PURPOSE: THIOMAB™ drug conjugates (TDCs) with engineered cysteine residues allow site-specific drug conjugation and defined Drug-to-Antibody Ratios (DAR). In order to help elucidate the impact of drug-loading, conjugation site, and subsequent deconjugation on pharmacokinetics and efficacy, we have developed an integrated mathematical model to mechanistically characterize pharmacokinetic behavior and preclinical efficacy of MMAE conjugated TDCs with different DARs. General applicability of the model structure was evaluated with two different TDCs. METHOD: Pharmacokinetics studies were conducted for unconjugated antibody and purified TDCs with DAR-1, 2 and 4 for trastuzumab TDC and Anti-STEAP1 TDC in mice. Total antibody concentrations and individual DAR fractions were measured. Efficacy studies were performed in tumor-bearing mice. RESULTS: An integrated model consisting of distinct DAR species (DAR0-4), each described by a two-compartment model was able to capture the experimental data well. Time series measurements of each Individual DAR species allowed for the incorporation of site-specific drug loss through deconjugation and the results suggest a higher deconjugation rate from heavy chain site HC-A114C than the light chain site LC-V205C. Total antibody concentrations showed multi-exponential decline, with a higher clearance associated with higher DAR species. The experimentally observed effects of TDC on tumor growth kinetics were successfully described by linking pharmacokinetic profiles to DAR-dependent killing of tumor cells. CONCLUSION: Results from the integrated model evaluated with two different TDCs highlight the impact of DAR and site of conjugation on pharmacokinetics and efficacy. The model can be used to guide future drug optimization and in-vivo studies.
PURPOSE:THIOMAB™ drug conjugates (TDCs) with engineered cysteine residues allow site-specific drug conjugation and defined Drug-to-Antibody Ratios (DAR). In order to help elucidate the impact of drug-loading, conjugation site, and subsequent deconjugation on pharmacokinetics and efficacy, we have developed an integrated mathematical model to mechanistically characterize pharmacokinetic behavior and preclinical efficacy of MMAE conjugated TDCs with different DARs. General applicability of the model structure was evaluated with two different TDCs. METHOD: Pharmacokinetics studies were conducted for unconjugated antibody and purified TDCs with DAR-1, 2 and 4 for trastuzumab TDC and Anti-STEAP1 TDC in mice. Total antibody concentrations and individual DAR fractions were measured. Efficacy studies were performed in tumor-bearing mice. RESULTS: An integrated model consisting of distinct DAR species (DAR0-4), each described by a two-compartment model was able to capture the experimental data well. Time series measurements of each Individual DAR species allowed for the incorporation of site-specific drug loss through deconjugation and the results suggest a higher deconjugation rate from heavy chain site HC-A114C than the light chain site LC-V205C. Total antibody concentrations showed multi-exponential decline, with a higher clearance associated with higher DAR species. The experimentally observed effects of TDC on tumor growth kinetics were successfully described by linking pharmacokinetic profiles to DAR-dependent killing of tumor cells. CONCLUSION: Results from the integrated model evaluated with two different TDCs highlight the impact of DAR and site of conjugation on pharmacokinetics and efficacy. The model can be used to guide future drug optimization and in-vivo studies.
Authors: Kevin J Hamblett; Peter D Senter; Dana F Chace; Michael M C Sun; Joel Lenox; Charles G Cerveny; Kim M Kissler; Starr X Bernhardt; Anastasia K Kopcha; Roger F Zabinski; Damon L Meyer; Joseph A Francisco Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2004-10-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: C Andrew Boswell; Eduardo E Mundo; Crystal Zhang; Daniela Bumbaca; Nicole R Valle; Katherine R Kozak; Aimee Fourie; Josefa Chuh; Neelima Koppada; Ola Saad; Herman Gill; Ben-Quan Shen; Bonnee Rubinfeld; Jay Tibbitts; Surinder Kaur; Frank-Peter Theil; Paul J Fielder; Leslie A Khawli; Kedan Lin Journal: Bioconjug Chem Date: 2011-10-03 Impact factor: 4.774
Authors: Svetlana O Doronina; Brian E Toki; Michael Y Torgov; Brian A Mendelsohn; Charles G Cerveny; Dana F Chace; Ron L DeBlanc; R Patrick Gearing; Tim D Bovee; Clay B Siegall; Joseph A Francisco; Alan F Wahl; Damon L Meyer; Peter D Senter Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2003-06-01 Impact factor: 54.908
Authors: V L Chudasama; F Schaedeli Stark; J M Harrold; J Tibbitts; S R Girish; M Gupta; N Frey; D E Mager Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2012-09-12 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Monica Simeoni; Paolo Magni; Cristiano Cammia; Giuseppe De Nicolao; Valter Croci; Enrico Pesenti; Massimiliano Germani; Italo Poggesi; Maurizio Rocchetti Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2004-02-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Stephen C Alley; Dennis R Benjamin; Scott C Jeffrey; Nicole M Okeley; Damon L Meyer; Russell J Sanderson; Peter D Senter Journal: Bioconjug Chem Date: 2008-03-04 Impact factor: 4.774
Authors: Aman P Singh; Katie F Maass; Alison M Betts; K Dane Wittrup; Chethana Kulkarni; Lindsay E King; Antari Khot; Dhaval K Shah Journal: AAPS J Date: 2016-03-30 Impact factor: 4.009
Authors: Shun Xin Wang-Lin; Chenguang Zhou; Amrita V Kamath; Kyu Hong; Neelima Koppada; Ola M Saad; Montserrat Carrasco-Triguero; Cyrus Khojasteh; Rong Deng Journal: MAbs Date: 2018-08-06 Impact factor: 5.857