Joanne Goodman, Kyra J Cowan, Michaela Golob, Robert Nelson, Daniel Baltrukonis, Karien Bloem, Brendy Van Butsel, Lysie Champion, John Cook, Minh Dang, Desislava Galeva, Davide Guerrieri, Gregor Jordan, Carsten Krantz, Ching-Hai Lai, Toralf Roch, Adriano Luis Soares de Sonza, Lauren Stevenson, Luis Perez Tosar, Foka Venema, Hanna Widmaier, Philip Timmerman
{"title":"重新思考临床免疫原性评估的现行模式:欧洲生物分析论坛讨论的最新情况。","authors":"Joanne Goodman, Kyra J Cowan, Michaela Golob, Robert Nelson, Daniel Baltrukonis, Karien Bloem, Brendy Van Butsel, Lysie Champion, John Cook, Minh Dang, Desislava Galeva, Davide Guerrieri, Gregor Jordan, Carsten Krantz, Ching-Hai Lai, Toralf Roch, Adriano Luis Soares de Sonza, Lauren Stevenson, Luis Perez Tosar, Foka Venema, Hanna Widmaier, Philip Timmerman","doi":"10.1080/17576180.2024.2376949","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>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 .</p>","PeriodicalId":8797,"journal":{"name":"Bioanalysis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Re-thinking the current paradigm for clinical immunogenicity assessment: an update from the discussion in the European Bioanalysis Forum.\",\"authors\":\"Joanne Goodman, Kyra J Cowan, Michaela Golob, Robert Nelson, Daniel Baltrukonis, Karien Bloem, Brendy Van Butsel, Lysie Champion, John Cook, Minh Dang, Desislava Galeva, Davide Guerrieri, Gregor Jordan, Carsten Krantz, Ching-Hai Lai, Toralf Roch, Adriano Luis Soares de Sonza, Lauren Stevenson, Luis Perez Tosar, Foka Venema, Hanna Widmaier, Philip Timmerman\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17576180.2024.2376949\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>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 .</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8797,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bioanalysis\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bioanalysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17576180.2024.2376949\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioanalysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17576180.2024.2376949","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
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 .
BioanalysisBIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS-CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
88
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍:
Reliable data obtained from selective, sensitive and reproducible analysis of xenobiotics and biotics in biological samples is a fundamental and crucial part of every successful drug development program. The same principles can also apply to many other areas of research such as forensic science, toxicology and sports doping testing.
The bioanalytical field incorporates sophisticated techniques linking sample preparation and advanced separations with MS and NMR detection systems, automation and robotics. Standards set by regulatory bodies regarding method development and validation increasingly define the boundaries between speed and quality.
Bioanalysis is a progressive discipline for which the future holds many exciting opportunities to further reduce sample volumes, analysis cost and environmental impact, as well as to improve sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, efficiency, assay throughput, data quality, data handling and processing.
The journal Bioanalysis focuses on the techniques and methods used for the detection or quantitative study of analytes in human or animal biological samples. Bioanalysis encourages the submission of articles describing forward-looking applications, including biosensors, microfluidics, miniaturized analytical devices, and new hyphenated and multi-dimensional techniques.
Bioanalysis delivers essential information in concise, at-a-glance article formats. Key advances in the field are reported and analyzed by international experts, providing an authoritative but accessible forum for the modern bioanalyst.