Update to the European Bioanalysis Forum recommendation on biomarkers assays; bringing context of use into practice

Translational pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modelling of the anti-ADAMTS-5 NANOBODY® (M6495) using the neo-epitope ARGS as a biomarker

M6495 is a first-in-class NANOBODY® molecule and an inhibitor of ADAMTS-5, with the potential to be a disease modifying osteoarthritis drug. In order to investigate the PK/PD (pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic) properties of M6495, a single dose study was performed in cynomolgus monkeys with doses up to 6 mg/kg, with the goal of understanding the PK/PD properties of M6495. The neo-epitope ARGS (Alanine-Arginine-Glycine-Serine) generated by cleavage of aggrecan by ADAMTS-5 was used as a target-engagement biomarker. A long-lasting dose-dependent decrease in serum ARGS could be observed after a single dose of M6495 in cynomolgus monkeys. The serum biomarker ARGS decreased to levels below the limit of quantification of the assay in animals which received doses of M6495 of 6 mg/kg and higher, indicating a strong inhibition of ADAMTS-5. Data from the single-dose PK/PD study was combined with data from a multiple dose study, and a non-linear mixed effects model was used to explore the relationship between plasma concentrations of M6495 and the reduction of serum ARGS. The model was subsequently used to inform the clinical phase 1 study design and was successful in predicting the human clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of M6495. In addition to having enabled a Phase 1 trial with M6495, this is the first PK/PD model describing the pharmacodynamics of the neo-epitope ARGS after ADAMTS5 inhibition. It is expected that in the future, this model can be used or adapted to explore the PK/PD relationship between M6495 serum concentrations and the ARGS serum biomarker.

Re-thinking the current paradigm for clinical immunogenicity assessment: an update from the discussion in the European Bioanalysis Forum

Immunogenicity regulatory guidance and industry recommendations have evolved over the last two decades since unexpected immune reactions were first reported with erythropoietin. Since then, the guidelines and practices for immunogenicity have stemmed from a reaction to a high-risk molecule causing significant clinical impact. Similar thinking is often applied to all biotherapeutic drugs, even when a well-defined risk assessment suggests otherwise. In recent years, the current testing paradigm for immunogenicity has been challenged with more informative approaches being proposed. In a Focus Workshop held by the European Bioanalysis Forum in September 2023, the current immunogenicity testing paradigm was challenged based on the experience and learning of 20+ years of immunogenicity strategies. The workshop recommendations proposed a new paradigm, challenging the value of multiple tiers depending on the immunogenicity risk assessment based on context of use and moving toward treating immunogenicity as a pharmacodynamic biomarker for the drug. Such rethinking ultimately results in the appropriate and efficient focusing of resources on immunogenicity testing strategies that benefit patients most, moving to a new paradigm where implementation of appropriate and truly informative immunogenicity testing strategies, depending on the context-of-use, become the norm .

The European Bioanalysis Forum recommendation on establishing appropriate drug tolerance levels in antidrug antibody assays

The European Bioanalysis Forum, in collaboration with several key industry stakeholders, has recently led discussions that address international immunogenicity guidance documents, specifically the three tier approach for immunogenicity testing strategies, after more than 20 years of experience with biotherapeutics. As part of this, the strategy and methods used to assess drug tolerance across all immunogenicity assays are challenged, emphasizing that bioanalytical scientists need to consider the context-of-use of each assay. Here, recommendations for drug tolerance assessments, driven by strong scientific rationale and subject to reevaluation as needed, are provided. This includes carefully considering the drug and positive control concentrations considered to be appropriate and which tiers are most relevant for performing drug tolerance assessments.

A European Bioanalysis Forum recommendation for requiring a context-of-use statement for successful development and validation of biomarker assays

The European Bioanalysis Forum, alongside key industry stakeholders, has been driving the discussions around the implementation of context-of use for biomarker assays to ensure that these assays are validated appropriately depending on their purpose. Insights into understanding why the implementation of context-of-use in assay strategies has also shown that the key stakeholder, or requester for the biomarker data, is responsible for providing the context-of-use statement for all biomarker assay requests. Experts from across the industry haves repeatedly sought a cross-industry recommended format in which the context-of-use statement could be provided. In this manuscript, the European Bioanalysis Forum suggests a format for this.

Establishing a framework for best practices for quality assurance and quality control in untargeted metabolomics

BACKGROUND

Quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) practices are key tenets that facilitate study and data quality across all applications of untargeted metabolomics. These important practices will strengthen this field and accelerate its success. The Best Practices Working Group (WG) within the Metabolomics Quality Assurance and Quality Control Consortium (mQACC) focuses on community use of QA/QC practices and protocols and aims to identify, catalogue, harmonize, and disseminate current best practices in untargeted metabolomics through community-driven activities.

