Pharmacokinetics of Bispecific Antibody

Current Pharmacology Reports

Volumn 3, Issue 3, 2017, Pages 126-137

  Chen, Yang ^a   Xu, Yan ^a  

^a JANSSEN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Bispecific antibody; Pharmacokinetics

Indexed keywords

AFM13; BISPECIFIC ANTIBODY; BLINATUMOMAB; CATUMAXOMAB; CD3 ANTIGEN; CETUXIMAB; DULIGOTUZUMAB; DUVORTUXIZUMAB; EMICIZUMAB; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; ERTUMAXOMAB; FC RECEPTOR; IMMUNOGLOBULIN G; INTERLEUKIN 17; NAVICIXIZUMAB; NEONATAL RECEPTOR; OZORALIZUMAB; PANITUMUMAB; RECEPTOR; SOLITOMAB; SOMATOMEDIN C RECEPTOR; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; VOBARILIZUMAB;

BINDING AFFINITY; BLOOD BRAIN BARRIER; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; COLORECTAL CANCER; DRUG BINDING; DRUG CLEARANCE; DRUG METABOLISM; DRUG RECEPTOR BINDING; DRUG UPTAKE; HUMAN; MOLECULAR SIZE; MOLECULAR WEIGHT; NONHUMAN; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SOLID MALIGNANT NEOPLASM; TUMOR GROWTH; TUMOR XENOGRAFT;

EID: 85018788237     PISSN: None     EISSN: 2198641X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s40495-017-0090-5     Document Type: Review

References (47)

