Gene therapy, cell therapy and vaccine research have led to an increased use of qPCR/ddPCR in bioanalytical laboratories. CROs are progressively undertaking the development and validation of qPCR and ddPCR assays. Currently, however, there is limited regulatory guidance for the use of qPCR and a complete lack of any regulatory guidelines for the use of the newer ddPCR to support regulated bioanalysis. Hence, the Global CRO Council in Bioanalysis (GCC) has issued this White Paper to provide; 1) a consensus on the different validation parameters required to support qPCR/ddPCR assays; 2) a harmonized approach to their validation and 3) a consistent development of standard operating procedures (SOPs) for all the bioanalytical laboratories using these techniques.

Keywords:

References

1. Premkumar N, Lowes S, Jersey J et al. Formation of a Global Contract Research Organization Council for Bioanalysis. Bioanalysis 2(11), 1797–1800 (2010).
CASGoogle Scholar
2. Breda M, Garofolo F, Caturla MC et al. Conference Report: The 3rd Global CRO Council for Bioanalysis at the International Reid Bioanalytical Forum. Bioanalysis 3(24), 2721–2727 (2011).
CASGoogle Scholar
3. Lowes S, Jersey J, Shoup R et al. Conference Report: 4th Global CRO Council for Bioanalysis: coadministered drugs stability, EMA/US FDA Guidelines, 483s and Carryover. Bioanalysis 4(7), 763–768 (2012).
CASGoogle Scholar
4. Nicholson R, Lowes S, Caturla MC et al. Conference Report: 6th GCC focus on LBA: critical reagents, positive controls and reference standards; specificity for endogenous compounds; biomarkers; biosimilars. Bioanalysis 4(19), 2335–2342 (2012).
CASGoogle Scholar
5. Rocci M, Lowes S, Shoup R et al. 7th GCC Insights: incurred samples use; fit-for-purpose validation, solution stability, electronic laboratory notebook and hyperlipidemic matrix testing. Bioanalysis 6(20), 2713–2720 (2014).
CASGoogle Scholar
6. Hayes R, LeLacheur R, Dumont I et al. 9th GCC closed forum: CAPA in regulated bioanalysis; method robustness, biosimilars, preclinical method validation, endogenous biomarkers, whole blood stability, regulatory audit experiences and electronic laboratory notebooks. Bioanalysis 8(6), 487–495 (2016).
CASGoogle Scholar
7. Islam R, Briscoe C, Bower J et al. 11th GCC Closed Forum: cumulative stability; matrix stability; immunogenicity assays; laboratory manuals; biosimilars; chiral methods; hybrid LBA/LCMS assays; fit-for-purpose validation; China Food and Drug Administration bioanalytical method validation. Bioanalysis 10(7), 433–444 (2018).
CASGoogle Scholar
8. Briscoe C, Hughes N, Hayes R et al. 12th GCC Closed Forum: critical reagents; oligonucleotides; CoA; method transfer; HRMS; flow cytometry; regulatory findings; stability and immunogenicity. Bioanalysis 11(12), 1129–1138 (2019).
CASGoogle Scholar
9. Bower J, Fast D, Garofolo F et al. 8th GCC: Consolidated feedback to US FDA on the 2013 Draft FDA guidance on bioanalytical method validation. Bioanalysis 6(22), 2957–2963 (2014).
CASGoogle Scholar
10. Cape S, Islam R, Nehls C et al. The 10th GCC Closed Forum: rejected data, GCP in bioanalysis, extract stability, BAV, processed batch acceptance, matrix stability, critical reagents, ELN and data integrity and counteracting fraud. Bioanalysis 9(7), 505–516 (2017).
CASGoogle Scholar
11. Bower J, Zimmer J, McCown S et al. Recommendations for the content and management of Certificates of Analysis for reference standards from the GCC for bioanalysis. Bioanalysis 13(8), (2021).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
12. Nehls C, Buonarati M, Cape S et al. GCC Consolidated Feedback to ICH on the 2019 ICH M10 Bioanalytical Method Validation Draft Guideline. Bioanalysis 11(18s), 1–228 (2019).
CASGoogle Scholar
13. Islam R, Kar S, Ritzén H et al. Recommendations for classification of commercial LBA kits for biomarkers in drug development from the GCC for bioanalysis. Bioanalysis 11(7), 645–653 (2019).
