Validation Of Biomarker Assays Research Articles

Interlaboratory evaluation of LC-MS-based biomarker assays.

Validation of biomarker assays is crucial for effective drug development and clinical applications. Interlaboratory reproducibility is vital for reliable comparison and combination of data from different centers. This review summarizes interlaboratory studies of quantitative LC-MS-based biomarker assays using reference standards for calibration curves. The following points are discussed: trends in reports, reference and internal standards, evaluation of analytical validation parameters, study sample analysis and normalization of biomarker assay data. Full evaluation of these parameters in interlaboratory studies is limited, necessitating further research. Some reports suggest methods to address variations in biomarker assay data among laboratories, facilitating organized studies and data combination. Method validation across laboratories is crucial for reducing interlaboratory differences and reflecting target biomarker responses.

Development and validation of qPCR methods for nucleic acid biomarkers as a drug development tool: points to consider.

Nucleic acid (NA) biomarkers play critical roles in drug development. However, the global regulatory guidelines for assessing quantification methods specific to NA biomarkers are limited. The validation of analytical methods is crucial for the use of biomarkers in clinical and post-marketing evaluations of drug efficacy and adverse reactions. Given that quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and reverse transcription qPCR (RT-qPCR) methods are the goldstandards for the quantification of NA biomarkers, the Biomarker Analytical Method Validation Study Group in Japan has discussed considerations and made recommendations for the development and validation of qPCR- and RT-qPCR-based analytical methods for endogenous NA biomarkers as drug development tools. This white paper aims to contribute to the global harmonization of NA biomarker assay validation.

A biomarker assay validation approach tailored to thecontext of use and bioanalytical platform.

It is widely acknowledged by the bioanalytical and biomarker community that biomarker assay validations should be fit-for-purpose depending on the context of use. The challenge is how to consistently apply these principles in teams responsible for measuring a disparate array of biomarkers, often on multiple analytical platforms, at various stages of the drug discovery and development pipeline and across diverse biology focus areas. To drive consistency, while maintaining the necessary flexibility to allow validations to be driven by scientific rationale and taking into consideration the context of use and associated biological and (pre)analytical factors, a framework applicable across biomarker assayswas developed. Herein the authorsshare their perspective to engage in the ongoing conversation around fit-for-purpose biomarker assay validation.

Interim analysis of MelaRisk, a biomarker assay validation study in stage IB/IIA melanoma tissue.

e21591 Background: Adjuvant therapy for melanoma patients (pts) is now available for pts from stage IIB onwards. Pts with cutaneous melanoma in early stages stage IB/IIA have low risk of relapse. However, this group still contributes to the most melanoma deaths in absolute numbers. Therefore, it is important to identify pts in stage IB/IIA that could benefit from adjuvant therapy. One promising biomarker is a proprietary 7-protein immunohistochemistry (7-P-IHC) signature (Immunoprint). Based on primary tumor tissue analysis, the 7-P-IHC has shown very high sensitivity and risk enhancement ability in previous prospective and retrospective validations.1,2 The 7-P-IHC test result indicates a risk score predicting relapse-free and melanoma-free survival (RFS, MSS), thereby allocating most relapses to the high score risk group. To further validate its key parameters, the MelaRisk trial was started in 2022, aiming to analyze up to 500 tissue samples with Immunoprint. Here we present its interim analysis and a combined analysis of all available data for Immunoprint in stage IB/IIA. Methods: All pts with available formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded blocks of the Central German Melanoma Registry diagnosed from 2005-16 and AJCC v8 stage IB/IIA were screened. Tumor tissue samples from 119 pts (83/IB; 36/IIA) were available; the 7-P-IHC was used to determine a risk group. Results: 7-P-IHC assigned 68 pts to the low-risk (57%) and 51 (43%) to the high-risk group. Median follow-up was 76 months. 15/17 relapses after 5-years were detected, resulting in a sensitivity of 88%. 5-years RFS event rate of the cohort according to AJCC v8 was 12% and 19% for stages IB and IIA, respectively. This was enhanced to a risk of recurrence of 30% (stage IB) and 29% (stage IIA) in the respective high score group. 5y-RFS rate was 97% for pts with 7-P-IHC low score risk and 71% for pts with 7-P-IHC high score risk (p=0.0001). 7-P-IHC was the only significant factor in a multivariate Cox analysis for RFS (HR 10.78 (2.38-48.74), p=0.002) and could detect 4/5 MSS events. Combined analysis including these and previous Immunoprint results in stage IB/IIA are summarized in the table. Conclusions: 7-P-IHC could concentrate 88% of stage IB/IIA RFS events in a small high score risk group. This group entails 43% of pts of the total cohort, correctly identifying pts needing adjuvant therapy. Immunoprint should be used to select pts in future studies in the adjuvant setting if these promising interim results can be confirmed in the final analysis. 1. Meyer et al. (2023) EJC; 2. Reschke et al. (2021). [Table: see text]

