{"title":"治疗肽抗药物抗体检测方法的发展:测定格式的选择。","authors":"Fangfang Chen, Xiaolong He, Yan Mao, Kelly Coble","doi":"10.1080/17576180.2025.2501937","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Monitoring immune responses to therapeutic peptides with endogenous counterparts is crucial for evaluating drug safety and efficacy. In this paper, we focused on the selection of an optimal assay format to develop a sensitive, robust, and drug-tolerant immunoassay for the detection of anti-drug antibody (ADA) against a therapeutic peptide.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We assessed distinct ADA assay formats for preclinical and clinical studies, such as direct binding with labeled protein A/G, direct binding with labeled multiple species-specific antibodies for detection, bridging and affinity capture elution (ACE) formats. The assay formats were evaluated based on multiple assay parameters including sensitivity, drug tolerance, individual matrix variability and inter-assay precision. Overall, direct binding assay with labeled protein A/G for detection, which utilized less labeled peptide drug and achieved desired sensitivity and drug tolerance, is appropriate for preclinical studies. Bridging assay is more suitable format to support clinical studies as bridging assay has less assay variability than ACE assay.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study highlighted advantages and limitations of each ADA assay format for peptide drugs and evaluated the performance of different assay formats in the assay development process to aid in the selection of the best fit-for-purpose assay formats for preclinical and clinical phases.</p>","PeriodicalId":8797,"journal":{"name":"Bioanalysis","volume":" ","pages":"537-548"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12087921/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Method development for the detection of anti-drug antibodies against a therapeutic peptide: assay format selection.\",\"authors\":\"Fangfang Chen, Xiaolong He, Yan Mao, Kelly Coble\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17576180.2025.2501937\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Monitoring immune responses to therapeutic peptides with endogenous counterparts is crucial for evaluating drug safety and efficacy. In this paper, we focused on the selection of an optimal assay format to develop a sensitive, robust, and drug-tolerant immunoassay for the detection of anti-drug antibody (ADA) against a therapeutic peptide.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We assessed distinct ADA assay formats for preclinical and clinical studies, such as direct binding with labeled protein A/G, direct binding with labeled multiple species-specific antibodies for detection, bridging and affinity capture elution (ACE) formats. The assay formats were evaluated based on multiple assay parameters including sensitivity, drug tolerance, individual matrix variability and inter-assay precision. Overall, direct binding assay with labeled protein A/G for detection, which utilized less labeled peptide drug and achieved desired sensitivity and drug tolerance, is appropriate for preclinical studies. Bridging assay is more suitable format to support clinical studies as bridging assay has less assay variability than ACE assay.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study highlighted advantages and limitations of each ADA assay format for peptide drugs and evaluated the performance of different assay formats in the assay development process to aid in the selection of the best fit-for-purpose assay formats for preclinical and clinical phases.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8797,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bioanalysis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"537-548\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12087921/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bioanalysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17576180.2025.2501937\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioanalysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17576180.2025.2501937","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Method development for the detection of anti-drug antibodies against a therapeutic peptide: assay format selection.
Aim: Monitoring immune responses to therapeutic peptides with endogenous counterparts is crucial for evaluating drug safety and efficacy. In this paper, we focused on the selection of an optimal assay format to develop a sensitive, robust, and drug-tolerant immunoassay for the detection of anti-drug antibody (ADA) against a therapeutic peptide.
Results: We assessed distinct ADA assay formats for preclinical and clinical studies, such as direct binding with labeled protein A/G, direct binding with labeled multiple species-specific antibodies for detection, bridging and affinity capture elution (ACE) formats. The assay formats were evaluated based on multiple assay parameters including sensitivity, drug tolerance, individual matrix variability and inter-assay precision. Overall, direct binding assay with labeled protein A/G for detection, which utilized less labeled peptide drug and achieved desired sensitivity and drug tolerance, is appropriate for preclinical studies. Bridging assay is more suitable format to support clinical studies as bridging assay has less assay variability than ACE assay.
Conclusion: This study highlighted advantages and limitations of each ADA assay format for peptide drugs and evaluated the performance of different assay formats in the assay development process to aid in the selection of the best fit-for-purpose assay formats for preclinical and clinical phases.
BioanalysisBIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS-CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
88
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍:
Reliable data obtained from selective, sensitive and reproducible analysis of xenobiotics and biotics in biological samples is a fundamental and crucial part of every successful drug development program. The same principles can also apply to many other areas of research such as forensic science, toxicology and sports doping testing.
The bioanalytical field incorporates sophisticated techniques linking sample preparation and advanced separations with MS and NMR detection systems, automation and robotics. Standards set by regulatory bodies regarding method development and validation increasingly define the boundaries between speed and quality.
Bioanalysis is a progressive discipline for which the future holds many exciting opportunities to further reduce sample volumes, analysis cost and environmental impact, as well as to improve sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, efficiency, assay throughput, data quality, data handling and processing.
The journal Bioanalysis focuses on the techniques and methods used for the detection or quantitative study of analytes in human or animal biological samples. Bioanalysis encourages the submission of articles describing forward-looking applications, including biosensors, microfluidics, miniaturized analytical devices, and new hyphenated and multi-dimensional techniques.
Bioanalysis delivers essential information in concise, at-a-glance article formats. Key advances in the field are reported and analyzed by international experts, providing an authoritative but accessible forum for the modern bioanalyst.