2022 White Paper on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis: ICH M10 BMV Guideline & Global Harmonization; Hybrid Assays; Oligonucleotides & ADC; Non-Liquid & Rare Matrices; Regulatory Inputs (Part 1A - Recommendations on Mass Spectrometry, Chromatography and Sample Preparation, Novel Technologies, Novel Modalities, and Novel Challenges, ICH M10 BMV Guideline & Global Harmonization Part 1B - Regulatory Agencies' Inputs on Regulated Bioanalysis/BMV, Biomarkers/CDx/BAV, Immunogenicity, Gene & Cell Therapy and Vaccine)

The 16th Workshop on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis (16th WRIB) took place in Atlanta, GA, USA on September 26-30, 2022. Over 1000 professionals representing pharma/biotech companies, CROs, and multiple regulatory agencies convened to actively discuss the most current topics of interest in bioanalysis. The 16th WRIB included 3 Main Workshops and 7 Specialized Workshops that together spanned 1 week in order to allow exhaustive and thorough coverage of all major issues in bioanalysis, biomarkers, immunogenicity, gene therapy, cell therapy and vaccines. Moreover, in-depth workshops on the ICH M10 BMV final guideline (focused on this guideline training, interpretation, adoption and transition); mass spectrometry innovation (focused on novel technologies, novel modalities, and novel challenges); and flow cytometry bioanalysis (rising of the 3rd most common/important technology in bioanalytical labs) were the special features of the 16th edition. As in previous years, WRIB continued to gather a wide diversity of international, industry opinion leaders and regulatory authority experts working on both small and large molecules as well as gene, cell therapies and vaccines to facilitate sharing and discussions focused on improving quality, increasing regulatory compliance, and achieving scientific excellence on bioanalytical issues. This 2022 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 2022 edition of this comprehensive White Paper has been divided into three parts for editorial reasons. This publication (Part 1A) covers the recommendations on Mass Spectrometry and ICH M10. Part 1B covers the Regulatory Agencies' Inputs on Bioanalysis, Biomarkers, Immunogenicity, Gene & Cell Therapy and Vaccine. Part 2 (LBA, Biomarkers/CDx and Cytometry) and Part 3 (Gene Therapy, Cell therapy, Vaccines and Biotherapeutics Immunogenicity) are published in volume 15 of Bioanalysis, issues 15 and 14 (2023), respectively.

2022 White Paper on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis: FDA Draft Guidance on Immunogenicity Information in Prescription Drug Labeling, LNP & Viral Vectors Therapeutics/Vaccines Immunogenicity, Prolongation Effect, ADA Affinity, Risk-based Approaches, NGS, qPCR, ddPCR Assays (Part 3 - Recommendations on Gene Therapy, Cell Therapy, Vaccines Immunogenicity & Technologies; Immunogenicity & Risk Assessment of Biotherapeutics and Novel Modalities; NAb Assays Integrated Approach)

The 2022 16th Workshop on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis (WRIB) took place in Atlanta, GA, USA on September 26-30, 2022. Over 1000 professionals representing pharma/biotech companies, CROs, and multiple regulatory agencies convened to actively discuss the most current topics of interest in bioanalysis. The 16th WRIB included 3 Main Workshops and 7 Specialized Workshops that together spanned 1 week in order to allow exhaustive and thorough coverage of all major issues in bioanalysis, biomarkers, immunogenicity, gene therapy, cell therapy and vaccines. Moreover, in-depth workshops on ICH M10 BMV final guideline (focused on this guideline training, interpretation, adoption and transition); mass spectrometry innovation (focused on novel technologies, novel modalities, and novel challenges); and flow cytometry bioanalysis (rising of the 3rd most common/important technology in bioanalytical labs) were the special features of the 16th edition. As in previous years, WRIB continued to gather a wide diversity of international, industry opinion leaders and regulatory authority experts working on both small and large molecules as well as gene, cell therapies and vaccines to facilitate sharing and discussions focused on improving quality, increasing regulatory compliance, and achieving scientific excellence on bioanalytical issues. This 2022 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 2022 edition of this comprehensive White Paper has been divided into three parts for editorial reasons. This publication (Part 3) covers the recommendations on Gene Therapy, Cell therapy, Vaccines and Biotherapeutics Immunogenicity. Part 1 (Mass Spectrometry and ICH M10) and Part 2 (LBA, Biomarkers/CDx and Cytometry) are published in volume 15 of Bioanalysis, issues 16 and 15 (2023), respectively.

