Literature DB >> 26265093

Measurement of Free Versus Total Therapeutic Monoclonal Antibody in Pharmacokinetic Assessment is Modulated by Affinity, Incubation Time, and Bioanalytical Platform.

Jeffrey J Talbot1,2, Dominador Calamba1, Melody Pai1,3, Mark Ma1, Theingi M Thway4.   

Abstract

Decisions about efficacy and safety of therapeutic proteins (TP) designed to target soluble ligands are made in part by their ex vivo quantification. Ligand binding assays (LBAs) are critical tools in measuring serum TP levels in pharmacokinetic, toxicokinetic, and pharmacodynamic studies. This study evaluated the impact of reagent antibody affinities, assay incubation times, and analytical platform on free or total TP quantitation. An ELISA-based LBA that measures monoclonal anti-sclerostin antibody (TPx) was used as the model system. To determine whether the method measures free or total TPx, the effects of K on, K off, and K D were determined. An 8:1 molar ratio of sclerostin (Scl) to TPx compared to a 1:1 molar ratio produced by rabbit polyclonal antibodies to TPx was required to achieve IC50, a measure of TPx interference effectiveness, making it unclear whether the ELISA truly measured free TPx. Kinetic analysis revealed that Scl had a rapid dissociation rate (K off) from TPx and that capture and detection antibodies had significantly higher binding affinities (K D) to TPx. These kinetic limitations along with long ELISA incubation times lead to the higher molar ratios (8:1) required for achieving 50% inhibition of TPx. However, a microfluidic platform with the same reagent pairs required shorter incubations to achieve a lower Scl IC50 molar ratio (1:1). The findings from this study provide the bioanalytical community with a deeper understanding of how reagent and platform selection for LBAs can affect what a particular method measures, either free or total TP concentrations.

Entities:  

Keywords:  affinity and kinetics; association and dissociation; free versus total; interference; ligand binding assay

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26265093      PMCID: PMC4627453          DOI: 10.1208/s12248-015-9807-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AAPS J        ISSN: 1550-7416            Impact factor:   4.009


  16 in total

Review 1.  Therapeutic monoclonal antibody concentration monitoring: free or total?

Authors:  Bing Kuang; Lindsay King; Huifen Faye Wang
Journal:  Bioanalysis       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.681

2.  Specificity and selectivity evaluations of ligand binding assay of protein therapeutics against concomitant drugs and related endogenous proteins.

Authors:  Jean Lee; Hongjin Ma
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2007-05-25       Impact factor: 4.009

3.  Experimental and statistical approaches in method cross-validation to support pharmacokinetic decisions.

Authors:  Theingi M Thway; Mark Ma; Jean Lee; Bethlyn Sloey; Steven Yu; Yow-Ming C Wang; Binodh Desilva; Tom Graves
Journal:  J Pharm Biomed Anal       Date:  2008-12-13       Impact factor: 3.935

4.  Monoclonal antibody pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics.

Authors:  W Wang; E Q Wang; J P Balthasar
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2008-09-10       Impact factor: 6.875

Review 5.  Application and interpretation of free and total drug measurements in the development of biologics.

Authors:  Ago B Ahene
Journal:  Bioanalysis       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 2.681

Review 6.  Bioanalytical approaches to quantify "total" and "free" therapeutic antibodies and their targets: technical challenges and PK/PD applications over the course of drug development.

Authors:  Jean W Lee; Marian Kelley; Lindsay E King; Jihong Yang; Hossein Salimi-Moosavi; Meina T Tang; Jian-Feng Lu; John Kamerud; Ago Ahene; Heather Myler; Cindy Rogers
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2011-01-15       Impact factor: 4.009

7.  Quantitative prediction of human pharmacokinetics for mAbs exhibiting target-mediated disposition.

Authors:  Aman P Singh; Wojciech Krzyzanski; Steven W Martin; Gregory Weber; Alison Betts; Alaa Ahmad; Anson Abraham; Anup Zutshi; John Lin; Pratap Singh
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 4.009

8.  In Silico Evaluation of the Potential Impact of Bioanalytical Bias Difference between Two Therapeutic Protein Formulations for Pharmacokinetic Assessment in a Biocomparability Study.

Authors:  Theingi M Thway; Chris Macaraeg; Michael Eschenberg; Mark Ma
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 4.009

9.  Sclerosteosis.

Authors:  P Beighton
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  1988-03       Impact factor: 6.318

10.  Quantitative prediction of human pharmacokinetics for monoclonal antibodies: retrospective analysis of monkey as a single species for first-in-human prediction.

Authors:  Jennifer Q Dong; David H Salinger; Christopher J Endres; John P Gibbs; Cheng-Pang Hsu; Brian J Stouch; Eunju Hurh; Megan A Gibbs
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 6.447

View more
  2 in total

1.  Generation by phage display and characterization of drug-target complex-specific antibodies for pharmacokinetic analysis of biotherapeutics.

Authors:  Stefan Harth; Andre Ten Haaf; Christian Loew; Christian Frisch; Achim Knappik
Journal:  MAbs       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 5.857

2.  Rapid single B cell antibody discovery using nanopens and structured light.

Authors:  Aaron Winters; Karyn McFadden; John Bergen; Julius Landas; Kelly A Berry; Anthony Gonzalez; Hossein Salimi-Moosavi; Christopher M Murawsky; Philip Tagari; Chadwick T King
Journal:  MAbs       Date:  2019-06-11       Impact factor: 5.857

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.