Statistical considerations for calculation of immunogenicity screening assay cut points

Journal of Immunological Methods

Volumn 373, Issue 1-2, 2011, Pages 200-208

  Hoffman, David ^a   Berger, Marion ^a  

^a SANOFI   (France)

Author keywords

Anti drug antibody; Cut point; False positive rate; Immunogenicity; Prediction limit

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CALCULATION; IMMUNOGENICITY; PERFORMANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SAMPLING; SCREENING; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

ALGORITHMS; ANIMALS; ANTIBODIES; CLINICAL LABORATORY TECHNIQUES; DRUG MONITORING; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; HUMANS; MODELS, IMMUNOLOGICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PROTEINS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC;

EID: 80054844625     PISSN: 00221759     EISSN: 18727905     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jim.2011.08.019     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. European Medicines Agency Guideline on Immunogenicity of Biotechnology-derived Therapeutic Proteins 2007, European Medicines Agency, Canary Wharf, London.
2. European Medicines Agency Concept Paper on Immunogenicity Assessment of Monoclonal Antibodies Intended for In Vivo Clinical Use 2009, European Medicines Agency, Canary Wharf, London.
3. Food and Drug Administration Draft Guidance for Industry: Bioanalytical Method Validation 1999, US Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, MD.
4. Food and Drug Administration Guidance for Industry: Assay Development for Immunogenicity Testing of Therapeutic Proteins 2009, US Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, MD.
5. Gorovits B. Antidrug antibody assay validation: industry survey results. AAPS J. 2009, 11(1):133.
6. Gupta S., Indelicato S., Jethwa V., et al. Recommendations for the design, optimization, and qualification of cell-based assays used for the detection of neutralizing antibody responses elicited to biological therapeutics. J. Immunol. Methods 2007, 321:1.
7. Validation of analytical procedures: text and methodology 1996, International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use.
8. Jahn E.-M., Schneider C. How to systematically evaluate immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins - regulatory considerations. N. Biotechnol. 2009, 25(5):280.
9. Jaki T., Lawo J.-P., Wolfsegger M., et al. A formal comparison of different methods for establishing cut points to distinguish positive and negative samples in immunoassays. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 2011, 55:1148.
10. Koren E., Smith H., Shores E., et al. Recommendations on risk-based strategies for detection and characterization of antibodies against biotechnology products. J. Immunol. Methods 2008, 333:1.
11. Lund R. Tables for an approximate test for outliers in linear models. Technometrics 1975, 17(4):473.
12. Mire-Sluis A., Barrett Y., Devanarayan V., et al. Recommendations for the design and optimization of immunoassays used in the detection of host antibodies against biotechnology products. J. Immunol. Methods 2004, 289:1.
13. Rosner B. On the detection of many outliers. Technometrics 1975, 17(2):221.
14. Schlain B., Amaravadi L., Donley J., et al. A novel gamma-fitting statistical method for anti-drug antibody assays to establish assay cut points for data with non-normal distribution. J. Immunol. Methods 2010, 352:161.
15. Shankar G., Shores E., Wagner C., Mire-Sluis A. Scientific and regulatory considerations on the immunogenicity of biologics. Trends Biotechnol. 2006, 24(6):274.
16. Shankar G., Devanarayan V., Amaravadi L., et al. Recommendations for the validation of immunoassays used for detection of host antibodies against biotechnology products. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 2008, 48:1267.
17. Shapiro S., Wilk M. An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 1965, 52:591.