Unique challenges of providing bioanalytical support for biological therapeutic pharmacokinetic programs

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: ▪ of interest

Bibliography

• 1  Leader B, Baca QJ, Golan DE. Protein therapeutics: a summary and pharmacological classification. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov.7,21–39 (2008).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 2  Liu CC, Schultz PJ. Adding new chemistries to the genetic code. An. Rev. Biochem.79,413–444 (2010).▪ Excellent review describing progress to augment the genetic codes of both prokaryotic and eukaryotic organisms with unnatural amino acids.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 3  US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. Good Laboratory Practice Regulations; Final Rule (docket no. 83N-0142 21). Federal Register 21 CFR Part 58 (1987).
  Google Scholar
• 4  Organization for economic co-operation development (OECD). Organization for Economic Co-operation Development Series on Principles of Good Laboratory Practice and Compliance Monitoring Number 4 (Revised). Consensus Document: Quality Assurance and Good Laboratory Practice. ENV/JM/MONO(99)20 (1999).
  Google Scholar
• 5  Shah VP, Midha KK, Dighe S et al. Analytical methods validation: bioavailability, bioequivalence and pharmacokinetic studies (conference report). Pharm. Res.9,588–592 (1992).▪ Summary of the first Crystal City meeting, which led the way for bioanalytical method validation standardization.
  Google Scholar
• 6  Health Products and Food Branch. Guidance for Industry: Conduct and Analysis of Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Studies – Part A and Part B. Health Products and Food Branch Guidance Document (1992).
  Google Scholar
• 7  Findlay J, Smith WC, Lee JW et al. Validation of immunoassays for bioanalysis: a pharmaceutical industry perspective. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal.21,1249–1273 (2000).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 8  DeSilva B, Smith W, Weiner R et al. Recommendations for the bioanalytical method validation of ligand-binding assays to support pharmacokinetic assessments of macromolecules. Pharm. Res.20(11),1885–1900 (2003).▪ Pivotal White Paper with clarification for ligand-binding assay method development, validation and in-study utilization.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 9  Miller KJ, Bowsher RR, Celniker A et al. Workshop on bioanalytical methods validation for macromolecules: summary report. Pharm. Res.18(9),1373–1383 (2001).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 10  Smolec J, DeSilva B, Smith W et al. Bioanalytical validation of macromolecules in support of pharmacokinetic studies. Pharm. Res.22(9),1425–1431 (2005).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 11  Mire-Sluis AR, Barrett YC, Devanarayan V et al. Recommendations for the design and optimization of immunoassays used in the detection of host antibodies against biotechnology products. J. Immunol. Methods289(1–2),1–16 (2004).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 12  Shankar G, Shores E, Wagner C, Mire-Sluis AR. Scientific and regulatory considerations on the immunogenicity of biologics. Trends Biotechnol.24(6),274–280 (2006).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 13  Gupta S, Indelicato SR, Jethwa V et al. Recommendations for the design, optimization and qualification of cell-based assays used for the detection of antibody responses elicited to biological therapeutics. J. Immunol. Methods321(1–2),1–18 (2007).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 14  Koren E, Smith HW, Shores E et al. Recommendations on risk-based strategies for detection and characterization of antibodies against biotechnology products. J. Immunol. Methods333(1–2),1–9 (2008).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 15  Shankar G, Devanarayan V, Amaradvadi L et al. Recommendations for the validation of immunoassays used for detection of host antibodies against biotechnology products. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal.48(5),1267–1281 (2008).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 16  Lee JW, Weiner RS, Sailstad JM et al. Method validation and measurement of biomarkers in nonclinical and clinical samples in drug development. A conference report. Pharm. Res.22(4),499–511 (2005).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 17  Lee JW, Devanarayan V, Barrett YC et al. Fit-for-purpose method development and validation for successful biomarker measurement. Pharm. Res.23(2),312–328 (2006).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 18  US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Center for Veternary Medicine. Guidance for Industry: Bioanalytical Method Validation. (2001).▪ Guidance was developed in response to two workshops held to discuss the bioanalytical method validations for both small molecules and macromolecules. A revision is expected in 2011.
