Search

Neutralizing antibodies (inhibitors) to replacement factor VIII (FVIII, either plasma derived or recombinant) impair the effective management of hemophilia A. Individuals with hemophilia A due to major deletions of the FVIII gene (F8) lack antigenically cross-reactive material in their plasma ('CRM-negative'), and the prevalence of inhibitors in these individuals may be as high as 90%. Conversely, individuals with hemophilia A caused by F8 missense mutations are CRM-positive, and their overall prevalence of inhibitors is <10% (ref. 2). Individuals with the F8 intron 22 inversion (found in ∼50% of individuals with severe hemophilia A) have been grouped with the former on the basis of their genetic defect and CRM-negative status. However, only ∼20% of these individuals develop inhibitors. Here we demonstrate that the levels of F8 mRNA and intracellular FVIII protein in B lymphoblastoid cells and liver biopsies from individuals with the intron 22 inversion are comparable to those in healthy controls. These results support the hypothesis that most individuals with the intron 22 inversion are tolerized to FVIII and thus do not develop inhibitors. Furthermore, we developed a new pharmacogenetic algorithm that permits the stratification of inhibitor risk for individuals and subpopulations by predicting the immunogenicity of replacement FVIII using, as input, the number of putative T cell epitopes in the infused protein and the competence of major histocompatibility complex class II molecules to present such epitopes. This algorithm showed statistically significant accuracy in predicting the presence of inhibitors in 25 unrelated individuals with the intron 22 inversion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The development of neutralizing anti-drug-antibodies to the Factor VIII protein-therapeutic is currently the most significant impediment to the effective management of hemophilia A. Common non-synonymous single nucleotide polymorphisms (ns-SNPs) in the F8 gene occur as six haplotypes in the human population (denoted H1 to H6) of which H3 and H4 have been associated with an increased risk of developing anti-drug antibodies. There is evidence that CD4+ T-cell response is essential for the development of anti-drug antibodies and such a response requires the presentation of the peptides by the MHC-class-II (MHC-II) molecules of the patient. We measured the binding and half-life of peptide-MHC-II complexes using synthetic peptides from regions of the Factor VIII protein where ns-SNPs occur and showed that these wild type peptides form stable complexes with six common MHC-II alleles, representing 46.5% of the North American population. Next, we compared the affinities computed by NetMHCIIpan, a neural network-based algorithm for MHC-II peptide binding prediction, to the experimentally measured values and concluded that these are in good agreement (area under the ROC-curve of 0.778 to 0.972 for the six MHC-II variants). Using a computational binding predictor, we were able to expand our analysis to (a) include all wild type peptides spanning each polymorphic position; and (b) consider more MHC-II variants, thus allowing for a better estimation of the risk for clinical manifestation of anti-drug antibodies in the entire population (or a specific sub-population). Analysis of these computational data confirmed that peptides which have the wild type sequence at positions where the polymorphisms associated with haplotypes H3, H4 and H5 occur bind MHC-II proteins significantly more than a negative control. Taken together, the experimental and computational results suggest that wild type peptides from polymorphic regions of FVIII constitute potential T-cell epitopes and thus could explain the increased incidence of anti-drug antibodies in hemophilia A patients with haplotypes H3 and H4. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reliable and reproducible monitoring of the conformational state of therapeutic protein products remains an unmet technological need. This need is amplified by the increasing number of biosimilars entering the drug development pipeline as many branded biologics are reaching the end of their market exclusivity period. Availability of methods to better characterize protein conformation may improve detection of counterfit and unlicensed therapeutic proteins. In this study, we report the use of a set of modified DNA aptamers with enhanced chemical diversity to probe the conformational state of 12 recombinant human erythropoietin (rHuEPO) therapeutic protein products; one FDA-licensed rHuEPO originator biological product, three rHuEPO products that are approved for marketing in the US or EU as biosimilars, and eight rHuEPO products that are not approved for marketing in the US or EU. We show that several of these modified aptamers are able to distinguish rHuEPO reference products or approved biosimilars from non-licensed rHuEPO products on the basis of differences in binding kinetics and equilibrium affinity constants. These reagents exhibit sensitivity to the conformational integrity of various forms of rHuEPO and as such represent powerful, simple-to-use analytical tools to monitor the conformational integrity of therapeutic-proteins during manufacture and to screen for and identify both substandard and counterfeit products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recombinant therapeutic proteins are a broad class of biological products used to replace dysfunctional human proteins in individuals with genetic defects (e.g., factor VIII for hemophilia) or, in the case of monoclonal antibodies, bind to disease targets involved in cancers, autoimmune disorders, or other