Characterization of robust immune responses to a bispecific antibody, a novel class of antibody therapeutics.

Background: Anti-A/B is a bispecific monoclonal antibody that blocks activities of soluble targets A and B. Robust immune responses were observed in a multiple-dose cynomolgus monkey toxicology study, negatively impacting the toxicokinetics/pharmacodynamics profile of anti-A/B in some animals. This was unexpected as similar findings were not observed in the two previously studied parental molecules. Methodology & Results: This paper discusses our characterization strategy for evaluating the immunogenic domain(s) of anti-A/B and our mitigation plan to monitor immunogenicity in the first-in-human clinical study. The characterization results from the cynomolgus monkey and Phase I studies are discussed. Conclusion: The characterization strategy discussed informed understanding of immunogenicity results and clinical impact, which can be broadly applied to other molecules with multiple-binding domains.

Overcoming disease-specific matrix effect in a clinical pharmacokinetic assay using a microfluidic immunoassay technology.

AIM: Etrolizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody, has demonstrated clinical remission in a Phase II study of ulcerative colitis patients. In the Phase III program, a second indication, Crohn's disease was added. The pharmacokinetic ELISA used in the Phase I/II studies in normal human and ulcerative colitis sera exhibited matrix interference in the Crohn's disease population, necessitating implementation of a new technology. Methodology & results: Optimization of the original ELISA and assay redevelopment using different antibody pairs did not result in substantive improvements, necessitating implementation of an alternative technology for assay development. CONCLUSION: We highlight the challenges encountered with optimization/redevelopment of the original ELISA and discuss results of the new assay on the Gyros platform.

Specific Immune Response to Phospholipase B-Like 2 Protein, a Host Cell Impurity in Lebrikizumab Clinical Material.

Host cell proteins are manufacturing process-related impurities that may co-purify with the product despite extensive efforts to optimize the purification process. The risks associated with these impurities can vary and may be patient and/or therapeutic dependent. Therefore, it is critical to monitor and control the levels of these impurities in products and their potential impact on safety and efficacy. Lebrikizumab is a humanized immunoglobulin G4 monoclonal antibody (mAb) that binds specifically to soluble interleukin 13. This mAb is currently in phase III clinical development for the treatment of asthma. Following initial phase III studies, the material used in lebrikizumab clinical trials was found to have a process-related impurity identified as Chinese hamster ovary phospholipase B-like 2 (PLBL2) which co-purified with lebrikizumab. The immunogenic potential of PLBL2 and its potential impact on the immunogenicity of lebrikizumab in clinical studies were therefore evaluated. Data from the clinical studies demonstrated that ∼90% of subjects developed a specific and measurable immune response to PLBL2. Given the high incidence of antibodies to PLBL2 as well as the comparable safety profile observed between placebo- and drug-treated subjects, no correlation between safety events and anti-PLBL2 antibodies could be made. Additionally, no impact on the incidence of anti-lebrikizumab antibodies was observed, suggesting the lack of an adjuvant effect from PLBL2. Interim analysis from ongoing phase III studies using material with substantially reduced levels of PLBL2 with patients having had longer exposure shows significantly less and dose-dependent frequency of immune responses to PLBL2.

Evaluation of IgE Antibodies to Omalizumab (Xolair®) and Their Potential Correlation to Anaphylaxis.

Omalizumab (Xolair®) is a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively binds to human immunoglobulin E (IgE). Omalizumab is used to treat IgE-mediated diseases such as chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU) and moderate to severe allergic asthma. In pre-marketing clinical trials in patients with asthma, anaphylaxis was reported in 3 of 3,507 (0.1%) patients. In post-marketing spontaneous reports, the frequency of anaphylaxis attributed to omalizumab use was estimated to be at least 0.2% of patients based on an estimated exposure of about 57,300 patients from June 2003 through December 2006. To better understand the risk of anaphylaxis in patients with allergic asthma receiving omalizumab, a post-marketing pharmacosurveillance study was initiated in 2009. As part of this study, an assay was developed to detect antibodies of IgE isotype to omalizumab. Serum samples from patients in the study were evaluated using this assay. Our results indicated that there was no observable correlation between either anaphylaxis or skin test reactivity and the presence of antibodies of IgE isotype to omalizumab. Here, we discuss the development of this assay as well as the results of the immunogenicity assessment.

Evaluation of two commercial omalizumab/free IgE immunoassays: implications of use during therapy.

