Target tolerance improvement of the immunogenicity assay developed for analysing samples from clinical trials of RGB-14, a proposed biosimilar to Prolia/Xgeva
Tímea Pap, Nikolett Király, Anna Fekete, János Pál Tóth, Attila Kónya
{"title":"Target tolerance improvement of the immunogenicity assay developed for analysing samples from clinical trials of RGB-14, a proposed biosimilar to Prolia/Xgeva","authors":"Tímea Pap, Nikolett Király, Anna Fekete, János Pál Tóth, Attila Kónya","doi":"10.1016/j.jim.2025.113878","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>An immunogenicity assay was developed to support the clinical program of RGB-14, a proposed biosimilar to Prolia/Xgeva. The ADA assay was successfully validated following current guidelines and white papers. The validation included an assessment of target (RANKL) interference, and the assay passed the test up to a 30 pg/mL RANKL level. This concentration was anticipated to be the maximum level present in clinical samples. Despite the successful validation, most of the analysed samples from the RGB-14 Phase I clinical trial yielded false-positive results for anti-denosumab antibodies. The investigation concluded that unexpectedly high levels of RANKL were present in the samples and caused interference in the assay. Consequently, the assay was re-developed by adding target-specific reagent, eliminating acid dissociation step and doubling the assay dilution to enhance target tolerance to 10,000 pg/mL RANKL, a requirement for clinical sample testing. The re-developed assay underwent successful validation, and the samples from the clinical trials of RGB-14 were subsequently analysed with the improved assay. The article outlines a strategy for enhancing the target (RANKL) tolerance of the ADA assay. It also underscores the importance of monitoring clinical sample analysis results, even if a validated assay is used for sample testing, as clinical samples may differ from the spiked samples prepared for validation. If unexpected results are obtained, an investigation should be initiated, and the assay should be improved if needed to ensure the reliability of the results.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16000,"journal":{"name":"Journal of immunological methods","volume":"541 ","pages":"Article 113878"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of immunological methods","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002217592500078X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
An immunogenicity assay was developed to support the clinical program of RGB-14, a proposed biosimilar to Prolia/Xgeva. The ADA assay was successfully validated following current guidelines and white papers. The validation included an assessment of target (RANKL) interference, and the assay passed the test up to a 30 pg/mL RANKL level. This concentration was anticipated to be the maximum level present in clinical samples. Despite the successful validation, most of the analysed samples from the RGB-14 Phase I clinical trial yielded false-positive results for anti-denosumab antibodies. The investigation concluded that unexpectedly high levels of RANKL were present in the samples and caused interference in the assay. Consequently, the assay was re-developed by adding target-specific reagent, eliminating acid dissociation step and doubling the assay dilution to enhance target tolerance to 10,000 pg/mL RANKL, a requirement for clinical sample testing. The re-developed assay underwent successful validation, and the samples from the clinical trials of RGB-14 were subsequently analysed with the improved assay. The article outlines a strategy for enhancing the target (RANKL) tolerance of the ADA assay. It also underscores the importance of monitoring clinical sample analysis results, even if a validated assay is used for sample testing, as clinical samples may differ from the spiked samples prepared for validation. If unexpected results are obtained, an investigation should be initiated, and the assay should be improved if needed to ensure the reliability of the results.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Immunological Methods is devoted to covering techniques for: (1) Quantitating and detecting antibodies and/or antigens. (2) Purifying immunoglobulins, lymphokines and other molecules of the immune system. (3) Isolating antigens and other substances important in immunological processes. (4) Labelling antigens and antibodies. (5) Localizing antigens and/or antibodies in tissues and cells. (6) Detecting, and fractionating immunocompetent cells. (7) Assaying for cellular immunity. (8) Documenting cell-cell interactions. (9) Initiating immunity and unresponsiveness. (10) Transplanting tissues. (11) Studying items closely related to immunity such as complement, reticuloendothelial system and others. (12) Molecular techniques for studying immune cells and their receptors. (13) Imaging of the immune system. (14) Methods for production or their fragments in eukaryotic and prokaryotic cells.
In addition the journal will publish articles on novel methods for analysing the organization, structure and expression of genes for immunologically important molecules such as immunoglobulins, T cell receptors and accessory molecules involved in antigen recognition, processing and presentation. Submitted full length manuscripts should describe new methods of broad applicability to immunology and not simply the application of an established method to a particular substance - although papers describing such applications may be considered for publication as a short Technical Note. Review articles will also be published by the Journal of Immunological Methods. In general these manuscripts are by solicitation however anyone interested in submitting a review can contact the Reviews Editor and provide an outline of the proposed review.