AIM OF REVIEW

A present goal of the Best Practices WG is to develop a working strategy, or roadmap, that guides the actions of practitioners and progress in the field. The framework in which mQACC operates promotes the harmonization and dissemination of current best QA/QC practice guidance and encourages widespread adoption of these essential QA/QC activities for liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry.

KEY SCIENTIFIC CONCEPTS OF REVIEW

Community engagement and QA/QC information gathering activities have been occurring through conference workshops, virtual and in-person interactive forum discussions, and community surveys. Seven principal QC stages prioritized by internal discussions of the Best Practices WG have received participant input, feedback and discussion. We outline these stages, each involving a multitude of activities, as the framework for identifying QA/QC best practices. The ultimate planned product of these endeavors is a "living guidance" document of current QA/QC best practices for untargeted metabolomics that will grow and change with the evolution of the field.

Assessment of biomarker stability and assay performance parameters for medical diagnosis: a case study of diagnosis of major depressive disorder

Aim: Assessing the stability profiles and assay performance of 24 biomarker assays in 32 biomarker/body fluid combinations identified as relevant for prediction of major depressive disorder. Materials & methods: Combinations were tested for stability and assay performance with ELISA at different storage and freeze-thaw conditions in pooled samples of 40 patients. Results: Stability and assay performance issues were found in almost all cases except three biomarkers in urine and three in serum. Conclusion: This study shows that, to produce reliable measurement data, assessments of stability and assay performance are essential. In development, other quality assurance parameters might be implemented to increase the level of measurement reliability by increasing assay performance control.

A biomarker assay validation approach tailored to the context of use and bioanalytical platform

It is widely acknowledged by the bioanalytical and biomarker community that biomarker assay validations should be fit-for-purpose depending on the context of use. The challenge is how to consistently apply these principles in teams responsible for measuring a disparate array of biomarkers, often on multiple analytical platforms, at various stages of the drug discovery and development pipeline and across diverse biology focus areas. To drive consistency, while maintaining the necessary flexibility to allow validations to be driven by scientific rationale and taking into consideration the context of use and associated biological and (pre)analytical factors, a framework applicable across biomarker assays was developed. Herein the authors share their perspective to engage in the ongoing conversation around fit-for-purpose biomarker assay validation.

A proposed framework to evaluate the quality and reliability of targeted metabolomics assays from the UK Consortium on Metabolic Phenotyping (MAP/UK)

Targeted metabolite assays that measure tens or hundreds of pre-selected metabolites, typically using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry, are increasingly being developed and applied to metabolic phenotyping studies. These are used both as standalone phenotyping methods and for the validation of putative metabolic biomarkers obtained from untargeted metabolomics studies. However, there are no widely accepted standards in the scientific community for ensuring reliability of the development and validation of targeted metabolite assays (referred to here as 'targeted metabolomics'). Most current practices attempt to adopt, with modifications, the strict guidance provided by drug regulatory authorities for analytical methods designed largely for measuring drugs and other xenobiotic analytes. Here, the regulatory guidance provided by the European Medicines Agency, US Food and Drug Administration and International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use are summarized. In this Perspective, we have adapted these guidelines and propose a less onerous 'tiered' approach to evaluate the reliability of a wide range of metabolomics analyses, addressing the need for community-accepted, harmonized guidelines for tiers other than full validation. This 'fit-for-purpose' tiered approach comprises four levels-discovery, screening, qualification and validation-and is discussed in the context of a range of targeted and untargeted metabolomics assays. Issues arising with targeted multiplexed metabolomics assays, and how these might be addressed, are considered. Furthermore, guidance is provided to assist the community with selecting the appropriate degree of reliability for a series of well-defined applications of metabolomics.

Feedback from the 8th European Bioanalysis Forum Young Scientist Symposium

After 2 years of COVID-19 restrictions, the 8th Young Scientist Symposium was organized again as a face-to-face meeting covering a broad array of scientific presentations. As in the previous editions, the meeting was organized by young scientists for young scientists under the umbrella of the European Bioanalysis Forum and in collaboration with academia. The traditional Science Café was again included as an interactive round table session. This year, the main focus was on the challenges of communication. New for the 8th edition was a session connecting the young scientists with more seasoned experts in an effort to bridge talent and experience. In this article, we share the feedback of the scientific sessions and the Science Café held at the symposium.