Evaluation of association of anti-PEG antibodies with anaphylaxis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination

BACKGROUND

The mechanism for anaphylaxis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination has been widely debated; understanding this serious adverse event is important for future vaccines of similar design. A mechanism proposed is type I hypersensitivity (i.e., IgE-mediated mast cell degranulation) to polyethylene glycol (PEG). Using an assay that, uniquely, had been previously assessed in patients with anaphylaxis to PEG, our objective was to compare anti-PEG IgE in serum from mRNA COVID-19 vaccine anaphylaxis case-patients and persons vaccinated without allergic reactions. Secondarily, we compared anti-PEG IgG and IgM to assess alternative mechanisms.

METHODS

Selected anaphylaxis case-patients reported to U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System December 14, 2020-March 25, 2021 were invited to provide a serum sample. mRNA COVID-19 vaccine study participants with residual serum and no allergic reaction post-vaccination ("controls") were frequency matched to cases 3:1 on vaccine and dose number, sex and 10-year age category. Anti-PEG IgE was measured using a dual cytometric bead assay (DCBA). Anti-PEG IgG and IgM were measured using two different assays: DCBA and a PEGylated-polystyrene bead assay. Laboratorians were blinded to case/control status.

RESULTS

All 20 case-patients were women; 17 had anaphylaxis after dose 1, 3 after dose 2. Thirteen (65 %) were hospitalized and 7 (35 %) were intubated. Time from vaccination to serum collection was longer for case-patients vs controls (post-dose 1: median 105 vs 21 days). Among Moderna recipients, anti-PEG IgE was detected in 1 of 10 (10 %) case-patients vs 8 of 30 (27 %) controls (p = 0.40); among Pfizer-BioNTech recipients, it was detected in 0 of 10 case-patients (0 %) vs 1 of 30 (3 %) controls (p >n 0.99). Anti-PEG IgE quantitative signals followed this same pattern. Neither anti-PEG IgG nor IgM was associated with case status with both assay formats.

CONCLUSION

Our results support that anti-PEG IgE is not a predominant mechanism for anaphylaxis post-mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

Anti-drug Antibody Sample Testing and Reporting Harmonization

A clear scientific and operational need exists for harmonized bioanalytical immunogenicity study reporting to facilitate communication of immunogenicity findings and expedient review by industry and health authorities. To address these key bioanalytical reporting gaps and provide a report structure for documenting immunogenicity results, this cross-industry group was formed to establish harmonized recommendations and a develop a submission template to facilitate agency filings. Provided here are recommendations for reporting clinical anti-drug antibody (ADA) assay results using ligand-binding assay technologies. This publication describes the essential bioanalytical report (BAR) elements such as the method, critical reagents and equipment, study samples, results, and data analysis, and provides a template for a suggested structure for the ADA BAR. This publication focuses on the content and presentation of the bioanalytical ADA sample analysis report. The interpretation of immunogenicity data, including the evaluation of the impact of ADA on safety, exposure, and efficacy, is out of scope of this publication.

Anti-drug Antibody Validation Testing and Reporting Harmonization

Evolving immunogenicity assay performance expectations and a lack of harmonized anti-drug antibody validation testing and reporting tools have resulted in significant time spent by health authorities and sponsors on resolving filing queries. Following debate at the American Association of Pharmaceutical Sciences National Biotechnology Conference, a group was formed to address these gaps. Over the last 3 years, 44 members from 29 organizations (including 5 members from Europe and 10 members from FDA) discussed gaps in understanding immunogenicity assay requirements and have developed harmonization tools for use by industry scientists to facilitate filings to health authorities. Herein, this team provides testing and reporting strategies and tools for the following assessments: (1) pre-study validation cut point; (2) in-study cut points, including procedures for applying cut points to mixed populations; (3) system suitability control criteria for in-study plate acceptance; (4) assay sensitivity, including the selection of an appropriate low positive control; (5) specificity, including drug and target tolerance; (6) sample stability that reflects sample storage and handling conditions; (7) assay selectivity to matrix components, including hemolytic, lipemic, and disease state matrices; (8) domain specificity for multi-domain therapeutics; (9) and minimum required dilution and extraction-based sample processing for titer reporting.