Multi-laboratory evaluation of immunoaffinity LC-MS-based glucagon-like peptide-1 assay.

Background: Although the fit-for-purpose approach has been proposed for biomarker assay validation, practical data should be compiled to facilitate the predetermination of acceptance criteria. Methods: Immunoaffinity LC-MS was used to analyze glucagon-like peptide-1 as a model biomarker in six laboratories. Calibration curve, carryover, parallelism, precision, relative accuracy and processed sample stability were evaluated, and their robustness among laboratories was assessed. The rat glucagon-like peptide-1 concentrations in four blinded samples were also compared. Results: The obtained results and determined concentrations in the blinded samples at all laboratories were similar, with a few exceptions, and robust, despite the difference in optimization techniques among laboratories. Conclusion: The results provide insights into the predefinition of the acceptance criteria of immunoaffinity LC-MS-based biomarker assays.

The PRECEDE consortium: A longitudinal international cohort study of individuals with genetic risk or familial pancreatic cancer.

e16239 Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly lethal disease with lack of effective early detection strategies. There is an incomplete understanding of who is at risk for PDAC development and the contribution of heritability to that risk. Further, efforts at biomarker development for detection of early stage disease have been hampered by small sample sizes, lack of coordination, and inadequate access to high quality clinical data and biospecimens in relevant clinical populations. The PRECEDE Consortium was established to serve as a collaborative international network of PDAC clinical and research centers to accelerate early detection advances by standardizing collection of clinical data and biospecimens from patients at increased risk for PDAC. The consortium goal is to increase the overall survival rate for PDAC to 50% in 10 years by enabling transformative biomarker-driven discoveries in early detection of high-risk premalignant lesions and early stage cancers. Methods: The PRECEDE Consortium (NCT04970056; precedestudy.org) launched in 2019 and began enrollment in May, 2020. Data and biospecimen sharing are required for centers to join the consortium, which is facilitated through use of standardized data and biospecimen collection, and a centralized database (PRECEDELink) managed by a data coordinating center (Arbor Research). Imaging and clinical sequencing data will be stored and analyzed via a PRECEDE solution in the Amazon Web Services cloud. Participants age 18-90 are enrolled into one of seven cohorts based on personal and/or family history of PDAC and carrier status of pathogenic germline variants (PGV) in cancer predisposition genes (CPG). Three-generation pedigrees are collected at enrolment from participants, and standardized clinical germline testing is offered. Blood sample collection for DNA, plasma, and serum is completed at enrollment, and repeated annually for individuals meeting guidelines for annual surveillance. Results: To date, 24 clinical sites have enrolled 2187 participants, with a target of 10,000 participants enrolled from100 sites over the next 5 years. Among enrolled patients, 55% meet criteria for annual surveillance by MRI or endoscopic ultrasound. Demographics of the cohort to date: 56% female; 73% white; 35% CPG PGV carriers; 32% meet criteria for familial pancreatic cancer. Conclusions: The PRECEDE Consortium study is a large international, longitudinal, prospective cohort study designed to accelerate the pace and scale of early diagnosis. Planned projects will address modifiers of risk, penetrance of disease, creating comprehensive risk models for clinical decision-making, and development and validation of biomarker assays. The PRECEDE Consortium provides a unique, innovative platform to bring together key stakeholders (academia, patients, public and private sector) to effect progress.

