Comparison of an antibody capture and a cell capture ligand-binding assay to quantify a monoclonal therapeutic in serum.

BACKGROUND Ligand-binding assays are a tool used for the quantification of antibody therapies. When assay format changes are required during the drug development process it is advisable to assess these formats ensuring the resulting data can be compared. In this article, we outline the method and results obtained comparing an anti-idiotype capture and a cell-capture ligand-binding assay. RESULTS Comparison of results for all quality controls between assays were within acceptance limits, with the exception of the low quality control. Statistical analysis of the results demonstrated 95% power to detect a 20% difference between data sets. Subsequent analysis of unknown samples further confirmed 98% power to detect a 20% difference between data sets. CONCLUSION Results obtained using two assay formats are statistically comparable to each other.

[1]  P. Twomey,et al.  How to use linear regression and correlation in quantitative method comparison studies , 2008, International journal of clinical practice.

[2]  Brian J Eastwood,et al.  A Comparison of Assay Performance Measures in Screening Assays: Signal Window, Z' Factor, and Assay Variability Ratio , 2006, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[3]  P. Twomey.  How to use difference plots in quantitative method comparison studies , 2006, Annals of clinical biochemistry.

[4]  Sridhar Samineni,et al.  Optimization, Comparison, and Application of Colorimetric vs. Chemiluminescence Based Indirect Sandwich ELISA for Measurement of Human IL‐23 , 2006, Journal of immunoassay & immunochemistry.

[5]  J. P. McCoy,et al.  Multiplex bead array assays: performance evaluation and comparison of sensitivity to ELISA. , 2006, Methods.

[6]  K. H. Pollock,et al.  Biostatistics: A Foundation for Analysis in the Health Sciences. , 1976 .

[7]  Binodh DeSilva,et al.  Recommendations for the Bioanalytical Method Validation of Ligand-Binding Assays to Support Pharmacokinetic Assessments of Macromolecules , 2003, Pharmaceutical Research.

[8]  Binodh DeSilva,et al.  A strategy for improving comparability across sites for ligand binding assays measuring therapeutic proteins. , 2010, Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis.

[9]  A. Kennedy,et al.  Three new assays for rituximab based on its immunological activity or antigenic properties: analyses of sera and plasmas of RTX-treated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia and other B cell lymphomas. , 2004, Journal of immunological methods.

[10]  K. Terao,et al.  Molecular evolution of IgG subclass among nonhuman primates: Implication of differences in antigenic determinants among apes , 2002, Primates.

[11]  J M Bland,et al.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement , 1986 .

[12]  Jian Li,et al.  Detection of low-affinity anti-drug antibodies and improved drug tolerance in immunogenicity testing by Octet(®) biolayer interferometry. , 2011, Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis.

[13]  Beverly J. Volicer,et al.  Biostatistics: A Foundation for Analysis in the Health Sciences , 1979 .

[14]  Denise M O'Hara,et al.  Critical ligand binding reagent preparation/selection: When specificity depends on reagents , 2007, The AAPS Journal.

[15]  Binodh DeSilva,et al.  Experimental and statistical approaches in method cross-validation to support pharmacokinetic decisions. , 2009, Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis.

[16]  L. Lerner,et al.  A rapid method for determining dynamic binding capacity of resins for the purification of proteins. , 2008, Protein expression and purification.

[17]  M. Maurel,et al.  Evaluation of a peptide ELISA for the detection of rituximab in serum. , 2007, Journal of immunological methods.

[18]  Antonio Orlandi,et al.  A review of statistical methods for comparing two data sets. , 2008 .