Quantitative polymerase chain reaction in the bioanalytical laboratory and technical and scientific considerations for nonclinical and clinical assay characterization, validation and sample analysis

In this manuscript, the European Bioanalysis Forum reports back on their discussions on practical and scientific considerations related to bioanalytical applications of quantitative polymerase chain reaction. This publication follows an earlier publication in which the European Bioanalysis Forum recommends to consider principles of context of use when defining assay acceptance criteria for method validation criteria and sample analysis.

Biomarker context-of-use: how organizational design can impact the implementation of the appropriate biomarker assay strategy

Since 2011, the European Bioanalysis Forum has been discussing the topic of context-of-use for biomarker assays, in support of a cross-industry implementation of its principles. The discussions have led to the acknowledgement of the challenges that we face as an industry in implementing these principles. In addition to scientific recommendations, the European Bioanalysis Forum has addressed these challenges by providing recommendations on organizational design, and what works in both sponsor and contract research organizations, to support and enable context-of-use across biomarker strategies. Here, we highlight the key considerations for organizational design to help ensure that biomarker assays are characterized and validated according to the right context-of-use, to ensure that the right decisions based on the biomarker data can be made during drug development.

Best practices for the development and fit-for-purpose validation of biomarker methods: a conference report

This conference report summarized a full-day workshop, “best practices for the development and fit-for-purpose validation of biomarker methods,” which was held prior to the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists (AAPS) PharmSci360 Congress, San Antonio, TX, November 2019. The purpose of the workshop was to bring together thought leaders in biomarker assay development in order to identify which assay parameters and key statistical measures need to be considered when developing a biomarker assay. A diverse group of more than 40 scientists participated in the workshop. The workshop and subsequent working dinner stimulated robust discussion. While a consensus on best practices was not achieved, some common themes and major points to consider for biomarker assay development have been identified and agreed on. The focus of this conference report is to summarize the presentations and discussions which occurred at the workshop. Biomarker assay validation is a complex and an evolving area with discussions ongoing.

Applying context of use to quantitative polymerase chain reaction method validation and analysis: a recommendation from the European Bioanalysis Forum

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is widely used in various fields of laboratory testing, ranging from forensic, molecular biology, medical and diagnostic applications to a wide array of basic research purposes. COVID-19 infection testing has brought the three-letter PCR abbreviation into the vocabulary of billions of people, making it likely the most well-known laboratory test worldwide. With new modalities and translational medicine gaining importance in pharmaceutical research and development, PCR or more specifically, quantitative PCR (qPCR) is now becoming a standard tool in the (regulated) bioanalytical laboratory, driving the bioanalytical community to define best practices for method development, characterization and validation. In absence of specific guidance from health authorities, qPCR may be vulnerable to scope creep from pharmacokinetics (PK) assay validation as defined in bioanalytical method validation guidance/guidelines. In this manuscript, the European Bioanalysis Forum builds a rationale for applying context of use principles when defining requirements for qPCR assay performance and validation criteria.

Effectively utilizing the Sponsor Contract Research Organization interaction for successful implementation of critical flow cytometry in the clinic

As the number of therapeutic modalities expand, and the field of scientific research evolves toward finding treatment solutions for complex and rare disease, an ability to demonstrate efficacy through biomarker end points in clinical development studies is becoming increasingly important. Implementing flow cytometry in a clinical setting is challenging and many sponsor organizations take a hybrid approach, developing complex analytical methods internally before identifying and forming partnerships with contract research organizations to conduct the formal analytical method validation and sample bioanalysis. Ensuring that these interactions are effective is critical to the delivery of high-quality, impactful clinical data. This paper provides a review of the recommendations, challenges and solutions for the implementation of decision-making flow cytometry end points effectively utilizing the Sponsor Contract Research Organization interaction.

Recommendations and discussion points on immunogenicity, biomarkers, automation/technology and protein-MS from the 2021 European Bioanalysis Forum Focus Workshops

During the first half of 2021, and due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic preventing in-person meetings, the European Bioanalysis Forum organized four workshops as live interactive online meetings. The themes discussed at the workshops were carefully selected to match the cyberspace dynamics of the meeting format. The first workshop was a training day on challenges related to immunogenicity. The second one focused on biomarkers and continued the important discussion on integrating the principles of Context of Use (CoU) in biomarker research. The third workshop was dedicated to technology, that is, cutting-edge development in cell-based and ligand-binding assays and automation strategies. The fourth was on progress and the continued scientific and regulatory challenges related to peptide and protein analysis with MS. In all four workshops, the European Bioanalysis Forum included a mixture of scientific and regulatory themes, while reminding the audience of important strategic aspects and our responsibility toward the patient.