Literature DB >> 20974317

Subset analysis of patients experiencing clinical events of a potentially immunogenic nature in the pivotal clinical trials of tocilizumab for rheumatoid arthritis: Evaluation of an antidrug antibody ELISA using clinical adverse event-driven immunogenicity testing.

Kay Stubenrauch1, Uwe Wessels, Herbert Birnboeck, Francisco Ramirez, Angelika Jahreis, Julia Schleypen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Tocilizumab (TCZ) is a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody directed against the interleukin-6 receptor. In Europe, TCZ is approved for use in combination with methotrexate in the treatment of adult patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have failed to respond to or were unable to tolerate previous therapy with one or more disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs or tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists; in the United States, it is approved for the treatment of adult patients with moderate to severe active RA who have failed to respond to one or more TNF antagonists. As part of the Phase III clinical development program, the immunogenicity of TCZ was evaluated using a bridging ELISA; however, this assay is considered limited in detecting low-affinity or immunoglobulin G4 subisotype antidrug antibodies (ADAs).
OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the validity of the ELISA for detecting anti-TCZ ADAs by using complementary bioanalytic assays to test samples from a subgroup of patients with clinical adverse events (AEs) of a potentially immunogenic nature, who were considered highly likely to have ADAs. The goal was to determine whether use of these additional assays led to detection of ADAs not found on the ELISA, thus minimizing the risk of false-negative results.
METHODS: The Phase III program for TCZ consisted of 5 core studies in which adult patients with RA received either TCZ 4 or 8 mg/kg IV or control every 4 weeks, with or without concomitant antirheumatic therapy. Blood samples obtained at baseline and at regular intervals thereafter were tested using the ELISA for ADA screening and confirmation. Regardless of the results on ADA screening, samples from patients who developed clinical AEs of a potentially immunogenic nature (ie, falling within predefined system organ classes, occurring during or within 24 hours of TCZ infusion, considered related to TCZ therapy, or leading to study withdrawal) were subjected to additional testing with a surface plasmon resonance (SPR) assay for isotyping and epitope localization and a standard ImmunoCAP immunoglobulin E (IgE) assay made specific for TCZ.
RESULTS: The 5 core studies and their open-label, longterm extension studies enrolled a total of 4199 adult patients with RA (82.1% female; 74.0% white; mean age, 52.0 years [range, 18-89 years]; mean weight, 73.4 kg [range, 35-150 kg]); 2928 patients received TCZ and 1271 received control. Of the 2816 samples from TCZ-treated patients tested, 64 (2.3%) had samples that tested positive at least once on the ELISA screening and confirmation assay, 48 (75.0%) of them at baseline. A clinical AE of a potentially immunogenic nature occurred during TCZ treatment in 21 patients, 8 of whom had an anaphylactic reaction. Eleven of the samples from these 21 patients had tested negative for AD As on the screening ELISA. Only 1 of these 11 patients tested positive for ADAs on both additional assays; all others tested negative. The results of the ELISA, SPR, and IgE assays were consistent for 16 of 18 tested patients (88.9%) who provided data on at least 2 of the 3 assays.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the findings of this analysis in a relevant patient population, the bridging-type screening and confirmation ELISA was a valid method of detecting anti-TCZ ADAs. Immunogenicity testing of samples from patients with clinical AEs of a potentially immunogenic nature using assays complementary to the ELISA added valuable information about the incidence and character of ADAs.
Copyright © 2010 Excerpta Medica Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20974317     DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2010.07.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Ther        ISSN: 0149-2918            Impact factor:   3.393


  20 in total

Review 1.  Review on modeling anti-antibody responses to monoclonal antibodies.

Authors:  José David Gómez-Mantilla; Iñaki F Trocóniz; Zinnia Parra-Guillén; María J Garrido
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2014-07-16       Impact factor: 2.745

2.  Linking interleukin-6 receptor blockade with tocilizumab and its hematological effects using a modeling approach.

Authors:  Leonid Gibiansky; Nicolas Frey
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2011-11-19       Impact factor: 2.745

Review 3.  Adverse reactions to biologic agents and their medical management.

Authors:  Onur Boyman; Denis Comte; François Spertini
Journal:  Nat Rev Rheumatol       Date:  2014-08-12       Impact factor: 20.543

Review 4.  Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Monoclonal Antibodies Approved to Treat Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Authors:  David Ternant; Theodora Bejan-Angoulvant; Christophe Passot; Denis Mulleman; Gilles Paintaud
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 6.447

Review 5.  A Review of Recent Advances Using Tocilizumab in the Treatment of Rheumatic Diseases.

Authors:  Andrea Rubbert-Roth; Daniel E Furst; Jan Michael Nebesky; Angela Jin; Erhan Berber
Journal:  Rheumatol Ther       Date:  2018-03-03

6.  A randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study of the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous tocilizumab versus intravenous tocilizumab in combination with traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (SUMMACTA study).

Authors:  Gerd R Burmester; Andrea Rubbert-Roth; Alain Cantagrel; Stephen Hall; Piotr Leszczynski; Daniel Feldman; Madura J Rangaraj; Georgia Roane; Charles Ludivico; Peng Lu; Lucy Rowell; Min Bao; Eduardo F Mysler
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2013-07-31       Impact factor: 19.103

Review 7.  Hypersensitivity reactions to monoclonal antibodies: Classification and treatment approach (Review).

Authors:  Irena Pintea; Carina Petricau; Dinu Dumitrascu; Adriana Muntean; Daniel Constantin Branisteanu; Daciana Elena Branisteanu; Diana Deleanu
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2021-07-03       Impact factor: 2.447

8.  Clinical, radiographic and immunogenic effects after 1 year of tocilizumab-based treatment strategies in rheumatoid arthritis: the ACT-RAY study.

Authors:  Maxime Dougados; Karsten Kissel; Philip G Conaghan; Emilio Martin Mola; Georg Schett; Roberto Gerli; Michael Sejer Hansen; Howard Amital; Ricardo M Xavier; Orrin Troum; Corrado Bernasconi; T W J Huizinga
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2014-01-28       Impact factor: 19.103

9.  Phase III study of the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous versus intravenous tocilizumab monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Atsushi Ogata; Kazuhide Tanimura; Toyohiko Sugimoto; Hiroshi Inoue; Yukitomo Urata; Tsukasa Matsubara; Masakazu Kondo; Yukitaka Ueki; Mitsuhiro Iwahashi; Shigeto Tohma; Shuji Ohta; Yukihiko Saeki; Toshio Tanaka
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 4.794

10.  Subcutaneous tocilizumab versus placebo in combination with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Alan Kivitz; Ewa Olech; Michael Borofsky; Beatriz M Zazueta; Federico Navarro-Sarabia; Sebastião C Radominski; Joan T Merrill; Lucy Rowell; Clare Nasmyth-Miller; Min Bao; Stephen Wright; Janet E Pope
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 4.794

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.