmes provides a DL-powered Ames test predictive model for predicting the results of Ames tests; with its defined AD and clear context of use, DeepAmes has potential for utility in regulatory application.

Gaps and challenges in nonclinical assessments of pharmaceuticals: An FDA/CDER perspective on considerations for development of new approach methodologies.

Previously, we provided an FDA/CDER perspective on nonclinical testing strategies and briefly discussed the opportunities and challenges of using new approach methodologies (NAMs) in drug development, especially for regulatory purposes. To facilitate the integration of NAMs into nonclinical regulatory testing, we surveyed the CDER Pharmacology/Toxicology community to identify the nonclinical challenges faced by CDER review staff, including gaps and areas of concern underserved by current nonclinical testing approaches, and to understand how development of NAMs with specific contexts of use (COUs) could potentially alleviate them. Survey outcomes were coalesced into CDER-identified needs for which NAMs with specific COUs could potentially be developed to address gaps and challenges in nonclinical safety assessments. We also discussed the current FDA procedure for validation and qualification of NAMs intended to inform regulatory decisions. This manuscript is intended to facilitate productive discussions and collaborations with regulatory, government, and academic stakeholders within the drug development community regarding the development and regulatory use of NAMs and their role in safety and efficacy assessment of pharmaceuticals.

Incorporating user feedback in the design of a genetics analysis tool: A two-part approach.

While general usability assessment models for websites have been developed for a wide variety of contexts, research literature on incorporating user feedback in the design of online scientific tools is lacking. In this article, we present an approach that we developed and illustrate how it was used to elicit user feedback of the AnalyzeMyVariant tool, which enables geneticists to use family pedigree data to calculate pathogenicity likelihood ratios for variants of unknown significance. We reviewed existing usability literature and developed a survey instrument emphasizing concepts of importance to online, data-driven, scientific tools. The items on the survey instrument were grouped in four categories: usability, quality, privacy and security, and satisfaction. We performed a two-part evaluation using the survey and a semi-structured interview protocol. The survey instrument was used to collect data about the use experience of AnalyzeMyVariant from 57 genetic experts and trainees who were recruited via email invitations. We also conducted semi-structured interviews with six genetics experts to explore work contexts in which users might use the tool and further delve into issues faced in tool use. Interviews were inductively coded and major themes identified using the constant comparative method. We found that the needs of genetics professionals vary for research- and clinically-focused work. These differences can inform the design of tools to serve their needs. The major contribution of this work is the description of a two-part method to elicit user feedback to inform the design of online, data-driven, scientific tools, which focuses on constructs of particular relevance to these tools such as usability, quality, privacy, security, and satisfaction. The survey instrument that we developed, coupled with contextual interviews, may serve as an example that can be used by others conducting usability studies of similar tools. In addition, our results emphasize the importance of considering contextual factors such as background knowledge, situational factors, and the intended application of results, in the usability evaluation of scientific software. It is our hope that this two-part approach might be adapted to assess the usability of other online scientific tools and facilitate the design of tools to meet the needs of their target audiences.

Blood-based biomarkers in Alzheimer disease: Current state of the science and a novel collaborative paradigm for advancing from discovery to clinic.

The last decade has seen a substantial increase in research focused on the identification of blood-based biomarkers that have utility in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Blood-based biomarkers have significant advantages of being time- and cost-efficient as well as reduced invasiveness and increased patient acceptance. Despite these advantages and increased research efforts, the field has been hampered by lack of reproducibility and an unclear path for moving basic discovery toward clinical utilization. Here we reviewed the recent literature on blood-based biomarkers in AD to provide a current state of the art. In addition, a collaborative model is proposed that leverages academic and industry strengths to facilitate the field in moving past discovery only work and toward clinical use. Key resources are provided. This new public-private partnership model is intended to circumvent the traditional handoff model and provide a clear and useful paradigm for the advancement of biomarker science in AD and other neurodegenerative diseases.

Clinical Outcome Assessments: Conceptual Foundation-Report of the ISPOR Clinical Outcomes Assessment - Emerging Good Practices for Outcomes Research Task Force.