Biomarker Assay Validation by Mass Spectrometry

Decades of discussion and publication have gone into the guidance from the scientific community and the regulatory agencies on the use and validation of pharmacokinetic and toxicokinetic assays by chromatographic and ligand binding assays for the measurement of drugs and metabolites. These assay validations are well described in the FDA Guidance on Bioanalytical Methods Validation (BMV, 2018). While the BMV included biomarker assay validation, the focus was on understanding the challenges posed in validating biomarker assays and the importance of having reliable biomarker assays when used for regulatory submissions, rather than definition of the appropriate experiments to be performed. Different from PK bioanalysis, analysis of biomarkers can be challenging due to the presence of target analyte(s) in the control matrices used for calibrator and quality control sample preparation, and greater difficulty in procuring appropriate reference standards representative of the endogenous molecule. Several papers have been published offering recommendations for biomarker assay validation. The situational nature of biomarker applications necessitates fit-for-purpose (FFP) assay validation. A unifying theme for FFP analysis is that method validation requirements be consistent with the proposed context of use (COU) for any given biomarker. This communication provides specific recommendations for biomarker assay validation (BAV) by LC-MS, for both small and large molecule biomarkers. The consensus recommendations include creation of a validation plan that contains definition of the COU of the assay, use of the PK assay validation elements that support the COU, and definition of assay validation elements adapted to fit biomarker assays and the acceptance criteria for both.

A multilaboratory validation study of LC/MS biomarker assays for three lysophosphatidylcholines.

Aim: Although the fit-for-purpose approach has been proposed for validation procedures and acceptance criteria for biomarker assays, practical biomarker assays to facilitate clinical application and regulatory documents on biomarker assays remain limited. Materials & methods:We assigned six independent laboratories and selected three lysophosphatidylcholines(LPCs): LPC(16:0), LPC(18:0)and LPC(18:1) as model biomarkers. Using LC-MS, the following key validation parameters were evaluated: calibration curve, carryover, parallelism, precisionand relative accuracyand these values were similar among all laboratories. Further, we determined LPC levels in six lots of rat plasma at unknown concentrations and compared them among the laboratories. Conclusion: Our multilaboratory validation and reproducibility data are useful for the development of future biomarker assay validation procedures, as well as regulatory documents.

Analytical method validation for biomarkers as a drug development tool: points to consider.

Biomarkers are an important drug developmental tool. Assessment of quantitative analytical methods of biomarkers is not included in any regulatory documents in Japan. Use of biomarkers in clinical evaluations and supporting the post-marketing evaluation of drug efficacy and/or adverse reactions requires assessment and full validation of analytical methods for these biomarkers. The Biomarker Analytical Method Validation Study Group is a research group in Japan comprising industry and regulatory experts. Group members discussed and prepared this 'points to consider document' covering measurements of endogenous metabolites/peptides/proteins by ligand binding assays and chromatographic methods with or without mass spectrometry. We hope this document contributes to the global harmonization of biomarker assay validation.

Fit-for-purpose protein biomarker assay validation strategies using hybrid immunocapture-liquid chromatography-tandem-mass spectrometry platform: Quantitative analysis of total soluble cluster of differentiation 73

