Survey Outcome on Immunogenicity Risk Assessment Tools for Biotherapeutics: an Insight into Consensus on Methods, Application, and Utility in Drug Development

• Published in: The AAPS journal Vol. 25; no. 4; p. 55
• Main Authors: Gokemeijer, Jochem, Wen, Yi, Jawa, Vibha, Mitra-Kaushik, Shibani, Chung, Shan, Goggins, Alan, Kumar, Seema, Lamberth, Kasper, Liao, Karen, Lill, Jennie, Phung, Qui, Walsh, Robin, Roberts, Brian J., Swanson, Michael, Singh, Inderpal, Tourdot, Sophie, Kroenke, Mark A., Rup, Bonita, Goletz, Theresa J., Gupta, Swati, Malherbe, Laurent, Pattijn, Sofie
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Cham Springer International Publishing 02.06.2023; Springer
• Subjects: Algorithms; Biochemistry; Biomedical and Life Sciences; Biomedicine; Biotechnology; Health aspects; Methods; Pharmacology/Toxicology; Pharmacy; Research Article; Risk assessment; Surveys; assay; harmonization; preclinical development; immunogenicity risk; reference materials; biotherapeutic; in vitro assay
• ISSN: 1550-7416; 1550-7416
• DOI: 10.1208/s12248-023-00820-7

A survey conducted by the Therapeutic Product Immunogenicity (TPI) community within the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists (AAPS) posed questions to the participants on their immunogenicity risk assessment strategies prior to clinical development. The survey was conducted in 2 phases spanning 5 years, and queried information about in silico algorithms and in vitro assay formats for immunogenicity risk assessments and how the data were used to inform early developability effort in discovery, chemistry, manufacturing and control (CMC), and non-clinical stages of development. The key findings representing the trends from a majority of the participants included the use of high throughput in silico algorithms, human immune cell-based assays, and proteomics based outputs, as well as specialized assays when therapeutic mechanism of action could impact risk assessment. Additional insights into the CMC-related risks could also be gathered with the same tools to inform future process development and de-risk critical quality attributes with uncertain and unknown risks. The use of the outputs beyond supporting early development activities was also noted with participants utilizing the risk assessments to drive their clinical strategy and streamline bioanalysis.