  Google Scholar
• 19  Savoie N, Garofolo F, van Amsterdam P et al. 2009 White Paper on recent issues in regulated bioanalysis from the 3^rd calibration and validation group workshop. Bioanalysis2(1),53–68 (2010).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 20  Viswanathan CT, Bansal S, Booth B et al. Quantitative bioanalytical methods validation and implementation: best practices for chromatographic and ligand binding assays. AAPS J.9(1),E30–E42 (2007).▪ Written after the 3rd American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists/US FDA Bioanalytical Workshop in May 2006, this publication is included as a summary of the recommendations obtained at the workshop and expands upon the 2001 FDA guidance.
  Google Scholar
• 21  The European Agency, Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP). Draft guidance on the investigation of bioequivalence. EMEA CPMP/EWP/QWP/1401/98 Rev. 1, London, UK (2008).
  Google Scholar
• 22  van Amsterdam P, Arnold M, Bansal S et al. Building the global bioanalysis consortium – working towards a functional globally acceptable and harmonized guideline on bioanalytical method validation. Bioanalysis2(11),1801–1803 (2010).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 23  Ray CA, Patel V, Shih J et al. Application of multi-factorial design of experiments to successfully optimize immunoassays for robust measurements of therapeutic proteins. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal.49(2),311–318 (2009).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 24  Sittampalam GS, Smith WC, Miyakawa TW, Smith DL, McMorris C. Application of experimental design techniques to optimize a competitive ELISA. J. Immunol. Method190(2),151–161 (1996).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 25  Vancea S, Imre S, Donáth-Nagy G et al. Determination of free captopril in human plasma by liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry detection. Talanta79(2),436–441 (2009).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 26  Alvarez C, Wainer IW. Development of an automatic solid phase extraction and liquid chromatography mass spectrometry method by using a monolithic column for the analysis of cyclosporine A in human plasma. Talanta79(2),280–283 (2009).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 27  Li H, Rose M, Tran L et al. Development of a method for the sensitive and quantitative determination of hepcidin in human serum using LC–MS/MS. J. Pharmacol. Toxicol. Meth.59(3),171–180 (2009).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 28  Rodriguez-Cabaleiro D, Uytfanghe KV, Stove V, Fiers T, Thienpont LM. Pilot study for the standardization of insulin immunoassays with isotope dilution-liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry. Clin. Chem.53,1462–1469 (2007).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 29  Fierens C, Thienpont LM, Stōckl D, Willekens E, DeLeenheer AP. Quantitative analysis of urinary C-peptide by liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry with a stable isotopically labeled internal standard. J. Chromatogr. A896(1–2),275–278 (2000).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 30  Van den Broek I, Sparidans RW, Schellens JHM, Beijnen JH. Quantitative bioanalysis of peptides by liquid chromatography coupled to (tandem) mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. B Analyt. Technol. Biomed. Life Sci.872(1–2),1–22 (2008).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 31  Fenn JB, Mann M, Meng CK, Wong SF, Whitehouse CM. Electrospray ionization for mass spectrometry of large biomolecules. Science246(4–26),64–71 (1989).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 32  Moseley MA, Unger SE. Packed column liquid chromatography–electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry in the pharmaceutical sciences: characterization of protein mixtures. J. Microcol. Sep.4(5),393–398 (1992).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 33  Anderson L, Hunter CL. Quantitative mass spectrometric multiple reaction monitoring assays for major plasma proteins. Mol. Cell. Proteomics5,573–588 (2006).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 34  Whiteaker JR, Zhao L, Anderson L, Paulovich AG. An automated and multiplexed method for high throughput peptide immunoaffinity enrichment and multiple reaction monitoring mass spectrometry-based quantification of protein biomarkers. Mol. Cell. Proteomics9,184–196 (2010).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 35  Buscher BA, Gerritsen H, van Schöll I, Cnubben NH, Brüll LP. Quantitative analysis of tenecteplase in rat plasma samples using LC–MS/MS as an alternative to ELISA. J. Chromatogr. B Analyt. Technol. Biomed. Life Sci.852(1–2),631–634 (2007).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar