Abstract
With more than 100 therapeutic proteins (TP) approved since the first EMA guidance on immunogenicity in 2007, a vast amount of clinical experience with a variety of therapeutic proteins has been gained. This has provided data on anti-drug antibodies (ADA) and their observed clinical impact, or lack thereof. It has become evident that not all ADA responses are clinically relevant. The current “standard practice” is to test for ADA in all patients on every study. It is essential that we acknowledge the immunogenicity data gained from marketed TPs and that options for immunogenicity testing reflect this information. Improvements in bioanalytical support throughout the drug development process will eliminate extraneous, non-impactful practices. We propose that low-risk therapeutic proteins could be supported with an event-driven (“collect-and-hold”) immunogenicity testing strategy throughout early phases of the clinical program. In the absence of an event, only pivotal studies (where ADA incidence and impact can be decisively assessed) would include default ADA testing. In keeping with the “standard practice,” immunogenicity risk assessment must be an on-going and real-time evaluation. This approach has the potential to deliver meaningful, clinically relevant immunogenicity results while maintaining an emphasis on patient safety.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
FDA, Guidance for industry: immunogenicity assessment for therapeutic protein products. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM338856.pdf. 2014.
EMA, Guideline on immunogenicity assessment of biotechnology-derived therapeutic proteins. http://www.emea.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientificguideline/2009/09/WC500003946.pdf. 2007.
Bi V, Jawa V, Joubert MK, Kaliyaperumal A, Eakin C, et al. Development of a human antibody tolerant mouse model to assess the immunogenicity risk due to aggregated biotherapeutics. J Pharm Sci. 2014;102(10):3545–55.
Jawa V, Cousens LP, Awwad M, Wakshull E, Kropshofer H, et al. T-cell dependent immunogenicity of protein therapeutics: preclinical assessment and mitigation. Clin Immunol. 2013;149(3):534–55.
Mazor R, Tai CH, Lee B, Pastan I. Poor correlation between T cell activation assays and HLA-DR binding prediction algorithms in an immunogenic fragment of Pseudomonas exotoxin A. J J Immunol Methods. 2015;425:10–20.
Paul S, Lindestam Arlehamn CS, Scriba TJ, Dillon MB, Oseroff C, et al. Development and validation of a broad scheme for prediction of HLA class II restricted T cell epitopes. J Immunol Methods. 2015;422:28–34.
Wullner D, Zhou L, Bramhall E, Kuck A, Goletz TJ, Swanson S, et al. Considerations for optimization and validation of an in vitro PBMC derived T cell assay for immunogenicity prediction of biotherapeutics. Clin Immunol. 2010;137(1):5–14.
Kloks C, Berger C, Cortez P, Dean Y, Heinrich J, et al. A fit-for-purpose strategy for the risk-based immunogenicity testing of biotherapeutics: a European industry perspective. J Immunol Methods. 2015;417:1–9.
Fischer SK, Cheu M, Peng K, Lowe J, Araujo J, et al. Specific immune response to phospholipase B-like 2 protein, a host cell impurity in lebrikizumab clinical material. AAPS J. 2017;19(1):254–63.
Jawa V, Joubert M, Zhang Q, Deshpande M, Hapurarachchi S, et al. Evaluating immunogenicity risk due to host cell protein impurities in antibody-based biotherapeutics. AAPS J. 2016;18(6):1439–52.
Chung CH, Mirakhur B, Chan E, Le QT, Berlin J, Morse M, et al. Cetuximab-induced anaphylaxis and IgE specific for galactose-alpha-1,3-galactose. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(11):1109–17.
Papadopoulos KP, Isaacs R, Bilic S, Kentsch K, Huet HA, et al. Unexpected hepatotoxicity in a phase I study of TAS266, a novel tetravalent agonistic Nanobody® targeting the DR5 receptor. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2015;75(5):887–95.
Hoofring SA, Lopez R, Hock MB, Kaliyaperumal A, Patel SK, et al. Immunogenicity testing strategy and bioanalytical assays for antibody-drug conjugates. Bioanalysis. 2013;5(9):1041–55.
Carrasco-Triguero M, Yi JH, Dere R, Qiu ZJ, Lei C, Li Y, et al. Immunogenicity assays for antibody-drug conjugates: case study with ado-trastuzumab emtansine. Bioanalysis. 2013;5(9):1007–23.
Melton AC, Soon RK, Tompkins T, Long B, Schweighardt B, et al. Antibodies that neutralize cellular uptake of elosulfase alfa are not associated with reduced efficacy or pharmacodynamic effect in individuals with Morquio A syndrome. J Immunol Methods. 2017;440:41–51.
Cinnapongse RB, Lew MF, Ferreira JJ, Gullo KL, Nemeth PR, Zhang Y. Immunogenicity and long-term efficacy of Botulinum toxin type B in the treatment of cervical dystonia: report of 4 prospective, multicenter trials. Clin Neuropharm. 2012;35:215–23.
Chamberlain P. Addressing immunogenicity-related risks in an integrated manner. Scrip. Regulatory Affairs. 2010.
Kathman Jr S, Thway TM, Zhou L, Lee S, Yu S, et al. Utility of a Bayesian mathematical model to predict the impact of immunogenicity on pharmacokinetics of therapeutic proteins. AAPS J. 2016;18(2):424–31.
Casadevall N, Nataf J, Viron B, Kolta A, Kiladjian JJ, et al. Pure red-cell aplasia and antierythropoietin antibodies in patients treated with recombinant erythropoietin. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(7):469–75.
Li J, Yang C, Xia Y, Bertino A, Glaspy J, et al. Thrombocytopenia caused by the development of antibodies to thrombopoietin. Blood. 2001;98(12):3241–8.
Wadhwa M, Mytych DT, Bird C, Barger T, Dougall T, et al. Establishment of the first WHO Erythropoietin antibody reference panel: report of an international collaborative study. J Immunol Methods. 2016;435:32–42.22.
Shankar G, Arkin S, Devanarayan V, Kromminga A, Quarmby V, et al. The quintessence of immunogenicity reporting for biotherapeutics. Nat Biotechnol. 2015;33(4):334–6.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mytych, D.T., Hock, M.B., Kroenke, M. et al. A Proposal to Redefine Clinical Immunogenicity Assessment. AAPS J 19, 599–602 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-017-0059-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-017-0059-7