Applications of Organoids in Advancing Drug Discovery and Development.

Organoids are small, self-organizing three-dimensional cell cultures that are derived from stem cells or primary organs. These cultures replicate the complexity of an organ, which cannot be achieved by single-cell culture systems. Organoids can be used in testing of new drugs instead of animals. Development and validation of organoids is thus important to reduce the reliance on animals for drug testing. In this review, we have discussed the developmental and regulatory aspects of organoids and highlighted their importance in drug development. We have first summarized different types of culture-based organoid systems such as submerged Matrigel, micro-fluidic 3D cultures, inducible pluripotent stem cells, and air-liquid interface cultures. These systems help us understand the intricate interplay between cells and their surrounding milieu for identifying functions of target receptors, soluble factors, and spatial interactions. Further, we have discussed the advances in humanized severe-combined immunodeficiency mouse models and their applications in the pharmacology of immune-oncology. Since regulatory aspects are important in using organoids for drug development, we have summarized FDA and EMA regulations on organoid research to support pre-clinical studies. Finally, we have included some unique studies highlighting the use of organoids in studying infectious diseases, cancer, and fundamental biology. These studies also exemplify the latest technological advances in organoid development resulting in improved efficiency. Overall, this review comprehensively summarizes the applications of organoids in early drug development during discovery and pre-clinical studies.

Immunogenicity Risk Assessment of Process-Related Impurities in An Engineered T Cell Receptor Cellular Product.

Cell therapies such as genetically modified T cells have emerged as a promising and viable treatment for hematologic cancers and are being aggressively pursued for a wide range of diseases and conditions that were previously difficult to treat or had no cure. The process development requires genetic modifications to T cells to express a receptor (engineered T cell receptor (eTCR)) of specific binding qualities to the desired target. Protein reagents utilized during the cell therapy manufacturing process, to facilitate these genetic modifications, are often present as process-related impurities at residual levels in the final drug product and can represent a potential immunogenicity risk upon infusion. This manuscript presents a framework for the qualification of an assay for assessing the immunogenicity risk of AA6 and Cas9 residuals. The same framework applies for other residuals; however, AAV6 and Cas9 were selected as they were residuals from the manufacturing of an engineered T cell receptor cellular product in development. The manuscript: 1) elucidates theoretical risks, 2) summarizes analytical data collected during process development, 3) describes the qualification of an in vitro human PBMC cytokine release assay to assess immunogenicity risk from cellular product associated process residuals; 4) identifies a multiplexed inflammatory innate and adaptive cytokine panel with pre-defined criteria using relevant positive controls; and 5) discusses qualification challenges and potential solutions for establishing meaningful thresholds. The assessment is not only relevant to establishing safe exposure levels of these residuals but also in guiding risk assessment and CMC strategy during the conduct of clinical trials.

Preexisting antibody assays for gene therapy: Considerations on patient selection cutoffs and companion diagnostic requirements.

Recombinant adeno-associated virus (AAV) vectors are the leading delivery vehicle used for in vivo gene therapies. Anti-AAV antibodies (AAV Abs) can interact with the viral capsid component of an AAV-based gene therapy (GT). Therefore, patients with preexisting AAV Abs (seropositive patients) are often excluded from GT trials to prevent treatment of patients who are unlikely to benefit1 or may have a higher risk for adverse events outweighing treatment benefits. On the contrary, unnecessary exclusion of patients with high unmet medical need should be avoided. Instead, a risk-benefit assessment that weighs the potential risks due to seropositivity vs. severity of disease and available treatment options, should drive the decision if patient selection is required. Assays for patient selection must be validated according to their intended use following national regulations/standards for diagnostic assays in appropriate laboratories. In this review, we summarize the current process of patient selection, including assay cutoff criteria and related assay validation approaches. We further provide considerations on regulatory requirements for the development of in vitro diagnostic tests supporting market authorization of a corresponding GT.

A High Threshold of Biotherapeutic Aggregate Numbers is Needed to Induce an Immunogenic Response In Vitro, In Vivo, and in the Clinic.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There is concern that subvisible aggregates in biotherapeutic drug products pose a risk to patient safety. We investigated the threshold of biotherapeutic aggregates needed to induce immunogenic responses. METHODS AND RESULTS: Highly aggregated samples were tested in cell-based assays and induced cellular responses in a manner that depended on the number of particles. The threshold of immune activation varied by disease state (cancer, rheumatoid arthritis, allergy), concomitant therapies, and particle number. Compared to healthy donors, disease state patients showed an equal or lower response at the late phase (7 days), suggesting they may not have a higher risk of responding to aggregates. Xeno-het mice were used to assess the threshold of immune activation in vivo. Although highly aggregated samples (~ 1,600,000 particles/mL) induced a weak and transient immunogenic response in mice, a 100-fold dilution of this sample (~ 16,000 particles/mL) did not induce immunogenicity. To confirm this result, subvisible particles (up to ~ 18,000 particles/mL, containing aggregates and silicone oil droplets) produced under representative administration practices (created upon infusion of a drug product through an IV catheter) did not induce a response in cell-based assays or appear to increase the rate of adverse events or immunogenicity during phase 3 clinical trials. CONCLUSION: The ability of biotherapeutic aggregates to elicit an immune response in vitro, in vivo, and in the clinic depends on high numbers of particles. This suggests that there is a high threshold for aggregates to induce an immunogenic response which is well beyond that seen in standard biotherapeutic drug products.