Middle Level IM-MS and CIU Experiments for Improved Therapeutic Immunoglobulin Subclass Fingerprinting.

Most of the current FDA and EMA approved therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are based on humanized or human IgG1, 2, or 4 subclasses and engineered variants. On the structural side, these subclasses are characterized by specific interchain disulfide bridge connections. Different analytical techniques have been reported to assess intact IgGs subclasses, with recently special interest in native ion mobility (IM) and collision induced unfolding (CIU) mass spectrometry (MS). However, these two techniques exhibit significant limitations to differentiate mAb subclasses at the intact level. In the present work, we aimed at developing a unique IM-MS-based approach for the characterization of mAb subclasses at the middle level. Upon IdeS-digestion, the unfolding patterns of the F(ab')2 and Fc domains were simultaneously analyzed in a single run to provide deeper structural insights of the mAb scaffold. The unfolding patterns associated with the F(ab')2 domains are completely different in terms of unfolding energies and number of transitions. Thereby, F(ab')2 regions are the diagnostic domain to provide specific unfolding signatures to differentiate IgG subclasses and provide more confident subclass categorization than CIU on intact mAbs. In addition, the potential of middle-level CIU was evaluated through the characterization of eculizumab, a hybrid therapeutic IgG2/4 mAb. The unfolding signatures of both domains were allowed to corroborate, within a single run, the hybrid nature of eculizumab as well as specific subclass domain assignments to the F(ab')2 and Fc regions. Altogether, our results confirm the suitability of middle-level CIU of F(ab')2 domains for subclass categorization of canonical and more complex new generation engineered antibodies and related products.

Lessons Learnt from the Second Generation of Anti-Amyloid Monoclonal Antibodies Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer disease (AD) is a chronic neurodegenerative disorder with complex pathophysiology that affects over 50 million people worldwide. Most drug therapies, to date, have focused on targeting the amyloid-beta (Aß) pathway, but clinical outcomes of anti-Aß antibodies have been unsuccessful and unable to meet their primary endpoints. Similar trends have also been observed in treatments that target the tau pathway. SUMMARY: This paper reviews recent anti-Aß passive monotherapies, since Bapineuzumab, that have progressed to phase 3 clinical trials. Specifically, we discuss the 4 clinical trial programs of Solanezumab (targets Aß monomers), Aducanumab (targets Aß oligomers and plaques), Crenezumab (targets Aß oligomers), and Gantenerumab (targets Aß fibrils) which are all exogenous monoclonal antibodies. We conclude with potential reasons for why they have not met their primary endpoints and discuss lessons learnt from these trials. Key Message: Future disease-modifying trials (DMTs) for AD should be conducted in asymptomatic, Aß-positive individuals. Moreover, potential additive and/or synergistic benefits focusing on anti-Aß and anti-tau drug combinations merit further investigation.

The use of the EVITA algorithm for clinical assessment of novel agents used in prostate cancer, metastatic melanoma, and systemic lupus erythematosus.

PURPOSE: Existing health technology assessment methods can be time-consuming and complicated to use in practice. EValuation of pharmaceutical Innovations with regard to Therapeutic Advantage (EVITA) is a recently developed drug assessment strategy that provides a detailed and clinically relevant evaluation of new agents compared to standard therapies. We therefore sought to use EVITA to evaluate eight novel agents recently introduced to clinical practice or in late-stage trials for the treatment of prostate cancer, metastatic melanoma, or systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). METHODS: Eight agents (abiraterone, enzalutamide, sipuleucel-T, Prostvac, radium 223, ipilimumab, vemurafenib, and belimumab) were selected for study using the EVITA algorithm. A comprehensive literature search was performed to find clinical trial data, which were then classified using the EVITA protocol. EVITA was also compared to results from health technology assessments (HTAs) or reimbursement decisions. RESULTS: The EVITA scores for the eight drugs ranged from 5.5 to 9: all the selected agents are therefore classed as 'recommended' and are likely to produce a therapeutic advantage. In particular, vemurafenib is likely to be highly beneficial to patients with metastatic melanoma and radium 223 to patients with metastatic prostate cancer affecting the bone. The EVITA results were generally concordant with HTAs. CONCLUSIONS: All the agents show favourable EVITA scores and are therefore recommended for clinical practice. EVITA is an easy-to-use tool that provides clinical context to the assessment of newly introduced agents and can be easily used by non-specialists.

Antibody humanization methods - a review and update.

This article reviews recent advances achieved during recent years on various aspects of antibody humanization theories and techniques. Common methods for producing humanized antibodies including framework-homology-based humanization, germline humanization, complementary determining regions (CDR)-homology-based humanization and specificity determining residues (SDR) grafting, as well as advantages and disadvantages of each of these methods and their applications are discussed.

The evolving role of PD-L1 testing in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting the programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) pathway improve clinical outcomes in patients with locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC). PD-L1 complementary or companion diagnostic assays are now available for anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 antibodies and these assays enable testing at diagnosis. The role of PD-L1 testing in UC is, however, the subject of much discussion within the medical community, particularly in light of recent restrictions on recruitment of PD-L1-low patients in clinical trials of atezolizumab and pembrolizumab as first-line therapy, and the European Medicines Agency and US Food and Drug Administration limiting use of these agents as first-line therapy in cisplatin-ineligible patients to those with high PD-L1 expression. We explore the evolving evidence for PD-L1 expression testing in UC and the role of PD-L1 expression in both tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating immune cells. We review clinical data on the prognostic and predictive value of PD-L1 expression in response to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents as first- and second-line therapy, considering issues such as the differences among complementary diagnostic assays in terms of the type of cells scored, antibodies used, and cutoff values. We consider how PD-L1 testing fits into decision-making and the potential of emerging biomarkers in UC. We conclude that, based on the scientific rationale for its use and evidence from clinical trials, PD-L1 testing provides enriched information on the patients most likely to benefit from immune checkpoint blockade and should be routinely offered to patients with metastatic UC.