BACKGROUND: The anti-IgE monoclonal antibody, omalizumab, is approved in the US as add-on therapy for patients ≥12 years of age with moderate-to-severe persistent allergic asthma. Omalizumab is administered according to the US Food and Drug Administration approved dosing table included in the prescribing information. The dosing table was developed using Genentech's free IgE assay and is designed to achieve free serum IgE levels of <50 ng/mL, known to be associated with clinical benefit. Lack of clinical benefit in a subset of patients on omalizumab has prompted demand for commercial free IgE assays to guide omalizumab dosing. To date, two commercial free IgE assays marketed by ViraCor-IBT (no longer offered) and BioTeZ have been available to physicians. OBJECTIVE: This study compares the results generated from the two commercial free IgE assays with the free IgE levels generated by the Genentech assay. METHODS: Two serum sample sets were prepared using 20 samples from patients with a wide range of IgE and omalizumab from an omalizumab clinical trial and 36 samples from omalizumab-naïve patients. Different amounts of omalizumab were added to the 36 omalizumab naïve samples based on measured total IgE levels to ensure that a good range of IgE and omalizumab was represented in the study samples. Samples were randomized for blinded analysis of free IgE levels using the Genentech, ViraCor-IBT and BioTeZ free serum IgE assays. Analysis of samples in the ViraCor-IBT assay were conducted by ViraCor-IBT and the analysis of samples using the Genentech and BioTeZ assay methods were conducted by a third party contract research organization. RESULTS: The ViraCor-IBT and BioTeZ free IgE assays demonstrated significantly higher free IgE levels than the Genentech free IgE assay. Twenty-nine of 56 samples tested <50 ng/mL in the Genentech assay; of these, 12/29 (41%) and 20/29 (69%) tested >50 ng/mL in the BioTeZ and ViraCor-IBT assays, respectively. In the BioTeZ free IgE evaluations, 11/20 samples that were re-tested had inter-assay differences ranging from 40-190%. CONCLUSIONS: Free ligand (such as IgE) measurements are challenging and dependent on the method and reagents used. The Viracor-IBT and BioTeZ methods tend to over-estimate free serum IgE levels compared with the Genentech free IgE assay. Using these assays to monitor therapy and adjust omalizumab doses post treatment is considered off-label use and could lead to a potential risk for unnecessary treatment and/or risk to patient safety.

Utilizing design of experiments to characterize assay robustness.

BACKGROUND: Design of experiments (DOE) is a systematic approach to assess the effects of many factors on a response of an assay. This paper provides a case study whereby DOE was successfully utilized to evaluate robustness parameters for a ligand-binding assay (LBA). METHODOLOGY: A 24-run Plackett-Burman design was developed to investigate factors that may have caused a lack of robustness in this particular LBA. We modeled five main effects and their ten two-way interactions, using the standard curve signal as the response. RESULTS: By utilizing DOE, we were able to quickly identify the factors that affected our assay's performance. The lack of robustness was attributed to the handling of the coat reagent. Factors that had an adverse effect on the coat material were vortexing and freeze-thaw cycles. CONCLUSION: We recommend that a robustness DOE be conducted prior to the validation of an assay for early identification of critical factors that may impact assay performance.

Clinical immunogenicity specificity assessments: a platform evaluation.

Immunogenicity assessment is an integral part of the evaluation of the safety and efficacy for protein therapeutics during drug development, and is required by the regulatory authorities. A tiered strategy is typically utilized to assess immunogenicity and is often comprised of a screening method, a confirmation/specificity step and a characterization step. To ensure methods with appropriate sensitivity are utilized, the threshold for screening assays is set to minimize false negatives resulting in a certain rate of false positivity. The confirmatory step is critical for determining assay specificity and eliminating false positives identified in the screening assay. Using a widely implemented technology and bridging assay format commonly used for immunogenicity assessments, unacceptably poor specificity was observed for the confirmatory/specificity step for a subset of monoclonal antibodies in our group. Therefore, we believe that this challenge will be relevant to others in the field. In this paper, we will describe our challenges with one of these antibodies, monoclonal antibody therapeutic X (rhuMAb X). This paper presents extensive evaluation of two technology platforms and various conditions to evaluate and provide solutions to improving the assay specificity in the immunogenicity assessment of antibody therapeutics.

Increased rheumatoid factor interference observed during immunogenicity assessment of an Fc-engineered therapeutic antibody.

Protein therapeutics may elicit an anti-therapeutic antibody (ATA) response in patients. This response depends on a number of factors including patient population, disease state, route of delivery or characteristics specific to the product. Therapeutics for immunological indications often target relatively young and healthy patients with hyperactive immune systems who have periodic flares and remissions. The hyperactive immune system of these patients can add several levels of bioanalytical complexity due to the presence of cross reactive molecules such as autoantibodies. In addition, the long-term chronic dosing regimen often necessary in this patient population can increase their risks of immunogenicity against the therapeutic and lead to safety concerns. Therefore, development of a sensitive and drug-tolerant ATA method is important. Bridging ATA assays are usually very sensitive and drug-tolerant methods for immunogenicity assessment; however these methods are particularly vulnerable to any factor that is able to bridge the conjugated therapeutics used as reagents and can generate false positive signal. Although there are many potential interfering factors in serum, rheumatoid factors (RFs), autoantibodies associated with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), are of particular concern in this type of assay. MTRX1011A is a non-depleting anti-CD4 monoclonal antibody therapeutic that was clinically tested in RA patients. This paper will discuss the bioanalytical challenges encountered during development of a clinical ATA assay for MTRX1011A. These challenges highlight interference due to patient disease state, in this case presence of RF in RA patients, as well as specific molecule-related interference caused by an engineered mutation in the Fc region of MTRX1011A designed to enhance its binding to the neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn). We will discuss the characterization work used to identify the cross-reactive epitope and our strategy to overcome this interference during development of an effective ATA assay to support clinical evaluation of MTRX1011A.