In recent years, biomarkers have played more extensive roles as indicators of disease progression, safety, and drug efficacy. Targeted quantitative analysis of biomarkers including drug targets have become increasingly important to drive critical decision-making in various drug development stages, as well as to improve the success rates of clinical trials. There are many analytical challenges when developing and validating the bioanalytical methods associated with the measurement of an endogenous protein biomarker, especially when using LC-MS based analysis. Moreover, the current regulatory guidelines for assay development and validation using LC-MS platform mainly focuse on regulated bioanalysis for therapeutic drugs. In this manuscript, we use total soluble CD73 (sCD73) as an example to present a “fit-for-purpose” assay using a hybrid immunocapture-LC-MS/MS assay platform. A non-competing antibody (to the therapeutic drug) was used to isolate and enrich the total sCD73 from biological matrix. The enriched sample was digested after immunocapture and a surrogate peptide was monitored for quantification. The assay showed good accuracy, precision, specificity and sensitivity with the LLOQ of 1.00 ng/mL, and was applied in a clinical study to measure the total sCD73 as a potential pharmacodynamic (PD) marker. Some recommendations and considerations for “fit-for-purpose” validation of this assay, and hybrid LC-MS assays in general, for the quantitative analysis of an endogenous protein biomarkers is also discussed.

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).

The 2019 13th Workshop on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis (WRIB) took place in New Orleans, LA, USA on April 1-5, 2019 with an attendance of over 1000 representatives from pharmaceutical/biopharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, contract research organizations and regulatory agencies worldwide. WRIB was once again a 5-day, week-long event - a full immersion week of bioanalysis, biomarkers, immunogenicity and gene therapy. As usual, it was specifically designed to facilitate sharing, reviewing, discussing and agreeing on approaches to address the most current issues of interest including both small- and large-molecule bioanalysis involving LCMS, hybrid LBA/LCMS, LBA cell-based/flow cytometry assays and qPCR approaches. This 2019 White Paper encompasses recommendations emerging from the extensive discussions held during the workshop and is aimed to provide the bioanalytical community with key information and practical solutions on topics and issues addressed, in an effort to enable advances in scientific excellence, improved quality and better regulatory compliance. Due to its length, the 2019 edition of this comprehensive White Paper has been divided into three parts for editorial reasons. This publication (Part 3) covers New Insights in Biomarker Assay Validation, Current & Effective Strategies for Critical Reagent Management, Flow Cytometry Validation in Drug Discovery & Development & CLSI H62, Interpretation of the 2019 FDA Immunogenicity Guidance and Gene Therapy Bioanalytical Challenges. Part 1 (Innovation in Small Molecules and Oligonucleotides & Mass Spectrometry Method Development Strategies for Large Molecule Bioanalysis) and Part 2 (Recommendations on the 2018 FDA BMV Guidance, 2019 ICH M10 BMV Draft Guideline and regulatory agencies' input on bioanalysis, biomarkers, immunogenicity and gene therapy) are published in volume 11of Bioanalysis, issues 22 and 23 (2019), respectively.

2019 White Paper On Recent Issues in Bioanalysis: FDA BMV Guidance, ICH M10 BMV Guideline and Regulatory Inputs (Part 2 - Recommendations on 2018 FDA BMV Guidance, 2019 ICH M10 BMV Draft Guideline and Regulatory Agencies' Input on Bioanalysis, Biomarkers and Immunogenicity).

The 2019 13th Workshop on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis (WRIB) took place in New Orleans, LA on 1-5 April 2019 with an attendance of over 1000 representatives from pharmaceutical/biopharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, contract research organizations and regulatory agencies worldwide. WRIB was once again a 5-day, week-long event - a full immersion week of bioanalysis, biomarkers, immunogenicity and gene therapy. As usual, it was specifically designed to facilitate sharing, reviewing, discussing and agreeing on approaches to address the most current issues of interest including both small- and large-molecule bioanalysis involving LCMS, hybrid LBA/LCMS, LBA cell-based/flow cytometry assays and qPCR approaches. This 2019 White Paper encompasses recommendations emerging from the extensive discussions held during the workshop, and is aimed to provide the bioanalytical community with key information and practical solutions on topics and issues addressed, in an effort to enable advances in scientific excellence, improved quality and better regulatory compliance. Due to its length, the 2019 edition of this comprehensive White Paper has been divided into three parts for editorial reasons. This publication (Part 2) covers the recommendations on the 2018 FDA BMV guidance, 2019 ICH M10 BMV draft guideline and regulatory agencies' input on bioanalysis, biomarkers, immunogenicity and gene therapy. Part 1 (Innovation in small molecules and oligonucleotides and mass spectrometry method development strategies for large molecules bioanalysis) and Part 3 (New insights in biomarker assay validation, current and effective strategies for critical reagent management, flow cytometry validation in drug discovery and development and CLSI H62, interpretation of the 2019 FDA immunogenicity guidance and gene therapy bioanalytical challenges) are published in volume 10 of Bioanalysis, issues 22 and 24 (2019), respectively.