A Model-Based Approach to Quantify the Time-Course of Anti-Drug Antibodies for Therapeutic Proteins

A mathematical antidrug antibody (ADA) model was developed to quantitatively assess immunogenicity for therapeutic proteins. The ADA model was built with antibody titer data in subjects from 10 clinical trials. The time course of the antibody titers was quantitatively characterized with a two-component semimechanistic model describing the double peaks of ADA titers. The relationship between antibody titer and incidence was also explored. The ADA incidences in subjects from 12 clinical trials were used for internal and external validations. The ADA titers reasonably predicted the incidence of antibody. The model-predicted elimination rate constant for antibody titer was 14.1 × 10^-3  day^-1 and 8.1 × 10^-3  day^-1 in healthy subjects and patients, respectively. This research provided a useful tool to quantitatively evaluate immunogenicity and its impact for therapeutic proteins.

FDA Approval: Blinatumomab

On December 3, 2014, the FDA granted accelerated approval of blinatumomab (Blincyto; Amgen, Inc.) for treatment of Philadelphia chromosome-negative relapsed or refractory precursor B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (R/R ALL). Blinatumomab is a recombinant murine protein that acts as a bispecific CD19-directed CD3 T-cell engager. The basis for the approval was a single-arm trial with 185 evaluable adults with R/R ALL. The complete remission (CR) rate was 32% [95% confidence interval (CI), 26%-40%], and the median duration of response was 6.7 months. A minimal residual disease response was achieved by 31% (95% CI, 25%-39%) of all patients. Cytokine release syndrome and neurologic events were serious toxicities that occurred. Other common (>20%) adverse reactions were pyrexia, headache, edema, febrile neutropenia, nausea, tremor, and rash. Neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and elevated transaminases were the most common (>10%) laboratory abnormalities related to blinatumomab. A randomized trial is required in order to confirm clinical benefit.

Assessment and reporting of the clinical immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins and peptides-harmonized terminology and tactical recommendations

Immunogenicity is a significant concern for biologic drugs as it can affect both safety and efficacy. To date, the descriptions of product immunogenicity have varied not only due to different degrees of understanding of product immunogenicity at the time of licensing but also due to an evolving lexicon that has generated some confusion in the field. In recent years, there has been growing consensus regarding the data needed to assess product immunogenicity. Harmonization of the strategy for the elucidation of product immunogenicity by drug developers, as well as the use of defined common terminology, can benefit medical practitioners, health regulatory agencies, and ultimately the patients. Clearly, understanding the incidence, kinetics and magnitude of anti-drug antibody (ADA), its neutralizing ability, cross-reactivity with endogenous molecules or other marketed biologic drugs, and related clinical impact may enhance clinical management of patients treated with biologic drugs. To that end, the authors present terms and definitions for describing and analyzing clinical immunogenicity data and suggest approaches to data presentation, emphasizing associations of ADA development with pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety that are necessary to assess the clinical relevance of immunogenicity.

New FDA draft guidance on immunogenicity

A "Late Breaking" session was held on May 20 at the 2013 American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists-National Biotech Conference (AAPS-NBC) to discuss the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) 2013 draft guidance on Immunogenicity Assessment for Therapeutic Protein Products. The session was initiated by a presentation from the FDA which highlighted several key aspects of the 2013 draft guidance pertaining to immunogenicity risk, the potential impact on patient safety and product efficacy, and risk mitigation. This was followed by an open discussion on the draft guidance which enabled delegates from biopharmaceutical companies to engage the FDA on topics that had emerged from their review of the draft guidance. The multidisciplinary audience fostered an environment that was conducive to scientific discussion on a broad range of topics such as clinical impact, immune mitigation strategies, immune prediction and the role of formulation, excipients, aggregates, and degradation products in immunogenicity. This meeting report highlights several key aspects of the 2013 draft guidance together with related dialog from the session.

Transcriptional coactivator, CIITA, is an acetyltransferase that bypasses a promoter requirement for TAF(II)250

The CIITA coactivator is essential for transcriptional activation of MHC class II genes and mediates enhanced MHC class I transcription. We now report that CIITA contains an intrinsic acetyltransferase (AT) activity that maps to a region within the N-terminal segment of CIITA, between amino acids 94 and 132. The AT activity is regulated by the C-terminal GTP-binding domain and is stimulated by GTP. CIITA-mediated transactivation depends on the AT activity. Further, we report that, although constitutive MHC class I transcription depends on TAF(II)250, CIITA activates the promoter in the absence of functional TAF(II)250.

