Comparison of RT-qPCR With Branched DNA to Quantify a Lipid Nanoparticle-Encapsulated mRNA Therapeutic in Serum and Liver Tissue Samples From Nonclinical PK Studies.

IF 5 3区 医学 Q1 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Jessica Ortiz, Laura Brunner, Lei Ci, Rena Baek, Darshana Jani, Jean-Claude Marshall, Jason Pennucci
{"title":"Comparison of RT-qPCR With Branched DNA to Quantify a Lipid Nanoparticle-Encapsulated mRNA Therapeutic in Serum and Liver Tissue Samples From Nonclinical PK Studies.","authors":"Jessica Ortiz, Laura Brunner, Lei Ci, Rena Baek, Darshana Jani, Jean-Claude Marshall, Jason Pennucci","doi":"10.1208/s12248-024-01002-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While the branched DNA (bDNA) assay is an established bioanalytical method for measurement of lipid nanoparticle (LNP)-encapsulated messenger RNA (mRNA) pharmacokinetic parameters, reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) has been considered as an alternative platform. RT-qPCR and bDNA platforms were compared for sensitivity, specificity, correlation, and overall assay performance using serum and tissue samples from 2 nonclinical mouse studies of a therapeutic mRNA candidate, LNP-PAH-mRNA, which encodes for human phenylalanine hydroxylase enzyme. Pharmacokinetic parameter noncompartmental analysis was completed using Phoenix WinNonlin. The assays were compared using simple linear regression and Bland-Altman analyses. Sensitivity ranged from 0.05 to 6.40 ng/mL for the bDNA assays, from 0.00000761 to 7.61 ng/mL in serum, and from 0.000179 to 179 ng/g in tissue for the RT-qPCR assay. Inter-assay accuracy was within ± 10%, inter-assay precision was ≤ 10%, and the total error for both assays was ≤ 20%. RT-qPCR serum mRNA concentrations were 2- to fourfold lower compared with the bDNA assay, whereas tissue samples were comparable between assays. A linear relationship with - 0.37 to - 0.02 systematic bias demonstrated acceptable concordance. Bland-Altman plots demonstrated close equivalence, with a negative bias of < 0.5, and ≥ 95% of the data points were within the 95% limits of agreement. The comparison of the RT-qPCR with bDNA assay platforms for quantification of pharmacokinetic properties of an mRNA-LNP therapeutic has demonstrated acceptable concordance. This comparison reinforces the use of the RT-qPCR, a widely accessible strategy, as an alternative platform for the quantification of subsequent mRNA-LNP therapeutics.</p>","PeriodicalId":50934,"journal":{"name":"AAPS Journal","volume":"27 1","pages":"27"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AAPS Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-024-01002-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While the branched DNA (bDNA) assay is an established bioanalytical method for measurement of lipid nanoparticle (LNP)-encapsulated messenger RNA (mRNA) pharmacokinetic parameters, reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) has been considered as an alternative platform. RT-qPCR and bDNA platforms were compared for sensitivity, specificity, correlation, and overall assay performance using serum and tissue samples from 2 nonclinical mouse studies of a therapeutic mRNA candidate, LNP-PAH-mRNA, which encodes for human phenylalanine hydroxylase enzyme. Pharmacokinetic parameter noncompartmental analysis was completed using Phoenix WinNonlin. The assays were compared using simple linear regression and Bland-Altman analyses. Sensitivity ranged from 0.05 to 6.40 ng/mL for the bDNA assays, from 0.00000761 to 7.61 ng/mL in serum, and from 0.000179 to 179 ng/g in tissue for the RT-qPCR assay. Inter-assay accuracy was within ± 10%, inter-assay precision was ≤ 10%, and the total error for both assays was ≤ 20%. RT-qPCR serum mRNA concentrations were 2- to fourfold lower compared with the bDNA assay, whereas tissue samples were comparable between assays. A linear relationship with - 0.37 to - 0.02 systematic bias demonstrated acceptable concordance. Bland-Altman plots demonstrated close equivalence, with a negative bias of < 0.5, and ≥ 95% of the data points were within the 95% limits of agreement. The comparison of the RT-qPCR with bDNA assay platforms for quantification of pharmacokinetic properties of an mRNA-LNP therapeutic has demonstrated acceptable concordance. This comparison reinforces the use of the RT-qPCR, a widely accessible strategy, as an alternative platform for the quantification of subsequent mRNA-LNP therapeutics.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
AAPS Journal
AAPS Journal 医学-药学
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
4.40%
发文量
109
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The AAPS Journal, an official journal of the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists (AAPS), publishes novel and significant findings in the various areas of pharmaceutical sciences impacting human and veterinary therapeutics, including: · Drug Design and Discovery · Pharmaceutical Biotechnology · Biopharmaceutics, Formulation, and Drug Delivery · Metabolism and Transport · Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Pharmacometrics · Translational Research · Clinical Evaluations and Therapeutic Outcomes · Regulatory Science We invite submissions under the following article types: · Original Research Articles · Reviews and Mini-reviews · White Papers, Commentaries, and Editorials · Meeting Reports · Brief/Technical Reports and Rapid Communications · Regulatory Notes · Tutorials · Protocols in the Pharmaceutical Sciences In addition, The AAPS Journal publishes themes, organized by guest editors, which are focused on particular areas of current interest to our field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信