Evolving our thinking on biomarker assay validation: are we ready for the next leap?

Evolving our thinking on biomarker assay validation: are we ready for the next leap?

Analytical Validation Strategies for DBS Biomarker Assays

In recent years biomarker assays have gained precedence both in the clinical and pharmaceutical laboratory. In the pharmaceutical arena biomarkers play multifaceted roles in the safety and efficacy studies of drug development. Alternatively, in the clinic, biomarker assays are useful in screening, diagnosis, detection, prognosis and prediction of diseases and disorders. The bio analytical validation of biomarker assays has been a topic of wide interest. The major bottle neck in this area is the paucity of a fixed regulatory guidance. The various phases in the development of new biomarker assays are pre-analytical considerations, analytical considerations and biomarker assay implementation. The focus of this review has been to address in detail the pre-analytical and analytical considerations in the development of new biomarker assays in a well-known matrix like dried blood spots both in the pharmaceutical and clinical laboratory. The validation parameters discussed include specificity, sensitivity, matrix effect, precision, accuracy, linearity, dilution linearity, parallelism, carry over, proficiency testing and reference intervals. Additional parameters for dried blood spot assays include hematocrit, blood spot volume, chromatographic effect, spot to spot carry over and DBS vs whole blood/plasma concentration.

Biomarker Assay Validation for Clinical Trials: a Questionnaire Survey to Pharmaceutical Companies in Japan

Biomarker Assay Validation for Clinical Trials: a Questionnaire Survey to Pharmaceutical Companies in Japan

Feedback from the EBF - Focus Workshop: bringing assay validation and analysis of biomarkers into practice.

European Bioanalysis Forum Focus Workshop, Lisbon, Portugal, 9-10 June 2016 At the recent European Bioanalysis Forum's Focus Workshop 'Bringing Assay Validation and Analysis of Biomarkers into Practice', the discussion on best practice for biomarker assay validation continued. Both the presentations and the adjacent panel discussions yielded valuable food for thought for the broader bioanalytical community. The present conference report summarizes the essence from these discussions and from the proposals or conclusions made by all delegates on how to increase the necessary connectivity of the stakeholders involved in the bioanalysis of biomarkers.

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.

The 10th Global CRO Council (GCC) Closed Forum was held in Orlando, FL, USA on 18 April 2016. In attendance were decision makers from international CRO member companies offering bioanalytical services. The objective of this meeting was for GCC members to meet and discuss scientific and regulatory issues specific to bioanalysis. The issues discussed at this closed forum included reporting data from failed method validation runs, GCP for clinical sample bioanalysis, extracted sample stability, biomarker assay validation, processed batch acceptance criteria, electronic laboratory notebooks and data integrity, Health Canada's Notice regarding replicates in matrix stability evaluations, critical reagents and regulatory approaches to counteract fraud. In order to obtain the pharma perspectives on some of these topics, the first joint CRO-Pharma Scientific Interchange Meeting was held on 12 November 2016, in Denver, Colorado, USA. The five topics discussed at this Interchange meeting were reporting data from failed method validation runs, GCP for clinical sample bioanalysis, extracted sample stability, processed batch acceptance criteria and electronic laboratory notebooks and data integrity. The conclusions from the discussions of these topics at both meetings are included in this report.

2016 White Paper on recent issues in bioanalysis: focus on biomarker assay validation (BAV): (Part 2 - Hybrid LBA/LCMS and input from regulatory agencies).