Nomenclature of humanized mAbs: Early concepts, current challenges and future perspectives.

Nomenclature of monoclonal antibodies traditionally followed a strict scheme indicating target and species information. Because of the rapid advances in this field, emphasized by approval of four humanized and six human antibodies in 2017, the International Nonproprietary Name of new antibodies was updated profoundly by removing the species substem completely. In this review we give an overview about what developments led to the preference of the scientific community towards human-like antibodies. We summarize the major updates in naming schemes that tried to classify antibodies according to their humanization technique or to the final primary sequence and how this led to the erroneous perception to indicate expected immunogenicity. Following the new 2017 nomenclature update, there will not be any information available about the species origin in the names of new antibodies, which emphasizes the need for providing additional supplemental information to the scientific community and develop tools to accurately estimate and control the safety of new monoclonal antibody molecules.

Antiangiogenic therapies in non-small-cell lung cancer.

Angiogenesis is frequent in non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) and is associated with more aggressive disease. Many clinical trials have evaluated the addition of antiangiogenic therapy to standard therapies for patients with nsclc. Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against serum vascular endothelial growth factor, in combination with carboplatin-paclitaxel chemotherapy, has been shown to improve survival for patients with nsclc. However, bevacizumab-based therapy is not suitable for many nsclc patients, including those with squamous histology, poor performance status, brain metastases, and the presence of bleeding or thrombotic disorders. Similar efficacy has also been seen with carboplatin-pemetrexed followed by maintenance pemetrexed chemotherapy. In the second-line setting, the addition of ramucirumab to docetaxel-or the addition of bevacizumab to paclitaxel-has resulted in a modest improvement in efficacy, although the clinical importance of those findings is questionable. Many trials in nsclc have also evaluated oral antiangiogenic compounds, both in the first line in combination with chemotherapy and upon disease progression either as combination or single-agent therapy. No clear improvements in overall survival have been observed, although a subgroup analysis of a trial evaluating the addition of nintedanib to docetaxel showed improved survival that was limited to patients with adenocarcinoma. Those findings require validation, however. All of the oral antiangiogenic agents result in added toxicities. Some agents have resulted in an increased risk of death, limiting their development. Available evidence supports a limited number of antiangiogenic therapies for patients with nsclc, but no biomarkers to help in patient selection are currently available, and additional translational research is needed to identify predictive biomarkers for antiangiogenic therapy.

Multiple Myeloma: Diagnosis and Treatment.

The diagnosis and treatment of multiple myeloma has changed dramatically in the past decade. The disease definition has been updated to include highly specific biomarkers in addition to established markers of end-organ damage. The staging system has been revised to combine both measures of tumor burden and disease biology. Advances in therapy have resulted in a marked improvement in overall survival. New drugs introduced in the past few years include carfilzomib, pomalidomide, panobinostat, ixazomib, elotuzumab, and daratumumab. In this review, we outline the current approach to the diagnosis, prognosis, and management of multiple myeloma.

A Retrospective Cohort Study Comparing Utilization and Costs of Biologic Therapies and JAK Inhibitor Therapy Across Four Common Inflammatory Indications in Adult US Managed Care Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Biologic therapies are used to treat several inflammatory diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriasis (PsO), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Data from a commercial claims database were used to evaluate utilization and cost of biologic treatment for these conditions. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Optum Research Database. Patients were aged 18-63 years with diagnosis of moderate to severe RA, PsO, PsA, and/or AS and first (index) claim for biologics abatacept, adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, rituximab, tocilizumab, or ustekinumab or non-biologic tofacitinib between March 1, 2011 and February 28, 2013. One-year treatment costs were based on observed paid amounts and used to impute dosing. Treatment patterns (persistence, switching, discontinuing, restarting) were evaluated. RESULTS: Data from 20,159 patients were analyzed for index medications abatacept (n = 583), adalimumab (n = 6521), certolizumab pegol (n = 415), etanercept (n = 9116), golimumab (n = 231), infliximab (n = 1906), rituximab (n = 295), tocilizumab (n = 165), ustekinumab (n = 922), and tofacitinib (n = 5). For patients with RA only, costs were lowest for tofacitinib ($18,769), rituximab ($19,569), or abatacept ($21,877), and ranged from $23,682 to $30,269 for all other medications. For patients with PsO only, costs were lowest for adalimumab ($29,186), etanercept ($31,212), and infliximab ($32,409) compared with ustekinumab ($53,746). For patients with PsA only, costs were lowest for etanercept ($26,916), followed by golimumab ($27,987), adalimumab ($28,749), and infliximab ($31,974). Costs were lowest with etanercept for RA plus PsA ($25,477) and for PsO plus PsA ($29,376), and with golimumab for AS only ($24,225). Across indications, annual costs were $29,521, $27,488, and $28,672 for adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab, respectively; persistence was greatest with infliximab (range 66-79%) compared with 11-59% for all other biologics. CONCLUSION: One-year treatment costs varied considerably between medications and indications. Some newly approved agents had lower costs but further research is needed to confirm these estimates as more patients are treated. FUNDING: Immunex (a wholly owned subsidiary of Amgen Inc.) and Wyeth (acquired by Pfizer).