CASGoogle Scholar
14. Lowes S, LeLacheur R, Shoup R et al. Recommendations on incurred sample stability (ISS) by GCC. Bioanalysis 6(18), 2385–2390 (2014).
CASGoogle Scholar
15. Hougton R, Gouty D, Allinson J et al. Recommendations on biomarker bioanalytical method validation by GCC. Bioanalysis 4(20), 2439–2446 (2012).
CASGoogle Scholar
16. Lowes S, Boterman M, Doig M et al. Recommendations on bioanalytical method stability implications of co-administered and co-formulated drugs by Global CRO Council for Bioanalysis (GCC). Bioanalysis 4(17), 2117–2126 (2012).
CASGoogle Scholar
17. Boterman M, Doig M, Breda M et al. Recommendations on the interpretation of the new European Medicines Agency Guideline on bioanalytical method validation by Global CRO Council for Bioanalysis (GCC). Bioanalysis 4(6), 651–660 (2012).
CASGoogle Scholar
18. Sangster T, Maltas J, Struwe P et al. Recommendations on ISR in multi analyte assays, QA/bioanalytical consultants and GCP by Global CRO Council for Bioanalysis (GCC). Bioanalysis 4(14), 1723–1730 (2012).
CASGoogle Scholar
19. Lowes S, Jersey J, Shoup R et al. Recommendations on: internal standard criteria, stability, incurred sample reanalysis and recent 483s by the Global CRO Council for Bioanalysis. Bioanalysis 3(12), 1323–1332 (2011).
CASGoogle Scholar
20. European Medicines Agency. EMA General Principles to Address Virus and Vector Shedding (EMEA/CHMP/ICH/449035/2009) (2009). https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/international-conference-harmonisation-technical-requirements-registration-pharmaceuticals-human-use_en-10.pdf
Google Scholar
21. US FDA Center for biologics evaluation and research. Guidance for industry: design and analysis of shedding studies for virus or bacteria-based gene therapy and oncolytic products (2015). https://www.fda.gov/media/89036/download
Google Scholar
22. US FDA Center for biologics evaluation and research. Guidance for industry: long term follow-up after administration of human gene therapy products (2020). https://www.fda.gov/media/113768/download
Google Scholar
23. Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency. PMDA Japan guidance on ensuring the quality and safety of products for gene therapy (2019). https://www.pmda.go.jp/files/000235607.pdf
Google Scholar
24. Piccoli S, Mehta D, Vitaliti A et al. 2019 White Paper on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis: FDA Immunogenicity Guidance, Gene Therapy, Critical Reagents, Biomarkers and Flow Cytometry Validation (Part 3-Recommendations on 2019 FDA Immunogenicity Guidance, Gene Therapy Bioanalytical Challenges, St. Bioanalysis (2019).
Google Scholar
25. US FDA Center for biologics evaluation and research. Guidance for Industry: Scientific Considerations in Demonstrating Biosimilarity to a Reference Product (2015). https://www.fda.gov/media/82647/download
Google Scholar
26. Ma H, Bell KN, Loker RN. qPCR and qRT-PCR analysis: Regulatory points to consider when conducting biodistribution and vector shedding studies. Mol. Ther. – Methods Clin. Dev. 20, 152–168 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
27. Stevenson L, Richards S, Pillutla R et al. 2018 White Paper on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis: focus on flow cytometry, gene therapy, cut points and key clarifications on BAV (Part 3 – LBA/cell-based assays: immunogenicity, biomarkers and PK assays). Bioanalysis 10(24), 1973–2001 (2018).
CASGoogle Scholar
28. Piccoli S, Mehta D, Vitaliti A et al. 2019 White Paper on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis: FDA Immunogenicity Guidance, Gene Therapy, Critical Reagents, Biomarkers and Flow Cytometry Validation (Part 3 – Recommendations on 2019 FDA Immunogenicity Guidance, Gene Therapy Bioanalytical Challenges, Strategies for Critical Reagent Management, Biomarker Assay Validation, Flow Cytometry Validation & CLSI H62). Bioanalysis 2207–2244 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