The 2016 10th Workshop on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis (10th WRIB) took place in Orlando, Florida with participation of close to 700 professionals from pharmaceutical/biopharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, contract research organizations, and regulatory agencies worldwide. WRIB was once again a 5-day, weeklong event - A Full Immersion Week of Bioanalysis including Biomarkers and Immunogenicity. As usual, it is specifically designed to facilitate sharing, reviewing, discussing and agreeing on approaches to address the most current issues of interest including both small and large molecules involving LCMS, hybrid LBA/LCMS, and LBA approaches, with the focus on biomarkers and immunogenicity. This 2016 White Paper encompasses recommendations emerging from the extensive discussions held during the workshop, and is aimed to provide the bioanalytical community with key information and practical solutions on topics and issues addressed, in an effort to enable advances in scientific excellence, improved quality and better regulatory compliance. This White Paper is published in 3 parts due to length. This part (Part 2) discusses the recommendations for Hybrid LBA/LCMS and regulatory inputs from major global health authorities. Parts 1 (small molecule bioanalysis using LCMS) and Part 3 (large molecule bioanalysis using LBA, biomarkers and immunogenicity) have been published in the Bioanalysis journal, issues 22 and 23, respectively.

2016 White Paper on recent issues in bioanalysis: focus on biomarker assay validation (BAV): (Part 3 - LBA, biomarkers and immunogenicity).

The 2016 10th Workshop on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis (10th WRIB) took place in Orlando, Florida with participation of close to 700 professionals from pharmaceutical/biopharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, contract research organizations, and regulatory agencies worldwide. WRIB was once again a weeklong event - A Full Immersion Week of Bioanalysis for PK, Biomarkers and Immunogenicity. As usual, it is specifically designed to facilitate sharing, reviewing, discussing and agreeing on approaches to address the most current issues of interest including both small and large molecules involving LCMS, hybrid LBA/LCMS, and LBA approaches, with the focus on PK, biomarkers and immunogenicity. This 2016 White Paper encompasses recommendations emerging from the extensive discussions held during the workshop, and is aimed to provide the bioanalytical community with key information and practical solutions on topics and issues addressed, in an effort to enable advances in scientific excellence, improved quality and better regulatory compliance. This White Paper is published in 3 parts due to length. This part (Part 3) discusses the recommendations for large molecule bioanalysis using LBA, biomarkers and immunogenicity. Parts 1 (small molecule bioanalysis using LCMS) and Part 2 (Hybrid LBA/LCMS and regulatory inputs from major global health authorities) have been published in the Bioanalysis journal, issues 22 and 23, respectively.

2016 White Paper on recent issues in bioanalysis: focus on biomarker assay validation (BAV) (Part 1 - small molecules, peptides and small molecule biomarkers by LCMS).

The 2016 10th Workshop on Recent Issues in Bioanalysis (10th WRIB) took place in Orlando, Florida with participation of close to 700 professionals from pharmaceutical/biopharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, contract research organizations, and regulatory agencies worldwide. WRIB was once again a 5-day, weeklong event - A Full Immersion Week of Bioanalysis including Biomarkers and Immunogenicity. As usual, it was specifically designed to facilitate sharing, reviewing, discussing and agreeing on approaches to address the most current issues of interest including both small and large molecule analysis involving LCMS, hybrid LBA/LCMS, and LBA approaches, with the focus on biomarkers and immunogenicity. This 2016 White Paper encompasses recommendations emerging from the extensive discussions held during the workshop, and is aimed to provide the bioanalytical community with key information and practical solutions on topics and issues addressed, in an effort to enable advances in scientific excellence, improved quality and better regulatory compliance. This white paper is published in 3 parts due to length. This part (Part 1) discusses the recommendations for small molecules, peptides and small molecule biomarkers by LCMS. Part 2 (Hybrid LBA/LCMS and regulatory inputs from major global health authorities) and Part 3 (large molecule bioanalysis using LBA, biomarkers and immunogenicity) will be published in the Bioanalysis journal, issue 23.