1. •• Spiess C, Zhai Q, Carter PJ. Alternative molecular formats and therapeutic applications for bispecific antibodies. Mol Immunol. 2015;67(2 Pt A):95–106. This article provides a comprehensive review of bi-specific antibody molecular formats, mechanisms of action, preclincal and clinical development
2. Kontermann RE, Brinkmann U. Bispecific antibodies. Drug Discov Today. 2015;20(7):838–47.
3. Thakur A, Lum LG. “NextGen” biologics: bispecific antibodies and emerging clinical results. Expert Opin Biol Ther. 2016;16(5):675–88.
4. Bano JC, Chames P, Baty D, Kerfelec B. Taking up cancer immunotherapy challenges: bispecific antibodies, the path forward? Antibodies. 2016; 5(1).
5. (EMA), E.M.A. Catumaxomab. Summary of product characteristics (SmPC). 2009; Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_-_Product_Information/human/000972/WC500051809.pdf.
6. (EMA), E.M.A. Blinatumomab. Summary of product characteristics (SmPC). 2016; Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/health/documents/community-register/2015/20151123133349/anx_133349_en.pdf.
7. (FDA), U.F.a.D.A. Blinatumomab. Package Insert. 2014; Available from: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2014/125557lbl.pdf.
8. Brinkmann U, Kontermann RE. The making of bispecific antibodies. MAbs. 2017;9(2):182–212.
9. Nisonoff A, Wissler FC, Lipman LN. Properties of the major component of a peptic digest of rabbit antibody. Science. 1960;132(3441):1770–1.
10. Webster CI, et al. Brain penetration, target engagement, and disposition of the blood-brain barrier-crossing bispecific antibody antagonist of metabotropic glutamate receptor type 1. FASEB J. 2016;30(5):1927–40.
11. Yu YJ, et al. Therapeutic bispecific antibodies cross the blood-brain barrier in nonhuman primates. Sci Transl Med. 2014;6(261):261ra154.
12. Couch JA, et al. Addressing safety liabilities of TfR bispecific antibodies that cross the blood-brain barrier. Sci Transl Med. 2013;5(183):183ra57. 1-12
13. Lutterbuese R, et al. T cell-engaging BiTE antibodies specific for EGFR potently eliminate KRAS- and BRAF-mutated colorectal cancer cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107(28):12605–10.
14. Junttila TT, et al. Antitumor efficacy of a bispecific antibody that targets HER2 and activates T cells. Cancer Res. 2014;74(19):5561–71.
15. Svecova, D., et al. Safety and efficacy of multiple ascending doses of subcutaneous M1095, an anti-interleukin-17A/F bispecific nanobody, in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Available from: http://www.ablynx.com/uploads/data/files/170301_m1095_psoriasis_003%20for%20aad2017.pdf
16. Dong J, et al. A stable IgG-like bispecific antibody targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor and the type I insulin-like growth factor receptor demonstrates superior anti-tumor activity. MAbs. 2011;3(3):273–88.
17. Wec AZ, et al. A “Trojan horse” bispecific-antibody strategy for broad protection against ebolaviruses. Science. 2016;354(6310):350–4.
18. Sebastian M, et al. Catumaxomab: a bispecific trifunctional antibody. Drugs Today (Barc). 2009;45(8):589–97.
19. •• Ruf P, et al. Pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity and bioactivity of the therapeutic antibody catumaxomab intraperitoneally administered to cancer patients. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2010;69(6):617–25. This article reported the results of clincial and pre-clinical pharmacokinetic studies of catumaxomab. Bioavailability of catumaxomab was found to be related to tumor burden and effector cells in the animal model
20. clinicaltrials.gov. A phase 1b open-label study investigating the safety and pharmacokinetics of administration of subcutaneous blinatumomab for the treatment of relapsed/refractory indolent non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02961881
21. Porter CJ, Charman SA. Lymphatic transport of proteins after subcutaneous administration. J Pharm Sci. 2000;89(3):297–310.
22. Richter WF, Bhansali SG, Morris ME. Mechanistic determinants of biotherapeutics absorption following SC administration. AAPS J. 2012;14(3):559–70.
23. Lobo ED, Hansen RJ, Balthasar JP. Antibody pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. J Pharm Sci. 2004;93(11):2645–68.
24. Wang W, Wang EQ, Balthasar JP. Monoclonal antibody pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2008;84(5):548–58.
25. •• Zhu M, et al. Blinatumomab, a Bispecific T-cell Engager (BiTE((R))) for CD-19 targeted cancer immunotherapy: clinical pharmacology and its implications. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2016;55(10):1271–88. This article reported the PK/PD related aspects of blinatumomab from multiple clincial studies. Mechanism invovled in blinatumomab disposition, determinants of PK varibility, and PK/PD considerations in dose selection were also discussed
26. Baxter LT, et al. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic model for specific and nonspecific monoclonal antibodies and fragments in normal tissues and human tumor xenografts in nude mice. Cancer Res. 1994;54(6):1517–28.
27. Wurster U, Haas J. Passage of intravenous immunoglobulin and interaction with the CNS. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1994;57(Suppl):21–5.
28. Yu YJ, et al. Boosting brain uptake of a therapeutic antibody by reducing its affinity for a transcytosis target. Sci Transl Med. 2011;3(84):84ra44.
29. van Osdol W, Fujimori K, Weinstein JN. An analysis of monoclonal antibody distribution in microscopic tumor nodules: consequences of a “binding site barrier”. Cancer Res. 1991;51(18):4776–84.
30. Adams GP, et al. High affinity restricts the localization and tumor penetration of single-chain fv antibody molecules. Cancer Res. 2001;61(12):4750–5.
31. Verel I, et al. Tumor targeting properties of monoclonal antibodies with different affinity for target antigen CD44V6 in nude mice bearing head-and-neck cancer xenografts. Int J Cancer. 2002;99(3):396–402.
32. Rudnick SI, et al. Influence of affinity and antigen internalization on the uptake and penetration of anti-HER2 antibodies in solid tumors. Cancer Res. 2011;71(6):2250–9.
33. Bortoletto N, et al. Optimizing anti-CD3 affinity for effective T cell targeting against tumor cells. Eur J Immunol. 2002;32(11):3102–7.
34. List T, Neri D. Biodistribution studies with tumor-targeting bispecific antibodies reveal selective accumulation at the tumor site. MAbs. 2012;4(6):775–83.
35. Nelson AL. Antibody fragments: hope and hype. MAbs. 2010;2(1):77–83.
36. Sun LL, et al. Anti-CD20/CD3 T cell-dependent bispecific antibody for the treatment of B cell malignancies. Sci Transl Med. 2015;7(287):287ra70.
37. Rothe A, et al. A phase 1 study of the bispecific anti-CD30/CD16A antibody construct AFM13 in patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2015;125(26):4024–31.
38. • Deng R, et al. Monoclonal antibodies: what are the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic considerations for drug development? Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2012;8(2):141–60. This article is a recent comprehensive review paper on conventional antibody’s PK and PD
39. Yazaki PJ, et al. A series of anti-CEA/anti-DOTA bispecific antibody formats evaluated for pre-targeting: comparison of tumor uptake and blood clearance. Protein Eng Des Sel. 2013;26(3):187–93.
40. Datta-Mannan A, et al. Aberrant bispecific antibody pharmacokinetics linked to liver sinusoidal endothelium clearance mechanism in cynomolgus monkeys. MAbs. 2016;8(5):969–82.
41. Croasdale R, et al. Development of tetravalent IgG1 dual targeting IGF-1R-EGFR antibodies with potent tumor inhibition. Arch Biochem Biophys. 2012;526(2):206–18.
42. Dong J, et al. Stable IgG-like bispecific antibodies directed toward the type I insulin-like growth factor receptor demonstrate enhanced ligand blockade and anti-tumor activity. J Biol Chem. 2011;286(6):4703–17.
43. Hu L, Hansen RJ. Issues, challenges, and opportunities in model-based drug development for monoclonal antibodies. J Pharm Sci. 2013;102(9):2898–908.
44. Li L, Gardner I, Gill K, Modeling the binding kinetics of bispecific antibodies under the framework of a minimal human PBPK model, in AAPS NBC2014.
45. Gadkar K, et al. Quantitative systems pharmacology: a promising approach for translational pharmacology. Drug Discov Today Technol. 2016;21-22:57–65.
46. Chudasama VL, et al. Simulations of site-specific target-mediated pharmacokinetic models for guiding the development of bispecific antibodies. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn. 2015;42(1):1–18.
47. Gadkar K, et al. Mathematical PKPD and safety model of bispecific TfR/BACE1 antibodies for the optimization of antibody uptake in brain. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2016;101:53–61.