conditions. Unfortunately, immunogenicity (immune response to the drug) remains a key impediment, potentially affecting the safety and efficacy of these therapeutics. Immunogenicity risk is routinely evaluated during the licensure of therapeutic proteins. However, despite eliciting anti-drug immune responses in at least some patients, most protein drugs are nevertheless licensed as they address unmet medical needs. The pre-licensure immunogenicity assessments of therapeutic proteins are the subject of numerous reviews and white papers. However, observation and clinical management of the immunogenicity of approved therapeutic proteins face additional challenges. We survey the immunogenicity of approved therapeutic proteins, discuss the clinical management of immunogenicity, and identify the challenges to establishing clinically relevant immunogenicity assays for use in routine clinical practice. Immunogenicity can compromise the safety and/or efficacy of therapeutic protein products, and is a priority issue for regulatory agencies. In addition to poor patient outcomes, the social and economic costs associated with neutralizing antibodies are considerable. Reliable assays for monitoring anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) and neutralizing antibodies post-licensure are lacking for most therapeutic proteins. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most immune responses to biotherapeutic proteins involve the development of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs). New drugs must undergo immunogenicity assessments to identify potential risks at early stages in the drug development process. This immune response is T cell-dependent. Ex vivo assays that monitor T cell proliferation often are used to assess immunogenicity risk. Such assays can be expensive and time-consuming to carry out. Furthermore, T cell proliferation requires presentation of the immunogenic epitope by major histocompatibility complex class II (MHCII) proteins on antigen-presenting cells. The MHC proteins are the most diverse in the human genome. Thus, obtaining cells from subjects that reflect the distribution of the different MHCII proteins in the human population can be challenging. The allelic frequencies of MHCII proteins differ among subpopulations, and understanding the potential immunogenicity risks would thus require generation of datasets for specific subpopulations involving complex subject recruitment. We developed TCPro, a computational tool that predicts the temporal dynamics of T cell counts in common ex vivo assays for drug immunogenicity. Using TCPro, we can test virtual pools of subjects based on MHCII frequencies and estimate immunogenicity risks for different populations. It also provides rapid and inexpensive initial screens for new biotherapeutics and can be used to determine the potential immunogenicity risk of new sequences introduced while bioengineering proteins. We validated TCPro using an experimental immunogenicity dataset, making predictions on the population-based immunogenicity risk of 15 protein-based biotherapeutics. Immunogenicity rankings generated using TCPro are consistent with the reported clinical experience with these therapeutics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fusing the human immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1) constant region (Fc-domain) to therapeutic proteins or peptides increases their circulating plasma half-life via neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn) binding and recycling. However, Fc-mediated interactions with other molecules including complement C1q and Fc gamma receptors (FcγRs) can have immunological consequences and the potential to modulate the immunogenicity of Fc-fusion therapeutics. In a comparative study, we carried out a comprehensive assessment of Fc-mediated interactions for five FDA-approved Fc-fusion therapeutics. C1q binding and complement activation were measured by ELISA, while FcγR binding and signaling were evaluated using BW5147:FcγR-ζ reporter cell lines. We demonstrate that FIX-Fc and FVIII-Fc bound C1q as well as activating and inhibitory FcγRs (I, IIA, IIB, IIIA). These coagulation factor Fc-fusions also signaled via FcγRIIIA, and to a lesser extent via FcγRI and FcγRIIB. TNFR-Fc and CTLA4-Fc bound FcγRI, while TNFR-Fc also bound FcγRIIIA, but these interactions did not result in FcγR signaling. Our comprehensive assessment demonstrates that (i) different Fc-fusion drugs have distinct C1q/FcγR binding and signaling properties, (ii) FcγR binding does not predict signaling, and (iii) the fusion partner (effector molecule) can influence Fc-mediated interactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Thrombin generation (TG) and fibrin clot formation represent the central process of blood coagulation. Up to 95% of thrombin is considered to be generated after the clot is formed. However, this was not investigated in depth. In this study, we conducted a quantitative analysis of the Thrombin at Clot Time (TCT) parameter in 5758 simultaneously recorded TG and clot formation assays using frozen plasma samples from commercial sources under various conditions of activation. These samples were supplemented with clotting factor concentrates, procoagulant lipid vesicles and a fluorogenic substrate and triggered with tissue factor (TF). We found that TCT is often close to a 10% of thrombin peak height (TPH) yet it can be larger or smaller depending on whether the sample has low or high TPH value. In general, the samples with high TPH are associated with elevated TCT. TCT appeared more sensitive to some procoagulant phenotypes than other commonly used parameters such as clotting time, TPH or Thrombin Production Rate (TPR). In a minority of cases, TCT were not predicted from TG parameters. For example, elevated TCT (above 15% of TPH) was associated with either very low or very high TPR values. We conclude that clotting and TG assays may provide complementary information about the plasma sample, and that the TCT parameter may serve as an additional marker for the procoagulant potential in plasma sample. