Ligand binding assays in the 21st century laboratory: Platforms

AAPS Journal

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 113-118

  Spriggs, Franklin P ^a   Zhong, Zhandong Don ^b   Safavi, Afshin ^c   Jani, Darshana ^d   Dontha, Narasaiah ^e   Kant, Anita ^f   Ly, Jenny ^g   Brilando, Lia ^h   Österlund, Karolina ^g   Rouleau, Nathalie ⁱ   Fischer, Saloumeh Kadkhodayan ^j   Boissonneault, Martin ⁱ   Ray, Chad ^a  

^a PFIZER INC   (United States)

^b AMGEN INC   (United States)

^c Department of Bioanalytical Operations   (United States)

^d BIOGEN   (United States)

^e CELGENE CORPORATION   (United States)

^f MOLECULAR DEVICES CORPORATION   (United States)

^g Meso Scale Discovery ^*  (Sweden)

^h Department of Project Services   (United States)

ⁱ INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH IN IMMUNOLOGY AND CANCER   (Canada)

^j GENENTECH INC   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

ligand binding assays; multiplexing instrument characteristics; platform development

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ANALYTICAL EQUIPMENT; ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS; BINDING ASSAY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; FLEXIBILITY; INSTRUMENT; INSTRUMENT INSTALLATION; INSTRUMENT MAINTENANCE; INSTRUMENT OPERATION; INSTRUMENT SERVICE; INSTRUMENT VALIDATION; LABORATORY AUTOMATION; LIFE CYCLE SUPPORT; LIGAND BINDING; MATRIX INTERFERENCE; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; MULTI MODALITY; MULTIPLEXING; NOTE; PLATFORM; RUGGEDNESS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; THROUGHPUT; TOTAL ASSAY TIME; WIDE DYNAMIC RANGE;

BIOTECHNOLOGY; CLINICAL LABORATORY TECHNIQUES; DRUG INDUSTRY; LIGANDS; PROTEIN BINDING; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 84857599948     PISSN: 15507416     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1208/s12248-012-9321-1     Document Type: Note

References (32)

