Bioanalytical Method Comparison Strategy for Clinical Anti-drug Antibody Immunoassays.

IF 5 3区 医学 Q1 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY AAPS Journal Pub Date : 2024-12-19 DOI:10.1208/s12248-024-00999-3
R J Elliott, T Pourmohamad, Y Webb-Vargas, W Yan, I Nijem, P Siguenza, Y Song
{"title":"Bioanalytical Method Comparison Strategy for Clinical Anti-drug Antibody Immunoassays.","authors":"R J Elliott, T Pourmohamad, Y Webb-Vargas, W Yan, I Nijem, P Siguenza, Y Song","doi":"10.1208/s12248-024-00999-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Per FDA guidance, method comparability should be established if an anti-drug antibody (ADA) assay is run by two or more independent laboratories during a study. Genentech, Inc. is evaluating an immunogenicity risk-based comparability approach consisting of both technical and clinical aspects. Technical comparability of the relative sensitivity (RS) is assessed using the Two One-Sided T-tests (TOST) statistical analysis which evaluates if the difference (in absolute value) of the RS means of the two laboratories is less than a pre-specified level of comparability, the practically significant difference (PSD). Clinical comparability is based on the molecule's immunogenicity risk. A basic and in-depth assessment for low and high-risk molecules are used, respectively. An alternative strategy for molecules with limited incurred sample availability is to be used. In the basic assessment, samples are either unfortified or fortified with surrogate ADA positive control at method appropriate concentrations in a representative biological matrix. Acceptable comparability requires in both methods i) at least 80% of the unfortified samples screen and confirm negative, ii) at least 90% of the low concentration samples screen and confirm positive; and iii) 100% of the high concentration samples screen and confirm positive. The in-depth assessment uses at least 100 incurred samples from 30 or more ADA-positive and ADA-negative patients. The results are evaluated using a 2 by 2-confusion matrix and Cohen's Kappa score where 1 indicates perfect agreement. Acceptable comparability requires a Cohen's Kappa score of greater than 0.40. This strategy allows for a robust technical and clinical method comparability assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":50934,"journal":{"name":"AAPS Journal","volume":"27 1","pages":"19"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AAPS Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-024-00999-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Per FDA guidance, method comparability should be established if an anti-drug antibody (ADA) assay is run by two or more independent laboratories during a study. Genentech, Inc. is evaluating an immunogenicity risk-based comparability approach consisting of both technical and clinical aspects. Technical comparability of the relative sensitivity (RS) is assessed using the Two One-Sided T-tests (TOST) statistical analysis which evaluates if the difference (in absolute value) of the RS means of the two laboratories is less than a pre-specified level of comparability, the practically significant difference (PSD). Clinical comparability is based on the molecule's immunogenicity risk. A basic and in-depth assessment for low and high-risk molecules are used, respectively. An alternative strategy for molecules with limited incurred sample availability is to be used. In the basic assessment, samples are either unfortified or fortified with surrogate ADA positive control at method appropriate concentrations in a representative biological matrix. Acceptable comparability requires in both methods i) at least 80% of the unfortified samples screen and confirm negative, ii) at least 90% of the low concentration samples screen and confirm positive; and iii) 100% of the high concentration samples screen and confirm positive. The in-depth assessment uses at least 100 incurred samples from 30 or more ADA-positive and ADA-negative patients. The results are evaluated using a 2 by 2-confusion matrix and Cohen's Kappa score where 1 indicates perfect agreement. Acceptable comparability requires a Cohen's Kappa score of greater than 0.40. This strategy allows for a robust technical and clinical method comparability assessment.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
临床抗药物抗体免疫测定的生物分析方法比较策略。
根据FDA指南,如果在研究期间由两个或更多独立实验室运行抗药物抗体(ADA)测定,则应建立方法可比性。基因泰克公司正在评估一种基于免疫原性风险的可比性方法,包括技术和临床方面。使用双单侧t检验(TOST)统计分析评估相对敏感性(RS)的技术可比性,该分析评估两个实验室RS均值的差异(绝对值)是否小于预先指定的可比性水平,即实际显著性差异(PSD)。临床可比性是基于分子的免疫原性风险。对低分子和高风险分子分别进行了基本和深入的评估。另一种策略与有限的产生的样品可用性的分子被使用。在基本评估中,样品要么未经强化,要么在具有代表性的生物基质中加入适当浓度的替代ADA阳性对照。可接受的可比性要求在两种方法中i)至少80%的未强化样品筛选并确认为阴性,ii)至少90%的低浓度样品筛选并确认为阳性;iii) 100%的高浓度样本筛选确认阳性。深入评估使用至少100份来自30名或更多ada阳性和ada阴性患者的样本。结果使用2 × 2混淆矩阵和科恩的Kappa分数进行评估,其中1表示完全一致。可接受的可比性要求科恩Kappa分数大于0.40。该策略允许进行可靠的技术和临床方法可比性评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
AAPS Journal
AAPS Journal 医学-药学
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
4.40%
发文量
109
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The AAPS Journal, an official journal of the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists (AAPS), publishes novel and significant findings in the various areas of pharmaceutical sciences impacting human and veterinary therapeutics, including: · Drug Design and Discovery · Pharmaceutical Biotechnology · Biopharmaceutics, Formulation, and Drug Delivery · Metabolism and Transport · Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Pharmacometrics · Translational Research · Clinical Evaluations and Therapeutic Outcomes · Regulatory Science We invite submissions under the following article types: · Original Research Articles · Reviews and Mini-reviews · White Papers, Commentaries, and Editorials · Meeting Reports · Brief/Technical Reports and Rapid Communications · Regulatory Notes · Tutorials · Protocols in the Pharmaceutical Sciences In addition, The AAPS Journal publishes themes, organized by guest editors, which are focused on particular areas of current interest to our field.
期刊最新文献
AI-Driven Analysis of Drug Marketing Efficiency: Unveiling FDA Approval to Market Release Dynamics. Bioequivalence of ANDA Data using a Non-Informative Bayesian Procedure (BEST) Compared with the Two One‑Sided t‑Tests (TOST). Addressing Clinical Challenges in Aberrant Pharmacokinetics of Biologic Therapeutic Drugs: Investigating Sample Processing Procedure in the Immunoassays. Stability of Anti-Drug Antibodies Against Antibody Therapeutics. Analysis on the Impact of U.S. FDA's Narrow Therapeutic Index Bioequivalence Criteria on Generic Drug Applications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1