Immunogenicity Summit
Immunogenicity and Bioassay Summit

Immunogenicity Summit Breakout Discussions

Breakout Discussions Part One, Wednesday October 10

Table 1: Challenges in Developing Neutralizing Antibody Assays

Moderator: Deborah Finco, Ph.D., Senior Principal Scientist, Immunotoxicology COE, Pfizer, Inc.

  • Factors for selection of cell-based Nab vs. non-cell-based Nab assays
  • Bioanalytical challenges
  • Challenges for Nab validation
  • Interpretation of the results and implications for risk assessment

Table 2: Dealing with Pre-existing Positive ADA Activity in Study Patients

Moderator: Jim McNally, Ph.D., Senior Principal Scientist, Pfizer, Inc.

  • Prediction of reactivity in naive samples vs. reactivity in pre-dose samples collected from study patients
  • If pre-dose samples with high levels of reactivity are identified, should we care? If so, what are the appropriate follow up activities?
  • Open exchange - what have you seen when characterizing pre-existing ADA and their impact?
  • What are the regulatory expectations for characterizing pre-existing ADA?

Table 3: Practical Application of Immunogenicity Pre-Clinical Risk Assessment

Moderator: Paul Chamberlain, NDA Advisory Board

  • Pertinent risk factors
  • Features of a good risk analysis and risk mitigation plan
  • Sharing of experiences of applying risk assessment in pre-clinical and clinical studies
  • How should we interpret bioanalytical signals relative to clinical significance?
  • Sharing experiences in presenting an immunogenicity risk assessment to the health authorities.

Table 4: Detection of Immune Complexes and Their Impact on Immunogenicity Assessment

Moderator: Steve J. Swanson, Ph.D., Executive Director, Medical Sciences, Clinical Immunology, Amgen, Inc.

  • Challenges of detecting ADAs in the presence of excess drug
  • Limitations of acid dissociation of immune complexes
  • Potential dangers of immune complexes in terms of toxicity and interpretation of immunogenicity
  • Can the drug be modified to prevent immune complex formation?
  • Immune complexes with PEGylated proteins
  • Sharing of experiences

Table 5: Immunogenicity Testing During Clinical Trials

Moderator: Frank F. Weichold, M.D., Ph.D., Director, Clinical Pharmacology and DMPK, Translational Science, MedImmune, LLC

  • Immunogenicity study design
  • When should immunogenicity assessments be made and how?
  • How do you select endpoints and interpret the results?
  • At which stage of the clinical trial will the cell-based neutralizing antibody assay be required?

Table 6: IgE Anti-drug Assay Development and Validation

Jörgen Dahlström, Ph.D., MBA, Scientific Director, ImmunoDiagnostics, Thermo Fisher Scientific

  • When it is appropriate to establish an IgE anti-drug assay associated with a clinical trial?
  • Unique challenges associated with IgE anti-drug assays (low concentration, interference from anti-drug of non-IgE isotypes and absence of positive controls)
  • Correlates with alternative IgE antibody assays (skin testing, provocation testing)
  • The role of heterologous interpolation in calibration and validation of IgE anti-drug assays

Breakout Discussions Part Two: Friday October 12

Table 1: Product-related Factors that Contribute to Immunogenicity

Moderator: Wim Jiskoot, Ph.D., Professor, Division of Drug Delivery Technology, Leiden University

  • Which structural variants increase immunogenicity?
  • How SVPs may impact immunogenicity, safety and efficacy
  • Comments on impact of formulation on SVPs and immunogenicity
  • Relation between formulation, dosing , packaging and immunogenicity
  • Measures to ensure long-term stability and avoid aggregation in protein drug products

Table 2: To what Extent can Immunogenicity Prediction affect the Clinical Strategy?

Moderator: Timothy Hickling, Ph.D., Associate Research Fellow, PDM Immunogenicity Sciences, Pfizer, Inc.

  • Understanding relative weight of immunogenicity risks through planning for product, delivery and patent factors.
  • Learning from examples of products with aggregation, degree of humanization, presence of T cell epitopes, formulation, etc
  • Pros and cons of in silico, in vitro and in vivo methods.
  • Which clinical measurements could be utilized to improve future predictions?

Table 3: Immune Tolerance Approaches

Moderator: Amy Rosenberg, M.D., Director, Therapeutic Proteins, CDER/FDA

  • When is immune tolerance induction indicated and in what clinical circumstances should it be considered
  • Factors that promote tolerance / promote immunogenicity.
  • Impact of dosing regimen and route on drug immunogenicity
  • Impact of formulation and formulation change on immunogenicity
  • Design of therapeutics for reduced immunogenicity

Table 4: Relevance of Animal Models for Predicting the Immunogenicity of Therapeutic Proteins

Jack Ragheb, M.D., Ph.D., Principal Investigator, Immunology, Therapeutic Proteins, CDER/FDA

  • Are relative immune responses (aggregated vs. non-aggregated human protein in a mouse) a valid measure?
  • How might known differences in the human and mouse adaptive and innate immune systems impact the results?
  • What, if any, is the role of adjuvants in such studies?

Register Today!

2016 Immunogenicity and Bioassay Summit Brochure

2016 Immunogenicity and Bioassay Summit Brochure  

View All Sponsors Big

View Attendee List Big

View Media Partners Big