Major histocompatibility class I gene transcription in thyrocytes: a series of interacting regulatory DNA sequence elements mediate thyrotropin/cyclic adenosine 3',5'-monophosphate repression

In response to TSH, thyroid cells decrease major histocompatibility (MHC) class I expression and transcription, providing an excellent model for studying the dynamic modulation of transcription of MHC class I genes. Here we show that protein kinase A (PKA), a downstream effector of the TSH/cAMP pathway, reproduces the effects of TSH in repressing class I transcription. PKA/cAMP-mediated repression of transcription involves multiple interacting upstream response elements in the class I promoter: an element extending from -127 to -90 bp containing a CRE-like core, and at least two elements within an upstream 30-bp segment (-160 to -130 bp), which overlaps with the interferon regulatory element. ICER (inducible cAMP early response), a transcriptional repressor induced by TSH/cAMP can decrease class I promoter activity when introduced into FRTL-5 thyroid cells in the absence of TSH/cAMP. ICER binds to both the CRE-like element and the upstream 30-bp segment, generating a novel TSH-induced ternary complex. The present studies led to the proposal that TSH-mediated repression of class I transcription is the result of integrating signals from transcription factors through the higher order interactions of multiple regulatory elements.

Role of MHC class I molecules in autoimmune disease

The MHC class I molecules play a pivotal role in triggering cellular immune responses, binding and presenting intracellularly derived peptide antigens. Studies of MHC class I expression revealed a complex regulatory mechanism that integrates tissue-specific and hormonal modulation. Dynamic regulation occurs in the thyroid, in response to hormonal repression by TSH and stimulation by thyroid hormone. This dynamic cycle provides the basis for proposing the model that such regulation is important to maintain tolerance to self-antigens in tissues synthesizing large amounts of secretory proteins. Failure to appropriately regulate class I levels is predicted to result in autoimmunity. In support of this model, we found that class I-deficient mice are resistant to the experimentally induced autoimmune diseases, SLE, and blepharitis. Furthermore, pharmacological treatment with an agent that reduces class I expression also reduces the incidence and severity of both experimental and spontaneous autoimmune SLE.

A peptide composed of tandem analogs of two myasthenogenic T cell epitopes interferes with specific autoimmune responses

Myasthenia gravis (MG) is a T cell-regulated, antibody-mediated autoimmune disease. Two peptides representing sequences of the human acetylcholine receptor alpha-subunit, p195-212 and p259-271, were previously shown to stimulate peripheral blood lymphocytes of patients with MG and were found to be immunodominant T cell epitopes in SJL and BALB/c mice, respectively. Single amino acid substituted analogs of p195-212 (analog Ala-207) and p259-271 (analog Lys-262) were synthesized. We showed that analogs Ala-207 and Lys-262 inhibited, in vitro and in vivo, the proliferative responses of T cell lines specific to the relevant peptide and lymph node cells of mice immunized to p195-212 and p259-271, respectively. To inhibit T cell responses to both peptides (p195-212 and p259-271), we synthesized dual analogs composed of the tandemly arranged two single (Ala-207 and Lys-262) analogs (dual analog) either sequentially (Ala-207-Lys-262) or reciprocally (Lys-262-Ala-207). In the present study, we report that both dual analogs could bind to major histocompatibility complex class II molecules on antigen-presenting cells of SJL and BALB/c mice. Analog Lys-262-Ala-207, which bound more efficiently to major histocompatibility complex class II molecules, was found to inhibit the proliferative responses of both p195-212- and p259-271-specific T cell lines. Furthermore, the analog inhibited the in vivo priming of lymph node cells of both SJL and BALB/c mice when administered i.v., i.p., or per os. The dual analog Lys-262-Ala-207 could also immunomodulate myasthenogenic manifestations in mice with experimental autoimmune MG induced by inoculation of a pathogenic T cell line. Thus, a single peptide that is composed of analogs to two epitope specificities can be used to regulate T cell responses and disease associated with each epitope.

Factors influencing long-term results in high tibial osteotomy

Recorded here is a comprehensive review of the current literature on high tibial osteotomy with emphasis on postponing an inevitable total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Accompanying this review is a confirmatory, retrospective study of 35 patients with 39 high tibial osteotomies with an average follow-up study of 8.5 years (range, 3.8-15.1 years). Twenty-two of the patients (57%) had good results, seven (18%) fair, and ten (25%) poor at final follow-up examination. Nine of the 35 patients required TKA at an average of 4.7 years post-osteotomy. The percentage of good results diminished with time of follow-up study, starting at two years with 87% good results and ending at 15 years with only 57% of the patients remaining in that category. Patients lost an average of 8 degrees of flexion post-osteotomy, regardless of good, fair, or poor result. Patients with favorable results were usually younger than 60 years of age, and had less than 12 degrees of angular deformity, pure unicompartmental disease, ligamentous stability, and a preoperative range of motion are of at least 90 degrees.