An outcome assessment, the patient assessment used in an endpoint, is the measuring instrument that provides a rating or score (categorical or continuous) that is intended to represent some aspect of the patient's health status. Outcome assessments are used to define efficacy endpoints when developing a therapy for a disease or condition. Most efficacy endpoints are based on specified clinical assessments of patients. When clinical assessments are used as clinical trial outcomes, they are called clinical outcome assessments (COAs). COAs include any assessment that may be influenced by human choices, judgment, or motivation. COAs must be well-defined and possess adequate measurement properties to demonstrate (directly or indirectly) the benefits of a treatment. In contrast, a biomarker assessment is one that is subject to little, if any, patient motivational or rater judgmental influence. This is the first of two reports by the ISPOR Clinical Outcomes Assessment - Emerging Good Practices for Outcomes Research Task Force. This report provides foundational definitions important for an understanding of COA measurement principles. The foundation provided in this report includes what it means to demonstrate a beneficial effect, how assessments of patients relate to the objective of showing a treatment's benefit, and how these assessments are used in clinical trial endpoints. In addition, this report describes intrinsic attributes of patient assessments and clinical trial factors that can affect the properties of the measurements. These factors should be considered when developing or refining assessments. These considerations will aid investigators designing trials in their choice of using an existing assessment or developing a new outcome assessment. Although the focus of this report is on the development of a new COA to define endpoints in a clinical trial, these principles may be applied more generally. A critical element in appraising or developing a COA is to describe the treatment's intended benefit as an effect on a clearly identified aspect of how a patient feels or functions. This aspect must have importance to the patient and be part of the patient's typical life. This meaningful health aspect can be measured directly or measured indirectly when it is impractical to evaluate it directly or when it is difficult to measure. For indirect measurement, a concept of interest (COI) can be identified. The COI must be related to how a patient feels or functions. Procedures are then developed to measure the COI. The relationship of these measurements with how a patient feels or functions in the intended setting and manner of use of the COA (the context of use) could then be defined. A COA has identifiable attributes or characteristics that affect the measurement properties of the COA when used in endpoints. One of these features is whether judgment can influence the measurement, and if so, whose judgment. This attribute defines four categories of COAs: patient reported outcomes, clinician reported outcomes, observer reported outcomes, and performance outcomes. A full description as well as explanation of other important COA features is included in this report. The information in this report should aid in the development, refinement, and standardization of COAs, and, ultimately, improve their measurement properties.

The development process of 'fit-for-purpose' imaging biomarkers to characterize the tumor microenvironment.

Immune-based treatment approaches are successfully used for the treatment of patients with cancer. While such therapies can be highly effective, many patients fail to benefit. To provide optimal therapy choices and to predict treatment responses, reliable biomarkers for the assessment of immune features in patients with cancer are of significant importance. Biomarkers (BM) that enable a comprehensive and repeatable assessment of the tumor microenvironment (TME), the lymphoid system, and the dynamics induced by drug treatment can fill this gap. Medical imaging, notably positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), providing whole-body imaging BMs, might deliver such BMs. However, those imaging BMs must be well characterized as being 'fit for purpose' for the intended use. This review provides an overview of the key steps involved in the development of 'fit-for-purpose' imaging BMs applicable in drug development, with a specific focus on pharmacodynamic biomarkers for assessing the TME and its modulation by immunotherapy. The importance of the qualification of imaging BMs according to their context of use (COU) as defined by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and National Institutes of Health Biomarkers, EndpointS, and other Tools (BEST) glossary is highlighted. We elaborate on how an imaging BM qualification for a specific COU can be achieved.

A European Bioanalysis Forum recommendation for requiring a context-of-use statement for successful development and validation of biomarker assays.

The European Bioanalysis Forum, alongside key industry stakeholders, has been driving the discussions around the implementation of context-of use for biomarker assays to ensure that these assays are validated appropriately depending on their purpose. Insights into understanding why the implementation of context-of-use in assay strategies has also shown that the key stakeholder, or requester for the biomarker data, is responsible for providing the context-of-use statement for all biomarker assay requests. Experts from across the industry haves repeatedly sought a cross-industry recommended format in which the context-of-use statement could be provided. In this manuscript, the European Bioanalysis Forum suggests a format for this.

Re-thinking the current paradigm for clinical immunogenicity assessment: an update from the discussion in the European Bioanalysis Forum.