1. J Li A Schantz M Schwegler G Shankar 2011 Detection of low-affinity anti-drug antibodies and improved drug tolerance in immunogenicity testing by Octet(R) biolayer interferometry J Pharm Biomed Anal 54 286 294 20869832 10.1016/j.jpba.2010.08.022 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3cXhtlensLzP
2. M Liang SL Klakamp C Funelas H Lu B Lam C Heri, et al. 2007 Detection of high- and low-affinity antibodies against a human monoclonal antibody using various technology platforms Assay Drug Dev Technol. 5 5 655 662 17939757 10.1089/adt.2007.089 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2sXht1KgtrvL (Pubitemid 47612203)
3. A Mikulskis D Yeung M Subramanyam L Amaravadi 2011 Solution ELISA as a platform of choice for development of robust, drug tolerant immunogenicity assays in support of drug development J Immunol Methods 365 38 49 21130095 10.1016/j.jim.2010.11.011 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3MXhsFyrtbg%3D
4. J Pan T Small D Qin S Li L Wang D Chen, et al. 2011 Comparison of the NIDS(R) rapid assay with ELISA methods in immunogenicity testing of two biotherapeutics J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods 63 150 159 20868758 10.1016/j.vascn.2010.09.003 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3MXit1GhtL0%3D
5. CI Soderstrom FP Spriggs W Song S Burrell 2011 Comparison of four distinct detection platforms using multiple ligand binding assay formats J Immunol Methods 371 1-2 106 113 21749873 10.1016/j.jim.2011.06.020 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3MXpvFajs7s%3D
6. X Wu JF Glickman BR Bowen MA Sills 2003 Comparison of assay technologies for a nuclear receptor assay screen reveals differences in the sets of identified functional antagonists J Biomol Screen 8 381 14567790 10.1177/1087057103256466 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3sXntlWrtLg%3D
7. Magana I, Thway T, Soto M, Ponce M, Salyers K, Ma M. A combined bioanalytical-serial sampling approach to support large molecule discovery studies in mice. American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists Annual Meeting. Washington D.C. 2011.
8. Roussis M, Beard E, Prakash K, Strouse R, Washabaugh M. High throughput process-related impurity testing using a Gyrolab(TM) workstation. Well-characterized biologic products. Washington D.C. 2011.
9. Chappell J, Raha N, Durham R, Sharma V, Lawrence J, Tew Z, et al. Validation of alzheimer biomarkers assays using various analytical techniques in CSF and plasma. American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists Annual Meeting. Atlanta, Georgia. 2008.
10. Gibbs J. Selecting the detection system-colorimetric, fluorescent, luminescent methods. Corning Life Sciences ELISA Technical Bulletin 2001:14.
11. Adler M, Schulz S, Spengler M. Cytokine quantification in drug development: A comparison of sensitive immunoassay platforms. Chimera Biotec GmbH, Dortmund Germany. http://www.chimera-biotec.de/data/pdf/Cytokine-Quant- Comp-Final.pdf. Report retreived on July 22, 2011.
12. B DeSilva W Smith R Weiner M Kelley J Smolec B Lee, et al. 2003 Recommendations for the bioanalytical method validation of ligand-binding assays to support pharmacokinetic assessments of macromolecules Pharm Res 20 11 16 10.1023/B:PHAM.0000003390.51761.3d (Pubitemid 37449466)
13. GDV Shankar L Amaravadi YC Barrett R Bowsher D Finco-Kent, et al. 2008 Recommendations for the validation of immunoassays used for detection of host antibodies against biotechnology products J Pharm Biomed Anal 48 5 14 10.1016/j.jpba.2008.09.020
14. JW Lee V Devanarayan YC Barrett R Weiner J Allinson S Fountain, et al. 2006 Fit-for-purpose method development and validation for successful biomarker measurement Pharm Res 22 2 17
15. ICH. ICH-Q2(R1): Validation of analytical procedures: text and methodology. International Conference on Harmonization 1995:9.
16. Food Drug and Cosmetics Act. 21CFR32029. United States of America 2010.
17. AR Mire-Sluis YC Barrett V Devanarayan E Koren H Liu M Maia, et al. 2004 Recommendations for the design and optimization of immunoassays used in the detection of host antibodies against biotechnology products J Immunol Methods 289 16 10.1016/j.jim.2004.06.002 (Pubitemid 38900899)
18. Entzeroth M, Flotow H, Condron P. Overview of high-throughput screening. New York: Wiley; 2001.
19. EF Ullman H Kirakossian AC Switchenko J Ishkanian M Ericson CA Wartchow, et al. 1996 Luminescent oxygen channeling assay (LOCI): sensitive, broadly applicable homogeneous immunoassay method Clin Chem 42 9 1518 1526 8787723 1:CAS:528:DyaK28Xls1Sqs7g%3D (Pubitemid 26300260)
20. CT Viswanathan S Bansal B Booth AJ DeStefano MJ Rose J Sailstad, et al. 2007 Quantitative bioanalytical methods validation and implementation: best practices for chromatographic and ligand binding assays Pharm Res 24 10 12 10.1007/s11095-007-9291-7 (Pubitemid 47389236)
21. Hack C, Groot ED, Felt-Bersma R, Nuijens J, Schijndel RSV, Eerenberg-Belmer A, et al. Increased plasma levels of interleukin-6 in sepsis. Blood. 1989;75(5):1704-11.
22. JA Lofgren S Dhandapani JJ Pennucci CM Abbott DT Mytych A Kaliyaperumal, et al. 2007 Comparing ELISA and surface plasmon resonance for assessing clinical immunogenicity of Panitumumab. 178 7467 7472 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2sXlsVOksb8%3D
23. D Sickert K Kroeger C Zickler E Chokote B Winkler J-M Grenet, et al. 2008 Improvement of drug tolerance in immunogenicity testing by acid treatment on biacore drug target interference J Immunol Methods 334 7 10.1016/j.jim.2008.01. 010
24. A Patton MC Mullenix SJ Swanson E Koren 2005 An acid dissociation bridging ELISA for detection of antibodies directed against therapeutic proteins in the presence of antigen J Immunol Methods 304 1-2 189 195 16107258 10.1016/j.jim.2005.06.014 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2MXpvFektbY%3D (Pubitemid 41262233)
25. CA Ray L Zhou J Tsoi L Uy J Gu J Malella, et al. 2010 A strategy for improving comparability across sites for ligand binding assays measuring therapeutic proteins J Pharmacol Biomed Anal 53 6 10.1016/j.jpba.2010.04.022
26. Wild D, editor. The immunoassay handbook. 3rd ed. Kidlington: Elsevier Ltd.; 2005. p. 364-70.
27. Kricka LJ, Wild D. The immunoassay handbook. 3rd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science; 2005. p. 192-209.
28. J Yohrling 2009 Ligand-binding assays: risk of using a platform supported by a single vendor Bioanalysis 1 3 8 10.4155/bio.09.46
29. J Anderson R Narasimhan 1979 Assessing project implementation risk: a methodological approach Manag Sci 25 6 10 10.1287/mnsc.25.6.512
30. VT Covello 1987 Decision analysis and risk management decision making: issues and methods Risk Anal 7 2 131 139 3112872 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1987. tb00978.x 1:STN:280:DyaL2s3ptVyrsg%3D%3D (Pubitemid 17117125)
31. A Klinke O Renn 2002 A new approach to risk evaluation and management: risk-based, precaution-based, and discourse-based strategies Risk Anal. 22 6 24 10.1111/1539-6924.00274 (Pubitemid 36034185)
32. IC Macmillan R Siegel PNS Narasimha 1985 Criteria used by venture capitalists to evaluate new venture proposals J Bus Ventur 1 1 119 128 10.1016/0883-9026(85)90011-4