Literature DB >> 21530130

Validation of immunoassay for protein biomarkers: bioanalytical study plan implementation to support pre-clinical and clinical studies.

Marie-Anne Valentin1, Shenglin Ma, An Zhao, François Legay, Alexandre Avrameas.   

Abstract

Biomarkers have emerged as an important tool to optimize the benefit/risk ratio of therapeutics. The scientific impact of biomarker studies is directly related to the quality of the underlying data. It is therefore important that guidance be established for validation of assays used to support drug development. This paper specifically focuses on validation of immunoassay for protein biomarker to support pre-clinical and clinical studies. Therapeutics (small- and macro-molecules) and their respective target/ligand are out of scope. This paper describes the implementation of a bioanalytical study plan for the validation of immunoassays to support decision-making biomarkers and biomarker selection during preclinical and clinical studies. It establishes the complete operating procedure as well as the parameters and their respective acceptance criteria and defines milestones and decision points to be followed during the assay validation that should result in high quality bioanalytical data in a limited timeframe and with reduced costs. The bioanalytical study plan can be applied to the validation of a wild range of immunoassay technology such as monoplex ELISA, automated analyzer, multiplex assays or cutting edge technology. Before any validation, a feasibility study is performed to assess the performance of the immunoassay using biological samples which should mimic the clinical population. The feasibility study addresses the likelihood that an assay will be able to achieve its intended purpose with parallelism being the most critical element (milestone 1). At the end of the feasibility study, a decision is taken to either continue with the validation or change the assay (milestone 2). The milestone 3 consists of the establishment of the nominal value of quality control to be used during the validation. The quality controls used to validate an assay should preferentially be prepared using neat (non-spiked) biological matrix (ideally derived from the specific trial population). The last milestone (milestone 4), the formal validation, includes demonstration of the assay performance meeting accuracy and precision acceptance criteria within (intra-run) and between (inter-run) validation runs for each QC sample. Validation also includes the assessment of stability of the protein biomarker in the biological matrix. It is recognized that the extent of the validation should be correlated to the intended use of the data and the assay acceptance criteria should take into consideration the study objective(s), nature of the methodology and the biological variability of the biomarker.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21530130     DOI: 10.1016/j.jpba.2011.03.033

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pharm Biomed Anal        ISSN: 0731-7085            Impact factor:   3.935


  38 in total

1.  Kisspeptin as a new serum biomarker to discriminate miscarriage from viable intrauterine pregnancy.

Authors:  Chantae Sullivan-Pyke; Daniel J Haisenleder; Suneeta Senapati; Olivia Nicolais; Esther Eisenberg; Mary D Sammel; Kurt T Barnhart
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 7.329

2.  Validation of a multiplex electrochemiluminescent immunoassay platform in human and mouse samples.

Authors:  J A Bastarache; T Koyama; N E Wickersham; L B Ware
Journal:  J Immunol Methods       Date:  2014-04-21       Impact factor: 2.303

3.  Calculations for Adjusting Endogenous Biomarker Levels During Analytical Recovery Assessments for Ligand-Binding Assay Bioanalytical Method Validation.

Authors:  John F Marcelletti; Cindy L Evans; Manju Saxena; Adriana E Lopez
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 4.009

4.  Data quality in drug discovery: the role of analytical performance in ligand binding assays.

Authors:  Hermann Wätzig; Imke Oltmann-Norden; Franziska Steinicke; Hassan A Alhazmi; Markus Nachbar; Deia Abd El-Hady; Hassan M Albishri; Knut Baumann; Thomas Exner; Frank M Böckler; Sami El Deeb
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2015-06-13       Impact factor: 3.686

5.  Bridging the gap: moving predictive and prognostic assays from research to clinical use.

Authors:  P Michael Williams; Tracy G Lively; J Milburn Jessup; Barbara A Conley
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  Development and use of integral assays in clinical trials.

Authors:  Richard L Schilsky; James H Doroshow; Michael Leblanc; Barbara A Conley
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 12.531

7.  Evaluation of serum cytokines in cats with and without degenerative joint disease and associated pain.

Authors:  Margaret E Gruen; Kristen M Messenger; Andrea E Thomson; Emily H Griffith; Lauren A Aldrich; Shelly Vaden; B Duncan X Lascelles
Journal:  Vet Immunol Immunopathol       Date:  2016-12-16       Impact factor: 2.046

8.  Analytical quality assessment and method comparison of immunoassays for the measurement of serum cobalamin and folate in dogs and cats.

Authors:  Susan A McLeish; Kay Burt; Kostas Papasouliotis
Journal:  J Vet Diagn Invest       Date:  2019-01-13       Impact factor: 1.279

9.  Development and validation of a microfluidic immunoassay capable of multiplexing parallel samples in microliter volumes.

Authors:  Mehdi Ghodbane; Elizabeth C Stucky; Tim J Maguire; Rene S Schloss; David I Shreiber; Jeffrey D Zahn; Martin L Yarmush
Journal:  Lab Chip       Date:  2015-08-07       Impact factor: 6.799

10.  Development and analytical validation of a radioimmunoassay for the quantification of alpha1 -proteinase inhibitor in serum and feces from the common marmoset (Callithrix jacchus).

Authors:  Joseph Cyrus Parambeth; Jonathan A Lidbury; Jan S Suchodolski; Jörg M Steiner
Journal:  J Med Primatol       Date:  2018-09-06       Impact factor: 0.667

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.