29. Corsaro B, Yang T, Murphy R et al. 2020 White Paper on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis: Vaccine Assay Validation, qPCR Assay Validation, QC for CAR-T Flow Cytometry, NAb Assay Harmonization and ELISpot Validation (Part 3 – Recommendations on Immunogenicity Assay Strategies, NAb Assays, Biosimilars and FDA/EMA Immunogenicity Guidance/Guideline, Gene & Cell Therapy and Vaccine Assays). Bioanalysis 13(6), 415–463 (2021).
CASGoogle Scholar
30. Sugimoto H, Chen S, Minembe JP et al. Insights on droplet digital pcr-based cellular kinetics and biodistribution assay support for CAR-T cell therapy. AAPS J. 23(2), (2021).
Google Scholar
31. European Medicines Agency. Guideline on quality, non-clinical and clinical aspects of medicinal products containing genetically modified cells. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-quality-non-clinical-clinical-aspects-medicinal-products-containing-genetically-modified_en-0.pdf (2020).
Google Scholar
32. Martinez M, Moon EK. CAR T cells for solid tumors: new strategies for finding, infiltrating, and surviving in the tumor microenvironment. Front. Immunol. 10 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
33. Roberts CC, Swoyer R, Bryan JT, Taddeo FJ. Comparison of real-time multiplex human papillomavirus (HPV) PCR assays with the linear array HPV genotyping PCR assay and influence of DNA extraction method on HPV detection. J. Clin. Microbiol. 49(5), 1899–1906 (2011).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
34. Wang Y, Kang H, Liu X, Tong Z. Combination of RT-qPCR testing and clinical features for diagnosis of COVID-19 facilitates management of SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. J. Med. Virol. 92(6), 538–539 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
35. Bustin SA, Benes V, Garson JA et al. The MIQE guidelines: minimum information for publication of quantitative real-time PCR experiments. Clin. Chem. 55(4), 611–622 (2009).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
36. Whale AS, de Spiegelaere W, Trypsteen W et al. The digital MIQE guidelines update: minimum information for publication of quantitative digital PCR experiments for 2020. Clin. Chem. 66(8), 1012–1029 (2020).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
37. Yang TY, Doddareddy R. Considerations in the development and validation of real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction and its application in regulated bioanalysis to characterize the cellular kinetics of CAR-T products in clinical studies. Bioanalysis 13(2), 115–128 (2021).
CASGoogle Scholar
38. Rangarajan S, Walsh L, Lester W et al. AAV5-Factor VIII gene transfer in severe hemophilia A. N. Engl. J. Med. 377(26), 2519–2530 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
39. Bustin S, Huggett J. qPCR primer design revisited. Biomol. Detect. Quantif. 14, 19–28 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
40. US FDA Center for biologics evaluation and research. Guidance for industry: bioanalytical method validation (2018). https://www.fda.gov/media/70858/download
Google Scholar
41. Zhao Y, Stepto H, Schneider CK. Development of the first World Health Organization lentiviral vector standard: toward the production control and standardization of lentivirus-based gene therapy products. Human Gene Ther. Methods 28(4), 205–214 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
42. Global CRO Council for Bioanalysis (2021). http://www.global-cro-council.org
Google Scholar

Vol. 14, No. 12

Metrics

Downloaded 11,911 times

History

Received 29 March 2022

Accepted 27 May 2022

Published online 15 June 2022

Published in print June 2022

Information

Keywords

Financial & competing interests disclosure

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.

PDF download