Niraj K. Tripathi

Comparative Nonclinical Assessments of the Proposed Biosimilar PF-05280586 and Rituximab (MabThera®)

Comparative nonclinical studies were conducted with the proposed biosimilar PF-05280586 and rituximab-EU (MabThera®). In side-by-side analyses, peptide maps and complement-dependent cytotoxicity assay results were similar. Sexually-mature cynomolgus monkeys were administered PF-05280586 or rituximab-EU as a single dose of 0, 2, 10, or 20 mg/kg on day 1 and observed for 92 days (single-dose study) or as 5 weekly injections of 0 or 20 mg/kg and necropsied on day 30, the day after the 5th dose, or on day 121 (repeat-dose study). The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles for both molecules were similar. Marked depletion of peripheral blood B cells 4 days after dosing was followed by near or complete repletion (single-dose study) or partial repletion (repeat-dose study). In the single-dose study, anti-drug antibodies (ADA) were detected by day 29 in all animals administered PF-05280586 or rituximab-EU and persisted through day 85, the last day tested. In the repeat-dose study, ADA were detected on day 121 in 50% of animals administered PF-05280586 or rituximab-EU. Both molecules were well tolerated at all doses. In all endpoints evaluated, PF-05280586 exhibited similarity to rituximab-EU.

Characterization, Biomarkers, and Reversibility of a Monoclonal Antibody-induced Immune Complex Disease in Cynomolgus Monkeys (Macaca fascicularis)

Two 6-month repeat-dose toxicity studies in cynomolgus monkeys illustrated immune complex–mediated adverse findings in individual monkeys and identified parameters that potentially signal the onset of immune complex–mediated reactions following administration of RN6G, a monoclonal antibody (mAb). In the first study, 3 monkeys exhibited nondose-dependent severe clinical signs accompanied by decreased erythrocytes with increased reticulocytes, neutrophilia, monocytosis, thrombocytopenia, coagulopathy, decreased albumin, azotemia, and increased serum levels of activated complement products, prompting unscheduled euthanasia. Histologically, immunohistochemical localization of RN6G was associated with monkey immunoglobulin and complement components in glomeruli and other tissues, attributable to immune complex disease (ICD). All 3 animals also had anti-RN6G antibodies and decreased plasma levels of RN6G. Subsequently, an investigational study was designed and conducted with regulatory agency input to detect early onset of ICD and assess reversibility to support further clinical development. Dosing of individual animals ceased when biomarkers of ICD indicated adverse findings. Of the 12 monkeys, 1 developed anti-RN6G antibodies and decreased RN6G exposure that preceded elevations in complement products, interleukin-6, and coagulation parameters and decreases in albumin and fibrinogen. All findings in this monkey, except for antidrug antibody (ADA), reversed after cessation of dosing without progressing to adverse sequelae typically associated with ICD.

Principles for Assessing Adversity in Toxicologic Clinical Pathology

There is limited direction in the literature or regulatory guidance on determination of adversity for clinical pathology (CP) biomarkers in preclinical safety studies. Toxicologic clinical pathologists representing the American Society for Veterinary Clinical Pathology—Regulatory Affairs Committee and Society of Toxicologic Pathology—Clinical Pathology Interest Group identified principles, overall approach, and unique considerations for assessing adversity in CP data interpretation to provide a consensus opinion. Emphasized is the need for pathophysiologic context and a weight-of-evidence approach. Most CP biomarkers do not have the potential to be adverse in isolation, regardless of magnitude of change. Rather, they quantify or describe the impact of effects, provide adjunct or supportive information regarding a process or pathogenesis, and provide translational biomarkers of effect. Most often, CP changes are part of a constellation of findings that collectively are adverse. Thus, most CP changes must be interpreted in conjunction with other study findings and require contextual and integrative interpretation. Exceptions include critical CP changes without correlates that indicate a health risk in the tested species. Overall, CP changes should not be interpreted in isolation and their adversity is best addressed with an integrated approach.

