Lei Diao1, Bernd Meibohm2. 1. Clinical Pharmacology & Pharmacometrics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Shanghai, China. 2. Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Monoclonal antibodies targeting key checkpoints in immune stimulatory pathways have over the last years become the mainstay of cancer immunotherapy. This article provides a brief review of the application and key impact of pharmacometrics and quantitative clinical pharmacology approaches in the development of these novel biologics. RECENT FINDINGS: The clinical development and selection of optimal dosing regimens for monoclonal antibodies used in immune-oncology has been facilitated by an extensive application of pharmacometric approaches to characterize the exposure-response relationship for major efficacy and safety endpoints. These analysis techniques were applied for the anti CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab, as well as the anti PD1/PD-L1 antibodies nivolumab, pembrolizumab, avelumab, atezolizumab and durvalumab. The utilization of quantitative clinical pharmacology, including model-based analyses, did not only support the identification of efficacious doses with acceptable safety limits, but was also able to address complicating challenges such as time- and response-dependent changes in antibody clearance as observed for most compounds. SUMMARY: A widespread and systematic application of pharmacometric approaches has provided key aspects in elucidating, interpreting and integrating preclinical, biochemical and clinical data in support of the development of safe and efficacious dosing regimens of monoclonal antibodies used in immuno-oncology, thereby facilitating the clinical use of this promising new class of biologics in cancer patients with unmet medical needs.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Monoclonal antibodies targeting key checkpoints in immune stimulatory pathways have over the last years become the mainstay of cancer immunotherapy. This article provides a brief review of the application and key impact of pharmacometrics and quantitative clinical pharmacology approaches in the development of these novel biologics. RECENT FINDINGS: The clinical development and selection of optimal dosing regimens for monoclonal antibodies used in immune-oncology has been facilitated by an extensive application of pharmacometric approaches to characterize the exposure-response relationship for major efficacy and safety endpoints. These analysis techniques were applied for the anti CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab, as well as the anti PD1/PD-L1 antibodies nivolumab, pembrolizumab, avelumab, atezolizumab and durvalumab. The utilization of quantitative clinical pharmacology, including model-based analyses, did not only support the identification of efficacious doses with acceptable safety limits, but was also able to address complicating challenges such as time- and response-dependent changes in antibody clearance as observed for most compounds. SUMMARY: A widespread and systematic application of pharmacometric approaches has provided key aspects in elucidating, interpreting and integrating preclinical, biochemical and clinical data in support of the development of safe and efficacious dosing regimens of monoclonal antibodies used in immuno-oncology, thereby facilitating the clinical use of this promising new class of biologics in cancer patients with unmet medical needs.
Authors: M Stroh; H Winter; M Marchand; L Claret; S Eppler; J Ruppel; O Abidoye; S L Teng; W T Lin; S Dayog; R Bruno; J Jin; S Girish Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2017-06-09 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: K C Fearon; D T Hansell; T Preston; J A Plumb; J Davies; D Shapiro; A Shenkin; K C Calman; H J Burns Journal: Cancer Res Date: 1988-05-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Julie R Brahmer; Charles G Drake; Ira Wollner; John D Powderly; Joel Picus; William H Sharfman; Elizabeth Stankevich; Alice Pons; Theresa M Salay; Tracee L McMiller; Marta M Gilson; Changyu Wang; Mark Selby; Janis M Taube; Robert Anders; Lieping Chen; Alan J Korman; Drew M Pardoll; Israel Lowy; Suzanne L Topalian Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-06-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: K Venkatakrishnan; L E Friberg; D Ouellet; J T Mettetal; A Stein; I F Trocóniz; R Bruno; N Mehrotra; J Gobburu; D R Mould Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2014-12-09 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: J Elassaiss-Schaap; S Rossenu; A Lindauer; S P Kang; R de Greef; J R Sachs; D P de Alwis Journal: CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol Date: 2016-11-08
Authors: A Lindauer; C R Valiathan; K Mehta; V Sriram; R de Greef; J Elassaiss-Schaap; D P de Alwis Journal: CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol Date: 2016-11-08
Authors: Tomoko Freshwater; Anna Kondic; Malidi Ahamadi; Claire H Li; Rik de Greef; Dinesh de Alwis; Julie A Stone Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2017-05-16 Impact factor: 13.751
Authors: R de Greef; J Elassaiss-Schaap; M Chatterjee; D C Turner; M Ahamadi; M Forman; D Cutler; D P de Alwis; A Kondic; J Stone Journal: CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol Date: 2016-11-05