Immunogenicity regulatory guidance and industry recommendations have evolved over the last two decades since unexpected immune reactions were first reported with erythropoietin. Since then, the guidelines and practices for immunogenicity have stemmed from a reaction to a high-risk molecule causing significant clinical impact. Similar thinking is often applied to all biotherapeutic drugs, even when a well-defined risk assessment suggests otherwise. In recent years, the current testing paradigm for immunogenicity has been challenged with more informative approaches being proposed. In a Focus Workshop held by the European Bioanalysis Forum in September 2023, the current immunogenicity testing paradigm was challenged based on the experience and learning of 20+ years of immunogenicity strategies. The workshop recommendations proposed a new paradigm, challenging the value of multiple tiers depending on the immunogenicity risk assessment based on context of use and moving toward treating immunogenicity as a pharmacodynamic biomarker for the drug. Such rethinking ultimately results in the appropriate and efficient focusing of resources on immunogenicity testing strategies that benefit patients most, moving to a new paradigm where implementation of appropriate and truly informative immunogenicity testing strategies, depending on the context-of-use, become the norm .

[Box: see text].

Extracellular vesicles as the next-generation modulators of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of medications and their potential as adjuvant therapeutics.

BACKGROUND AND MAIN BODY: Pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) are central concepts to guide the dosage and administration of drug therapies and are essential to consider for both healthcare professionals and researchers in therapeutic planning and drug discovery. PK/PD properties of a drug significantly influence variability in response to treatment, including therapeutic failure or excessive medication-related harm. Furthermore, suboptimal PK properties constitute a significant barrier to further development for some candidate treatments in drug discovery. This article describes how extracellular vesicles (EVs) affect different aspects of PK and PD of medications and their potential to modulate PK and PD properties to address problematic PK/PD profiles of drugs. We reviewed EVs' intrinsic effects on cell behaviours and medication responses. We also described how surface and cargo modifications can enhance EV functionalities and enable them as adjuvants to optimise the PK/PD profile of conventional medications. Furthermore, we demonstrated that various bioengineering strategies can be used to modify the properties of EVs, hence enhancing their potential to modulate PK and PD profile of medications. CONCLUSION: This review uncovers the critical role of EVs in PK and PD modulation and motivates further research and the development of assays to unfold EVs' full potential in solving PK and PD-related problems. However, while we have shown that EVs play a vital role in modulating PK and PD properties of medications, we postulated that it is essential to define the context of use when designing and utilising EVs in pharmaceutical and medical applications. HIGHLIGHTS: Existing solutions for pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics modulation are limited. Extracellular vesicles can optimise pharmacokinetics as a drug delivery vehicle. Biogenesis and administration of extracellular vesicles can signal cell response. The pharmaceutical potential of extracellular vesicles can be enhanced by surface and cargo bioengineering. When using extracellular vesicles as modulators of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, the 'context of use' must be considered.

Exploring the two sides of a moment of use approach to design.

We have explored designers having empathy for the audience of focus, designers using empathy as a means to an end, and designers using empathy to deliver a meaningful design deliverable. Our research has evolved from studying how designers reflect on their own design context and the audience's given circumstance to designers acting on moments of use. Our purpose was to explore two sides of a moment of use approach to design by observing one team of graduate student designers, tasked with designing an online training course from beginning to end. Our research question was the following: how did the design team act on a moment of use approach to design a meaningful design deliverable? Our findings indicated that although the design team designed a meaningful design deliverable the client did not implement the final deliverable. We discuss why this happened and the implications for designers and those who prepare designers.

A biomarker assay validation approach tailored to the context of use and bioanalytical platform.

It is widely acknowledged by the bioanalytical and biomarker community that biomarker assay validations should be fit-for-purpose depending on the context of use. The challenge is how to consistently apply these principles in teams responsible for measuring a disparate array of biomarkers, often on multiple analytical platforms, at various stages of the drug discovery and development pipeline and across diverse biology focus areas. To drive consistency, while maintaining the necessary flexibility to allow validations to be driven by scientific rationale and taking into consideration the context of use and associated biological and (pre)analytical factors, a framework applicable across biomarker assays was developed. Herein the authors share their perspective to engage in the ongoing conversation around fit-for-purpose biomarker assay validation.

Direct bioanalysis or indirect calculation of target engagement and free drug exposure: do we apply double standards?

