Search

The eye, which is under constant exposure to environmental pathogens, has evolved various anatomic and immunological barriers critical to the protection of tissues lacking regenerative capacity, and the maintenance of a clear optic pathway essential to vision. By bypassing the ocular barriers, intravitreal (IVT) injection has become the mainstay for the delivery of drugs to treat conditions that affect the back of the eye. Both small molecules and biotherapeutics have been successfully administered intravitreally, and several drugs have been approved for the treatment of (wet) age‐related macular degeneration and diabetic macular edema. However, IVT injection is an invasive procedure, which requires sufficient technical expertise from the healthcare professional administering the drug. Potential side effects include bleeding, retinal tear, cataracts, infection, uveitis, loss of vision, and increased ocular pressure. Pharmaceutical companies often differ in their drug development plan, including drug administration techniques, collection of ocular tissues and fluids, ophthalmology monitoring, and overall conduct of nonclinical and clinical studies. The present effort, under the aegis of the Innovation & Quality Ophthalmic Working Group, aims at understanding these differences, identifying pros and cons of the various approaches, determining the gaps in knowledge, and suggesting feasible good practices for nonclinical and early clinical IVT drug development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In October 2019, Novartis launched brolucizumab, a single-chain variable fragment molecule targeting vascular endothelial growth factor A, for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration. In 2020, rare cases of retinal vasculitis and/or retinal vascular occlusion (RV/RO) were reported, often during the first few months after treatment initiation, consistent with a possible immunologic pathobiology. This finding was inconsistent with preclinical studies in cynomolgus monkeys that demonstrated no drug-related intraocular inflammation, or RV/RO, despite the presence of preexisting and treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies (ADAs) in some animals. In this study, the immune response against brolucizumab in humans was assessed using samples from clinical trials and clinical practice. In the brolucizumab-naïve population, anti-brolucizumab ADA responses were detected before any treatment, which was supported by the finding that healthy donors can harbor brolucizumab-specific B cells. This suggested prior exposure of the immune system to proteins with structural similarity. Experiments on samples showed that naïve and brolucizumab-treated ADA-positive patients developed a class-switched, high-affinity immune response, with several linear epitopes being recognized by ADAs. Only patients with RV/RO showed a meaningful T cell response upon recall with brolucizumab. Further studies in cynomolgus monkeys preimmunized against brolucizumab with adjuvant followed by intravitreal brolucizumab challenge demonstrated that high ADA titers were required to generate ocular inflammation and vasculitis/vascular thrombosis, comparable to RV/RO in humans. Immunogenicity therefore seems to be a prerequisite to develop RV/RO. However, because only 2.1% of patients with ADA develop RV/RO, additional factors must play a role in the development of RV/RO. Eyeing drug-related inflammation: Brolucizumab is a single-chain variable fragment molecule that targets vascular endothelial growth factor A and is used for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Despite being safe in non-human primate (NHP) models, the drug has been associated with cases of retinal vasculitis/retinal vascular occlusion (RV/RO) in some patients. Here, Karle and colleagues analyzed samples from patients and NHPs pre-immunized against brolucizumab to demonstrate that anti-brolucizumab immune responses are a prerequisite to developing RV/RO. Kearns and colleagues then used experimental and modelling approaches to identify several factors, including a shared epitope with bacteria and development of non-native drug species in the eye that contributed to the immunogenicity of brolucizumab and induced formation of immune complexes. These findings advance our understanding of RV/RO related to brolucizumab administrationincluding a shared epitope with bacteria and development of non-native drug species in the eye that contributed to the immunogenicity of brolucizumab and induced formation of immune complexes. These findings advance our understanding of RV/RO related to brolucizumab administration.—MN [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dexamethasone (DEXA) administration has been associated with serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) elevations that may result from enhanced ALT expression. The aim of our current study was to compare liver vs. serum ALT activity and to examine the onset of any hepatocellular changes. Groups of 4 male Sprague-Dawley rats were administered a single dose of DEXA or corn oil at 12, 16, and 24 h prior to euthanasia or once-daily for 2, 3, or 4 days. All (nonfasted) rats were necropsied together on Day 5. While DEXA incrementally increased liver ALT activity in the 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-day treatment groups (maximal, 3.7-fold), liver aspartate aminotransferase (AST) never exceeded 1.4-fold over control. Significant hepatic glycogen elevations were detected after DEXA treatment, which correlated with microscopic observations. Serum ALT, AST, sorbitol dehydrogenase, and glutamate dehydrogenase (GLDH) increased after 2, 3, and 4 days of DEXA dosing (1.3-10.3-fold). DEXA-related necropsy findings included pale livers consistent with glycogen deposition. The relative percent liver to body weight was elevated in all DEXA-treated rats. Hepatocellular necrosis was observed in 1/4 rats at 12 h, 2/4 rats at 2 days, 4/4 rats at 3 days, and 3/4 rats at 4 days. DEXA treatment <2 days failed to produce consistent evidence of hepatic injury, as detected by serum biomarkers and pathology assessment. However, early DEXA treatment did correlate with apparent ALT induction. Ultimately, this may explain some early asymptomatic serum ALT elevations seen clinically. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]