Despite major advances in modern drug discovery and development, the number of new drug approvals has not kept pace with the increased cost of their development. Increasingly, innovative uses of biomarkers are employed in an attempt to speed new drugs to market. Still, widespread adoption of biomarkers is impeded by limited experience interpreting biomarker data and an unclear regulatory climate. Key differences preclude the direct application of existing validation paradigms for drug analysis to biomarker research. Following the AAPS 2003 Biomarker Workshop (J. W. Lee, R. S. Weiner, J. M. Sailstad, et al. Method validation and measurement of biomarkers in nonclinical and clinical samples in drug development. A conference report. Pharm Res 22:499-511, 2005), these and other critical issues were addressed. A practical, iterative, "fit-for-purpose" approach to biomarker method development and validation is proposed, keeping in mind the intended use of the data and the attendant regulatory requirements associated with that use. Sample analysis within this context of fit-for-purpose method development and validation are well suited for successful biomarker implementation, allowing increased use of biomarkers in drug development.

Biomarkers are increasingly used in drug development to aid scientific and clinical decisions regarding the progress of candidate and marketed therapeutics. Biomarkers can improve the understanding of diseases as well as therapeutic and off-target effects of drugs. Early implementation of biomarker strategies thus promises to reduce costs and time-to-market as drugs proceed through increasingly costly and complex clinical development programs. The 2003 American Association of Pharmaceutical Sciences/Clinical Ligand Assay Society Biomarkers Workshop (Salt Lake City, UT, USA, October 24-25, 2003) addressed key issues in biomarker research, with an emphasis on the validation and implementation of biochemical biomarker assays, covering from preclinical discovery of efficacy and toxicity biomarkers through clinical and postmarketing implementation. This summary report of the workshop focuses on the major issues discussed during presentations and open forums and noted consensus achieved among the participants on topics from nomenclature to best practices. For example, it was agreed that because reliable and accurate data provide the basis for sound decision making, biomarker assays must be validated in a manner that enables the creation of such data. The nature of biomarker measurements often precludes direct application of regulatory guidelines established for clinical diagnostics or drug bioanalysis, and future guidance on biomarker assay validation should therefore be adaptable enough that validation criteria do not stifle creative biomarker solutions.

Abstract. The predominant driver of bioanalysis in supporting drug development is the intended use of the data. Ligand-binding assays (LBA) are widely used for the analysis of protein biotherapeutics and target ligands (L) to support pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) and safety assessments. For monoclonal antibody drugs (mAb), in particular, which non-covalently bind to L, multiple forms of mAb and L can exist in vivo, including free mAb, free L, and mono-and/or bivalent complexes of mAb and L. Given the complexity of the dynamic binding equilibrium occurring in the body after dosing and multiple sources of perturbation of the equilibrium during bioanalysis, it is clear that ex vivo quantification of the forms of interest (free, bound, or total mAb and L) may differ from the actual ones in vivo. LBA reagents and assay formats can be designed in principle to measure the total or free forms of mAb and L. However, confirmation of the forms being measured under the specified conditions can be technically challenging. The assay forms and issues must be clearly communicated and understood appropriately by all stakeholders as the program proceeds through the development process. This paper focuses on monoclonal antibody biotherapeutics and their circulatory L that are either secreted as soluble forms or shed from membrane receptors. It presents an investigation into the theoretical and practical considerations for total/free analyte assessment to increase awareness in the scientific community and offer bioanalytical approaches to provide appropriate PK/PD information required at specific phases of drug development.

Ligand binding assays (LBAs) are widely used for therapeutic monoclonal antibody (mAb) quantification in biological samples. Major limitations are long method development times, reagent procurement, and matrix effects. LC-MS/MS methods using signature peptides are emerging as an alternative approach, which typically use a stable isotope labeled signature peptide as the internal standard (IS). However, a new IS has to be generated for every candidate, and the IS may not correct for variations at all processing steps. We have developed a general LC-MS/MS method approach employing a uniformly heavy-isotope labeled common whole mAb IS and a common immunocapture for sample processing. The method was streamlined with automation for consistency and throughput. Method qualification of four IgG(2) and four IgG(1) mAbs showed sensitivity of 0.1 μg/mL and linearity of 0.1-15 μg/mL. Quality control (QC) data of these eight mAbs were accurate and precise. The QC performance of the whole molecule labeled IS was better than those of synthetic labeled IS peptides tested. The pharmacokinetic results of two mAbs (an IgG(2) and IgG(1) candidate) dosed in rats were comparable to those of LBA. The general LC-MS/MS method approach overcomes the limitations of current methods to reduce time and resources required for preclinical studies.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Abstract. The knowledge of in vivo biotransformation (e.g., proteolysis) of protein therapeutic candidates reveals structural liabilities that impact stability. This information aids the development and confirmation of ligand-binding assays with the required specificity for bioactive moieties (including intact molecule and metabolites) for appropriate PK profiling. Furthermore, the information can be used for re-engineering of constructs to remove in vivo liabilities in order to design the most stable candidates. We have developed a strategic approach of ligand-binding mass spectrometry (LBMS) to study biotransformation of fusion proteins of peptides fused to human Fc ("peptibodies") using anti-human Fc immunoaffinity capture followed by tiered mass spectrometric interrogation. LBMS offers the combined power of selectivity of ligand capture with the specificity and detailed molecular-level information of mass spectrometry. In this paper, we demonstrate the preclinical application of LBMS to three peptibodies, AMG531 (romiplostim), AMG195(linear), and AMG195(loop), that target the thrombopoietin receptor. The data show that ligand capture offers excellent sample cleanup and concentration of intact peptibodies and metabolites for subsequent query by matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry for identification of in vivo proteolytic points. Additional higherresolution analysis by nanoscale liquid chromatography interfaced with electrospray ionization mass spectrometry is required for identification of heterogeneous metabolites. Five proteolytic points are accurately identified for AMG531 and two for AMG195(linear), while AMG195(loop) is the most stable construct in rats. We recommend the use of LBMS to assess biotransformation and in vivo stability during early preclinical phase development for all novel fusion proteins.KEY WORDS: fusion protein biotransformation; in vivo stability of biopharmaceuticals; immunoaffinitymass spectrometry; ligand-binding assay; peptibodies.