Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39229274›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in immunology2024

Development and characterization of dendritic cell internalization and activation assays contributing to the immunogenicity risk evaluation of biotherapeutics.

Michel Siegel, Aman Padamsey, Anna-Lena Bolender, Patrick Hargreaves, Johannes Fraidling, Axel Ducret, Katharina Hartman, Cary M Looney, Cristina Bertinetti-Lapatki, Olivier Rohr and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Michel SiegelRoche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Aman PadamseyRoche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center Penzberg, Penzberg, Germany.
Anna-Lena BolenderRoche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center Penzberg, Penzberg, Germany.
Patrick HargreavesRoche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Johannes FraidlingRoche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center Penzberg, Penzberg, Germany.
Axel DucretRoche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Katharina HartmanRoche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Cary M LooneyRoche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Cristina Bertinetti-LapatkiRoche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Olivier RohrUniversity of Strasbourg, UPR CNRS 9002 ARN, IUT Louis Pasteur, Schiltigheim, France.
Timothy P HicklingRoche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Thomas E Kraft *Roche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center Penzberg, Penzberg, Germany.
Céline Marban-Doran *Roche Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Roche Innovation Center Basel, Basel, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Immunogenicity refers to the ability of a substance, such as a therapeutic drug, to elicit an immune response. While beneficial in vaccine development, undesirable immunogenicity can compromise the safety and efficacy of therapeutic proteins by inducing anti-drug antibodies (ADAs). These ADAs can reduce drug bioavailability and alter pharmacokinetics, necessitating comprehensive immunogenicity risk assessments starting at early stages of drug development. Given the complexity of immunogenicity, an integrated approach is essential, as no single assay can universally recapitulate the immune response leading to the formation of anti-drug antibodies. Methods: To better understand the Dendritic Cell (DC) contribution to immunogenicity, we developed two flow cytometry-based assays: the DC internalization assay and the DC activation assay. Monocyte-derived dendritic cells (moDCs) were generated from peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and differentiated over a five-day period. The internalization assay measured the accumulation rate of therapeutic antibodies within moDCs, while the activation assay assessed the expression of DC activation markers such as CD40, CD80, CD86, CD83, and DC-SIGN (CD209). To characterize these two assays further, we used a set of marketed therapeutic antibodies. Results: The study highlights that moDCs differentiated for 5 days from freshly isolated monocytes were more prone to respond to external stimuli. The internalization assay has been shown to be highly sensitive to the molecule tested, allowing the use of only 4 donors to detect small but significant differences. We also demonstrated that therapeutic antibodies were efficiently taken up by moDCs, with a strong correlation with their peptide presentation on MHC-II. On the other hand, by monitoring DC activation through a limited set of activation markers including CD40, CD83, and DC-SIGN, the DC activation assay has the potential to compare a series of compounds. These two assays provide a more comprehensive understanding of DC function in the context of immunogenicity, highlighting the importance of both internalization and activation processes in ADA development. Discussion: The DC internalization and activation assays described here address key gaps in existing immunogenicity assessment methods by providing specific and reliable measures of DC function. The assays enhance our ability to pre-clinically evaluate the immunogenic potential of biotherapeutics, thereby improving their safety and efficacy. Future work should focus on further validating these assays and integrating them into a holistic immunogenicity risk assessment framework.

Indexed as

Dendritic CellsCell DifferentiationCells, CulturedFlow CytometryHumansLeukocytes, MononuclearMonocytesRisk Assessmentassay developmentbiotherapeuticsdendritic cellsimmunogenicityimmunomodulation

Identifiers

PMID39229274
PMCPMC11368763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.