Evaluation of the immunogenicity of panitumumab, a fully human anti-epidermal growth factor receptor mAb approved for use in colorectal cancer patients, led to the development of two separate immunoassays for the detection of anti-panitumumab Abs. The first immunoassay used a bridging ELISA capable of detecting 10 ng/ml positive control anti-panitumumab Ab. The ELISA incorporated an acid dissociation step to reduce drug interference and tolerated the presence of ∼100-fold molar excess of drug. During eight clinical trials, the ELISA detected developing Ab responses in 2 of 612 (0.3%) subjects. In one of the ELISA positive subjects, neutralizing Abs were detected using an epidermal growth factor receptor phosphorylation bioassay. The second immunoassay used a Biacore biosensor immunoassay format capable of detecting 1 μg/ml positive control Ab while tolerating the presence of equal molar amounts of drug. Although less sensitive and less tolerant to competing drug in the assay, the Biacore assay detected developing Ab responses in 25 of the 604 (4.1%) subjects. Additionally, the Biacore assay identified eight subjects who developed neutralizing Abs. Mouse mAbs with affinities ranging from 1.1 × 10−6 to 8.4 × 10−10 M were used to characterize both assay types. The ELISA was more sensitive for the detection of higher affinity mAbs and detected high-affinity mAbs in the presence of higher molar ratio of drug to mAb. The Biacore assay was more sensitive for detection of lower affinity mAbs and detected low affinity Abs in the presence of higher molar ratios of drug to mAb.

Antibodies elicited by protein therapeutics can cause serious side effects in humans. We studied immunogenicity of a recombinant fusion protein (FPX) consisting of two identical, biologically active, peptides attached to human Fc fragment. EpiMatrix, an in silico epitope-mapping tool, predicted promiscuous T-cell epitope(s) within the 14-amino-acid carboxy-terminal region of the peptide portion of FPX. On administration of FPX in 76 healthy human subjects, 37% developed antibodies after a single injection. A memory T-cell response against the above carboxy-terminus of the peptide was observed in antibody-positive but not in antibody-negative subjects. Promiscuity of the predicted T-cell epitope(s) was confirmed by representation of all common HLA alleles in antibody-positive subjects. As predicted by EpiMatrix, HLA haplotype DRB1*0701/1501 was associated with the highest T-cell and antibody response. In conclusion, in silico prediction can be successfully used to identify Class II restricted T-cell epitopes within therapeutic proteins and predict immunogenicity thereof in humans.

The 2015 9th Workshop on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis (9th WRIB) took place in Miami, Florida with participation of 600 professionals from pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, contract research organizations and regulatory agencies worldwide. WRIB was once again a 5 day, week-long event - A Full Immersion Bioanalytical Week - specifically designed to facilitate sharing, reviewing, discussing and agreeing on approaches to address the most current issues of interest in bioanalysis. The topics covered included both small and large molecules, and involved LCMS, hybrid LBA/LCMS and LBA approaches, including the focus on biomarkers and immunogenicity. This 2015 White Paper encompasses recommendations emerging from the extensive discussions held during the workshop, and is aimed to provide the bioanalytical community with key information and practical solutions on topics and issues addressed, in an effort to enable advances in scientific excellence, improved quality and better regulatory compliance. Due to its length, the 2015 edition of this comprehensive White Paper has been divided into three parts. Part 3 discusses the recommendations for large molecule bioanalysis using LBA, biomarkers and immunogenicity. Part 1 (small molecule bioanalysis using LCMS) and Part 2 (hybrid LBA/LCMS and regulatory inputs from major global health authorities) have been published in volume 7, issues 22 and 23 of Bioanalysis, respectively.

With increasing numbers of bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) and multispecific products entering the clinic, recent data highlight immunogenicity as an emerging challenge in the development of such novel biologics. This review focuses on the immunogenicity risk assessment (IgRA) of BsAb-based immunotherapies for cancer, highlighting several risk factors that need to be considered. These include the novel scaffolds consisting of bioengineered sequences, the potentially synergistic immunomodulating mechanisms of action (MOAs) from different domains of the BsAb, as well as several other product-related and patient-related factors. In addition, the clinical relevance of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) against selected BsAbs developed as anticancer agents is reviewed and the advances in our knowledge of tools and strategies for immunogenicity prediction, monitoring, and mitigation are discussed. It is critical to implement a drug-specific IgRA during the early development stage to guide ADA monitoring and risk management strategies. This IgRA may include a combination of several assessment tools to identify drug-specific risks as well as a proactive risk mitigation approach for candidate or format selection during the preclinical stage. The IgRA is an on-going process throughout clinical development. IgRA during the clinical stage may bridge the gap between preclinical immunogenicity prediction and clinical immunogenicity, and retrospectively guide optimization efforts for next-generation BsAbs. This iterative process throughout development may improve the reliability of the IgRA and enable the implementation of effective risk mitigation strategies, laying the foundation for improved clinical success.

All therapeutic proteins have the potential to induce anti-drug antibodies (ADA). Clinically relevant ADA can impact efficacy and/or safety of a biological therapeutic. Immunogenicity assessment strategy evaluates binding and neutralizing ADA, and the need for additional characterization (e.g., epitope, titer and so on) is determined using a risk-based approach. The choice of characterization assays depends on the type, application and immunogenicity of the therapeutic. ADA characterization can impact the interpretation of the risk profile of a given therapeutic, and offers insight into opportunities for risk mitigation and management. This article describes common ADA characterization methods. Strategic assessment and characterization of clinically relevant ADA are discussed, in order to support clinical options for safe and effective patient care and disease management.