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The advancements in next-generation sequencing have made it possible to effectively detect somatic mutations, which has led to the development of personalized neoantigen cancer vaccines that are tailored to the unique variants found in a patient's cancer. These vaccines can provide significant clinical benefit by leveraging the patient's immune response to eliminate malignant cells. However, determining the optimal vaccine dose for each patient is a challenge due to the heterogeneity of tumors. To address this challenge, we formulate a mathematical dose optimization problem based on a previous mathematical model that encompasses the immune response cascade produced by the vaccine in a patient. We propose an optimization approach to identify the optimal personalized vaccine doses, considering a fixed vaccination schedule, while simultaneously minimizing the overall number of tumor and activated T cells. To validate our approach, we perform in silico experiments on six real-world clinical trial patients with advanced melanoma. We compare the results of applying an optimal vaccine dose to those of a suboptimal dose (the dose used in the clinical trial and its deviations). Our simulations reveal that an optimal vaccine regimen of higher initial doses and lower final doses may lead to a reduction in tumor size for certain patients. Our mathematical dose optimization offers a promising approach to determining an optimal vaccine dose for each patient and improving clinical outcomes. Author summary: The development of neoantigen cancer vaccines have rapidly increased over the past decade with the advancement of next-generation sequencing technologies to determine immunogenic peptides from patient's somatic mutations. However, traditional methods to determine the cancer vaccine dose often produce suboptimal clinical outcomes. This work use our previous mathematical model to represent the immunological cascade at the cellular and subcellular levels elicited by the vaccine dose, and focuses on developing a mathematical optimization approach to identify the optimal vaccine dose to minimize two objective functionals, (i) minimize the amount of peptide dose and tumor size, and (ii) minimize the number of activated T cells in addition to the objective functional i. The optimization approach allows the identification of optimal vaccine doses among a set of tested doses for a higher clinical benefit in tumor reduction. To demonstrate and validate our optimization approach, we perform in silico experiments on six patients with melanoma from a clinical trial study. The results show that the predicted optimal vaccine doses can provide higher clinical benefit in tumor reduction when compared to the clinical trial doses for some patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inducing immune tolerance to proteins used in therapeutic applications is needed for these medications to meet their full potential. There has been a surge in new approaches to induce immune tolerance to therapeutic proteins; however, challenges remain in applying these to the clinic. Effective immune tolerance is necessary because many therapeutic proteins are no longer safe and/or effective due to immunogenicity. Immunogenicity affects the safety and efficacy of therapeutic proteins. This review is focused on approaches for inducing immunological tolerance to circumvent the immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins in the clinic. The few immune tolerance strategies that are used in the clinic tend to be inefficient and expensive and typically involve global immunosuppression, putting patients at risk of infections. The hallmark of a desirable immune tolerance regimen is the specific alleviation of immune responses to the therapeutic protein. In the past decade, proof-of-principle studies have demonstrated that emerging technologies, including nanoparticle-based delivery of immunomodulators, cellular targeting and depletion, cellular engineering, gene therapy, and gene editing, can be leveraged to promote tolerance to therapeutic proteins. We discuss the potential of these novel approaches and the barriers that need to be overcome for translation into the clinic. Immunogenicity affects the safety and efficacy of therapeutic proteins. This review is focused on approaches for inducing immunological tolerance to circumvent the immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins in the clinic. The few immune tolerance strategies that are used in the clinic tend to be inefficient and expensive and typically involve global immunosuppression, putting patients at risk of infections. The hallmark of a desirable immune tolerance regimen is the specific alleviation of immune responses to the therapeutic protein. In the last decade, proof-of-principle studies have demonstrated that emerging technologies, including nanoparticle-based delivery of immunomodulators, cellular targeting and depletion, cellular engineering, gene therapy, and gene editing, can be leveraged to promote tolerance to therapeutic proteins. We discuss the potential of these novel approaches and the barriers that need to be overcome for translation into the clinic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]