STP Best Practices for Evaluating Clinical Pathology in Pharmaceutical Recovery Studies

The Society of Toxicologic Pathology formed a working group in collaboration with the American Society for Veterinary Clinical Pathology to provide recommendations for the appropriate inclusion of clinical pathology evaluation in recovery arms of nonclinical toxicity studies but not on when to perform recovery studies. Evaluation of the recovery of clinical pathology findings is not required routinely but provides useful information on risk assessment in nonclinical toxicity studies and is recommended when the ability of the organ to recover is uncertain. The study design generally requires inclusion of concurrent controls to separate procedure-related changes from test article–related changes, but return of clinical pathology values toward baseline may be sufficient in some cases. Evaluation of either a select or full panel of standard hematology, coagulation, and serum and urine chemistry biomarkers can be scientifically justified. It is also acceptable to redesignate dosing phase animals to the recovery phase or vice versa to optimize data interpretation. Assessment of delayed toxicity during the recovery phase is not required but may be appropriate in development programs with unique concerns. Evaluation of the recovery of clinical pathology data for vaccine development is required and, for efficacy markers, is recommended if it furthers pharmacologic understanding.

Nontraditional Applications in Clinical Pathology

Most published reviews of preclinical toxicological clinical pathology focus on the fundamental aspects of hematology, clinical chemistry, coagulation, and urinalysis in routine toxicology animal species, for example, rats, mice, dogs, and nonhuman primates. The objective of this continuing education course was to present and discuss contemporary examples of nonroutine applications of clinical pathology endpoints used in the drug development setting. Area experts discussed bone turnover markers of laboratory animal species, clinical pathology of pregnant and growing laboratory animals, clinical pathology of nonroutine laboratory animal species, and unique applications of the Siemens Advia® hematology analyzer. This article is a summary based on a presentation given at the 31st Annual Symposium of the Society of Toxicologic Pathology, during the Continuing Education Course titled “Nontraditional Applications of Clinical Pathology in Drug Discovery and Preclinical Toxicology.”

Influence of Study Design Variables on Clinical Pathology Data

A number of factors related to study design have the potential to impact clinical pathology test results during the conduct of nonclinical safety studies. A thorough understanding of these factors is paramount in drawing accurate conclusions from clinical pathology data generated during such studies, particularly when attempting to make the distinction between test article and nontest article–related effects. Study design and conduct variables with potential to impact clinical pathology data discussed in this overview include those related to species and test system, animal age, animal care and husbandry practices, fasting, acclimatization periods, effects of transportation and stressors, route of administration, effects of in-life and surgical procedures, influence of study length, timing of blood collections, impact of vehicle/formulation composition, and some general concepts related to drug class. The material presented here is a summary based on information presented at the 35th Annual Symposium of the Society of Toxicologic Pathology (June 2016), during Symposium Session 2 titled “Deciphering Sources of Variability in Clinical Pathology—It’s Not Just about the Numbers.”

Nonclinical pharmacology and toxicology of the first biosimilar insulin glargine drug product (BASAGLAR®/ABASAGLAR®) approved in the European Union

ABSTRACT Basaglar®/Abasaglar® (Lilly insulin glargine [LY IGlar]) is a long‐acting human insulin analogue drug product granted marketing authorisation as a biosimilar to Lantus® (Sanofi insulin glargine [SA IGlar]) by the European Medicines Agency. We assessed the similarity of LY IGlar to the reference drug product, European Union–sourced SA IGlar (EU‐SA IGlar), using nonclinical in vitro and in vivo studies. No biologically relevant differences were observed for receptor binding affinity at either the insulin or insulin‐like growth factor‐1 (IGF‐1) receptors, or in assays of functional or de novo lipogenic activity. The mitogenic potential of LY IGlar and EU‐SA IGlar was similar when tested in both insulin‐ and IGF‐1 receptor dominant cell systems. Repeated subcutaneous daily dosing of rats for 4 weeks with 0, 0.3, 1.0, or 2.0 mg/kg LY IGlar and EU‐SA IGlar produced mortalities and clinical signs consistent with severe hypoglycaemia. Glucodynamic profiles of LY IGlar and EU‐SA IGlar in satellite animals showed comparable dose‐related hypoglycaemia. Severe hypoglycaemia was associated with axonal degeneration of the sciatic nerve; the incidence and severity were low and did not differ between LY IGlar and EU‐SA IGlar. These results demonstrated no biologically relevant differences in toxicity between LY IGlar and EU‐SA IGlar. HIGHLIGHTSBasaglar®/Abasaglar® (LY IGlar) is the first biosimilar insulin glargine drug product approved in the European Union.We compared nonclinical profiles of LY IGlar and European Union–sourced Lantus (EU‐SA IGlar).We found no biologically relevant differences between LY IGlar and EU‐SA IGlar.