Analysis of "free" drug/target concentrations is important to set up appropriate pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models, to evaluate active-drug exposure and target engagement. Such "free-analyte" determination could be done by direct bioanalysis using an appropriate "free-analyte" assay. Development of "free" assays is often considered challenging from a technological and regulatory perspective. The application of a "total-total" approach, where the "free-analyte" concentration is determined mathematically, is considered a more convenient option. In this perspective, we examine and discuss the challenges of this "total-total" approach, from the affinity data, the importance of applying an appropriate "total" assay, the impact of additional binding partners and the variability of the total drug/target assays and their impact on the quality and variability of the final "free-analyte" dataset.

Industry Adoption of Organoids and Organs-on-Chip Technology: Toward a Paradox of Choice.

During the last decade, organoid and organs-on-chip technologies have significantly enhanced the ability to model human biology in vitro. For the pharmaceutical industry, this represents an opportunity to augment, or possibly replace, traditional preclinical animal studies with more clinically predictive tools. In the last few years, the marketplace for new human model systems has expanded rapidly. While pharma companies welcome the breadth of new options, ample choice can be paralyzing. Even for experts from the model developer community who are now filling the ranks in the industry, the pairing of the right model for a specific, fit-for-purpose biological question can be daunting. As a community, the adoption of these models can be hastened in the industry by publishing high dimensional datasets (e.g., multiomic, imaging, functional, etc.) on existing model systems, termed model-omics, and storing them in publicly accessible databases. This action will allow for quick cross-model comparisons and provide a sought-after rationale for either routine or fit-for-purpose use of organoids or organs-on-chip during drug development.

Perspectives on the evaluation and adoption of complex in vitro models in drug development: Workshop with the FDA and the pharmaceutical industry (IQ MPS Affiliate).

Complex in vitro models (CIVM) offer the potential to improve pharmaceutical clinical drug attrition due to safety and/ or efficacy concerns. For this technology to have an impact, the establishment of robust characterization and qualifi­cation plans constructed around specific contexts of use (COU) is required. This article covers the output from a workshop between the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Innovation and Quality Microphysiological Systems (IQ MPS) Affiliate. The intent of the workshop was to understand how CIVM technologies are currently being applied by pharma­ceutical companies during drug development and are being tested at the FDA through various case studies in order to identify hurdles (real or perceived) to the adoption of microphysiological systems (MPS) technologies, and to address evaluation/qualification pathways for these technologies. Output from the workshop includes the alignment on a working definition of MPS, a detailed description of the eleven CIVM case studies presented at the workshop, in-depth analysis, and key take aways from breakout sessions on ADME (absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion), pharmacology, and safety that covered topics such as qualification and performance criteria, species differences and concordance, and how industry can overcome barriers to regulatory submission of CIVM data. In conclusion, IQ MPS Affiliate and FDA scientists were able to build a general consensus on the need for animal CIVMs for preclinical species to better determine species concordance. Furthermore, there was acceptance that CIVM technologies for use in ADME, pharmacology and safety assessment will require qualification, which will vary depending on the specific COU.

Biomarker context-of-use: how organizational design can impact the implementation of the appropriate biomarker assay strategy.

Since 2011, the European Bioanalysis Forum has been discussing the topic of context-of-use for biomarker assays, in support of a cross-industry implementation of its principles. The discussions have led to the acknowledgement of the challenges that we face as an industry in implementing these principles. In addition to scientific recommendations, the European Bioanalysis Forum has addressed these challenges by providing recommendations on organizational design, and what works in both sponsor and contract research organizations, to support and enable context-of-use across biomarker strategies. Here, we highlight the key considerations for organizational design to help ensure that biomarker assays are characterized and validated according to the right context-of-use, to ensure that the right decisions based on the biomarker data can be made during drug development.

Quantitative polymerase chain reaction in the bioanalytical laboratory and technical and scientific considerations for nonclinical and clinical assay characterization, validation and sample analysis.

In this manuscript, the European Bioanalysis Forum reports back on their discussions on practical and scientific considerations related to bioanalytical applications of quantitative polymerase chain reaction. This publication follows an earlier publication in which the European Bioanalysis Forum recommends to consider principles of context of use when defining assay acceptance criteria for method validation criteria and sample analysis.