Dynamics of circulating TNF during adalimumab treatment using a drug-tolerant TNF assay

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can be successfully treated with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, including the monoclonal antibody adalimumab. Once in remission, a proportion of patients can successfully discontinue treatment, indicating that blocking TNF is no longer required for disease control. To explore the dynamics of circulating TNF during adalimumab treatment, we developed a competition enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay that can quantify TNF in the presence of large amounts of TNF inhibitor, i.e., a “drug-tolerant” assay. In 193 consecutive adalimumab-treated patients with RA, we demonstrated that circulating TNF increased in average of &gt;50-fold upon treatment and reached a stable concentration in time for most patients. A similar increase in TNF was found in 30 healthy volunteers after one dose of adalimumab. This implies that TNF in circulation during anti-TNF treatment is not primarily associated with disease activity. During treatment, TNF was in complex with adalimumab and could be recovered as inactive 3:1 adalimumab-TNF complexes. No quantitative association was found between TNF and adalimumab concentrations. Low TNF concentrations at week 4 were associated with a higher frequency of antidrug antibodies (ADAs) at subsequent time points, less frequent methotrexate use at baseline, and less frequent remission after 52 weeks. Also in healthy volunteers, early low TNF concentrations are associated with ADAs. In conclusion, longitudinal TNF concentrations are mostly stable during adalimumab treatment and may therefore not predict successful treatment discontinuation. However, early low TNF is strongly associated with ADA formation and may be used as timely predictor of nonresponse toward adalimumab treatment.</p

Antidrug antibody detection for adalimumab depends on the type of assay used: an experimental approach to help clinicians interpret diagnostic data

OBJECTIVES: To compare different methods of antidrug antibody (ADA) against adalimumab detection in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients and the impact of ADA on adalimumab drug levels and mean ASDAS-CRP. METHODS: We used the acid-dissociation-radioimmunoassay (ARIA), antidrug-binding-test (ABT) and a bridging Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) to detect ADA at 4, 12 and 24 weeks of treatment. Patients were divided into groups; all assays negative (All-neg), only ARIA positive (ARIA-only-pos), ARIA and ABT positive, bridging ELISA negative (ARIA/ABT-double-pos) and all assays positive (All-pos). RESULTS: Eighty-three consecutive AS patient were included. At week 4, 18% compared to 11% and 0% of the patients tested positive for ADA in the ARIA, ABT and bridging ELISA, respectively. At week 12 and 24, cumulative 52% and 69% patients tested positive in the ARIA, compared to 27% and 30% patients in the ABT and 2% patients in the bridging ELISA. Adalimumab levels between All-neg and ARIA-only-pos were 9.1 (5.5-12.5) and 8.5 (5.7-12.3). Drug levels differed between ARIA/ABT-double-pos (2.7 (1.3-4.4)) and All-neg (9.1 (5.5-12.5)). All-pos patients had undetectable drug levels. Mean ASDAS-CRP at week 24 differs between All-neg (1.9 (±1.2)), and All-pos (3.8 (±1.9)) and ARIA/ABT-double-pos (2.0 (±1.1)) and All-pos. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of AS patients had detectable ADA against adalimumab in the ARIA. The ARIA detects more ADA compared to the less drug tolerant ABT and bridging ELISA. The clinical relevance depends on the impact on the bio-availability of the drug. A drug level measurement therefore helps to interpret ADA data regardless of type of assay used

Antidrug antibody detection for adalimumab depends on the type of assay used: an experimental approach to help clinicians interpret diagnostic data

OBJECTIVES: To compare different methods of antidrug antibody (ADA) against adalimumab detection in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients and the impact of ADA on adalimumab drug levels and mean ASDAS-CRP. METHODS: We used the acid-dissociation-radioimmunoassay (ARIA), antidrug-binding-test (ABT) and a bridging Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) to detect ADA at 4, 12 and 24 weeks of treatment. Patients were divided into groups; all assays negative (All-neg), only ARIA positive (ARIA-only-pos), ARIA and ABT positive, bridging ELISA negative (ARIA/ABT-double-pos) and all assays positive (All-pos). RESULTS: Eighty-three consecutive AS patient were included. At week 4, 18% compared to 11% and 0% of the patients tested positive for ADA in the ARIA, ABT and bridging ELISA, respectively. At week 12 and 24, cumulative 52% and 69% patients tested positive in the ARIA, compared to 27% and 30% patients in the ABT and 2% patients in the bridging ELISA. Adalimumab levels between All-neg and ARIA-only-pos were 9.1 (5.5-12.5) and 8.5 (5.7-12.3). Drug levels differed between ARIA/ABT-double-pos (2.7 (1.3-4.4)) and All-neg (9.1 (5.5-12.5)). All-pos patients had undetectable drug levels. Mean ASDAS-CRP at week 24 differs between All-neg (1.9 (±1.2)), and All-pos (3.8 (±1.9)) and ARIA/ABT-double-pos (2.0 (±1.1)) and All-pos. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of AS patients had detectable ADA against adalimumab in the ARIA. The ARIA detects more ADA compared to the less drug tolerant ABT and bridging ELISA. The clinical relevance depends on the impact on the bio-availability of the drug. A drug level measurement therefore helps to interpret ADA data regardless of type of assay used

Antidrug antibody detection for adalimumab depends on the type of assay used: an experimental approach to help clinicians interpret diagnostic data

OBJECTIVES: To compare different methods of antidrug antibody (ADA) against adalimumab detection in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients and the impact of ADA on adalimumab drug levels and mean ASDAS-CRP. METHODS: We used the acid-dissociation-radioimmunoassay (ARIA), antidrug-binding-test (ABT) and a bridging Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) to detect ADA at 4, 12 and 24 weeks of treatment. Patients were divided into groups; all assays negative (All-neg), only ARIA positive (ARIA-only-pos), ARIA and ABT positive, bridging ELISA negative (ARIA/ABT-double-pos) and all assays positive (All-pos). RESULTS: Eighty-three consecutive AS patient were included. At week 4, 18% compared to 11% and 0% of the patients tested positive for ADA in the ARIA, ABT and bridging ELISA, respectively. At week 12 and 24, cumulative 52% and 69% patients tested positive in the ARIA, compared to 27% and 30% patients in the ABT and 2% patients in the bridging ELISA. Adalimumab levels between All-neg and ARIA-only-pos were 9.1 (5.5-12.5) and 8.5 (5.7-12.3). Drug levels differed between ARIA/ABT-double-pos (2.7 (1.3-4.4)) and All-neg (9.1 (5.5-12.5)). All-pos patients had undetectable drug levels. Mean ASDAS-CRP at week 24 differs between All-neg (1.9 (±1.2)), and All-pos (3.8 (±1.9)) and ARIA/ABT-double-pos (2.0 (±1.1)) and All-pos. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of AS patients had detectable ADA against adalimumab in the ARIA. The ARIA detects more ADA compared to the less drug tolerant ABT and bridging ELISA. The clinical relevance depends on the impact on the bio-availability of the drug. A drug level measurement therefore helps to interpret ADA data regardless of type of assay used