A Diagnostic Approach for Rodent Progressive Cardiomyopathy and Like Lesions in Toxicology Studies up to 28 Days in the Sprague Dawley Rat (Part 2 of 2)

To test the diagnostic approach described in part 1 of this article, 2 exercises were completed by pathologists from multiple companies/agencies. Pathologist’s examination of whole slide image (WSI) heart sections from rats using personal diagnostic approaches (exercise #1) corroborated conclusions from study #1. Using the diagnostic approach described in part 1, these pathologists examined the same WSI heart sections (exercise #2) to determine whether that approach increased consistency of diagnosis of rodent progressive cardiomyopathy (PCM) lesions. In exercise #2, there was improved consistency of categorization of small borderline morphologies and mild lesions, but a decrement in consistency of categorizing minimal lesions. Exercises 1 and 2 suggest the described diagnostic approach is representative of that in use by the majority of toxicologic pathologists across companies/agencies and that application by all may improve diagnostic consistency of PCM/like lesions. Additionally, a criterion of approximately 5% heart section involvement is suggested for separating mild from moderate or greater severity. While evidence is not absolute, until further investigation shows otherwise, microscopic changes resembling PCM, but located in the epicardial and subepicardial region of the right ventricle, may be considered as part of the spectrum of PCM.

Deciphering Sources of Variability in Clinical Pathology It’s Not Just about the Numbers

The objectives of this session were to explore causes of variability in clinical pathology data due to preanalytical and analytical variables as well as study design and other procedures that occur in toxicity testing studies. The presenters highlighted challenges associated with such variability in differentiating test article–related effects from the effects of experimental procedures and its impact on overall data interpretation. These presentations focused on preanalytical and analytical variables and study design–related factors and their influence on clinical pathology data, and the importance of various factors that influence data interpretation including statistical analysis and reference intervals. Overall, these presentations touched upon potential effect of many variables on clinical pathology parameters, including animal physiology, sample collection process, specimen handling and analysis, study design, and some discussion points on how to manage those variables to ensure accurate interpretation of clinical pathology data in toxicity studies. This article is a brief synopsis of presentations given in a session entitled “Deciphering Sources of Variability in Clinical Pathology—It’s Not Just about the Numbers” that occurred at the 35th Annual Symposium of the Society of Toxicologic Pathology in San Diego, California.

Clinical Pathology Assays in Immunopathology

Clinical pathology endpoints are evaluated during the course of toxicity studies to monitor structural and functional changes in organs and tissues in response to administration or withdrawal of a test item. A variety of assays can be performed in a clinical pathology laboratory with body fluids using either clinical pathology analyzers or other instruments. Information from the basic assays in clinical pathology, including hematology, clinical chemistry, urinalysis and coagulation are used with other safety assessment endpoints to evaluate immunotoxicity. Non-routine clinical pathology variables, such as acute phase proteins, cytokines, complement, hormones, autoantibodies, and bone marrow cytology are also included in preclinical toxicity studies as supplementary assays to ensure adequate interpretation of test item-related effects on the immune system. This chapter will describe the clinical pathology assays that are most useful to assess immunotoxicity.