Showing posts with label Cell Therapy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cell Therapy. Show all posts

Monday, November 7, 2016

At the Forefront of Cell Therapy in Boston: Oren Levy of Karp Lab

Oren Levy from Karp Lab gave an excellent talk called “MSCs on Steriods” last month at Biotech Week Boston. Oren's research focus is "investigating the roles of signal transduction pathways in hMSC physiological processes, specifically, the involvement of the JAK/STAT cascade in hMSC proliferation and osteogenic differentiation". His research also focuses on "hMSC homing and engraftment to various sites in the body". Karp Lab is located in the Cambridge/Boston Biotech Hub and works closely with Brigham and Womens' Hospital, MIT, Harvard Medical School and Harvard-MIT Health Sciences and Technology.

Levy started his discussion with this unfortunate fact - so common with so many potential biopharma cures being researched right now – that “MSCs clinical endpoints have not been met and there’s not a single approved FDA product”. He then also shared the impressive stat that “MSCs are used in 600 clinical trials worldwide”; with so much research happening right now, the industry is hopeful that some breakthroughs are on the horizon.


What are MSCs and Why Are They on Steroids? 

The NIH gives a good definition of MSCs on their website: “Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are adult stem cells which can be isolated from human and animal sources”. MSCs are being studied for bone, cartilage, heart and blood vessel repair, as well as inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. Why are MSCs on steroids? If you check out their website, Karp Lab has a great sense of humor (and it’s an understatement to say the Lab’s work is “creative”) which makes sense that the title of the talk was playful. But in all seriousness, MSCs have the potential to be very powerful; researchers such as Oren Levy and Karp Lab have a real sense of urgency about getting MSC therapies to work. So much so that they embarked on a very ambitious project: with the help of Sanofi, Levy screened over 10,000 small molecules to improve cell targeting.

Our Goal is to Improve Control Over Cell Fate 


Oren Levy mentioned two disease areas where his team was studying the use of MSCs: prostate cancer and multiple sclerosis. In fact, Levy mentioned that their multiple sclerosis study was about to be submitted for publication, so we have that to look forward to soon. For prostate cancer, the screening of the small molecules Levy’s team did with Sanofi comes into play. Levy discussed how they use “drug loaded MSCs to kill prostate cancer cells”. How they’re trying to make this happen is by “small molecule pretreatment to give MSCs the homing mechanisms they lack”. Essentially, they’re “using engineering strategies to improve MSCs targeting to tumor sites”. The combination of engineering and life sciences – bioengineering – is a major trademark of what Karp Lab does. Their website relates one of their mission statements: “Our lab firmly believes that innovation occurs at the interface of disciplines”. You can read an in-depth interview of Jeff Karp of Karp Lab produced by Biotech Week Boston and written by journalist Nick Paul Taylor here.

Don't forget to follow Biotech Week Boston on Twitter for news on innovation in biotech and medicine. Each year passionate scientists and innovators converge on Boston to share ground breaking data, research and ideas - don't miss our next event in September 2017!





Share this article with your social network, just click below to share now!


Monday, August 15, 2016

Experts Predict what Boston Biotech Might Look Like in 2050

This past July Karl Thiel wrote in Biospace: “Never has there been so much transformative technology, seemingly right around the corner… Hugely exciting new technologies like CAR-T, emerging technologies like CRISPR-Cas, and perhaps-ready-for-prime-time technologies like RNAi, gene therapy, and antisense all seem to be on the cusp of revolutionizing healthcare.” It’s hard to deny the fact that so many amazing groundbreaking biotechnologies have been developed, so quickly, in the past few years. If this growth rate continues there is really no telling what is on the horizon for biotech. I asked several experts in the Boston area – from biotech CEOs to bioengineers – what they thought Boston biotech would look like in 30 or so years.

What does Boston biotech look like in 2050?


Jeffrey Karp, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Karp Labs

In 2050, Boston’s population will have significantly swelled resulting from the booming biotech, medtech, and pharma industries, and new innovative colleges that have formed. People will be much more in control of their health than they are today - most people will have had their genome sequenced and will wear devices whose data will be used to minimize implications of the genome findings. Data from wearable devices will help promote lifestyle modifications to maximize health and be used by clinicians to tailor patient specific treatments. Life expectancies will continue to rise and quality of life past 65 will improve with regenerative therapies for hearing loss, cancer, and cardiovascular disease. This will in part be achieved through controlling stem cell populations inside the body with small molecules. People will also frequently visit stem cell infusion clinics for routine therapy for multiple diseases and tissue defects. The future is quite bright for Boston!

Catch Jeffrey Karp at Biotech Week Boston's Cell and Gene Therapy Bioprocessing and Commercialization event this October. Jeffrey's talk is entitled "MSCs on steroids".


Robert Langer, David H. Koch Institute Professor, MIT

I think in 2050 the Boston area will be the center of the biotech universe even more than it is today, and I expect we will see a host of new technologies including RNA therapies, nanotechnology, tissue engineering, gene editing and technologies that are not even on our radar screen today affecting the lives of billions all over the world.


Martin Tolar, MD, PhD, Founder, President and CEO Alzheon, Inc.

Boston is one of the most active areas for research and drug development in neuroscience and neurodegenerative diseases. The Boston ecosystem that fuels biotechnology innovation includes a brain trust of experts in science, medicine and biotechnology collaborating for new ways to treat neurodegenerative disorders.

By the year 2050, the outlook is promising for new life-changing medicines to emerge from the Boston hub for these devastating diseases of the brain that represents some of the greatest challenges in human health, currently with very limited treatment options for patients: Alzheimer’s, ALS, Huntington’s, Parkinson’s diseases. We are on the cusp of bringing new medicines to millions of patients in need.

You can see Martin Tolar at Biotech Week Boston's Partnerships in Clinical Trials event this October. Martin will present the opening keynote for day two of the event entitled "Innovation in Clinical R&D: Finding a Cure for Alzheimer’s".


C. Michael Gibson, Founder and Chairman of Wikidoc.org and Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School

Randomized clinical trials will no longer need to pay to build a new database for each trial and will not be using large number of nurses and doctors to identify and follow patients. Instead, national health databases will be used to identify patients with disease or those at risk of disease, and with the patient's consent they will be randomized to a therapy and followed using this database and a more limited number of nurses at centralized centers. Digital devices will collect and transmit data. Obviously, therapy will be much more highly targeted based upon genomics, proteinomics and other "ics."


Phillip Sharp, Ph. D.  Koch Institute at MIT. Dr. Sharp won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1993 for the discovery of RNA splicing (in 1977) and founded Biogen in 1978.

Biotech in Cambridge and Boston will be thriving in 2050 having generated numerous treatments for Alzheimer's, Parkinson’s, better control of cancers, schizophrenia and depression. Delivery of medical care will continue to move from hospitals to more diverse settings and intense use of IT and engineering will individualize healthcare and reduce its cost.


Got any predictions for 2050? We’d love to share them with our audience so Tweet to us at @BiotechWkBoston. Don’t forget to check in every week for our Biotech Week Boston blog series. Biotech Week Boston is a hub for life sciences, technology, and business and fosters cross-disciplinary interaction and collaboration to break down silos and spark change. Biotech Week Boston will showcase the most comprehensive science and innovative technologies while fostering partnerships to unlock the full potential of what science and business can achieve. Learn more by clicking the link below.






Share this article with your social network, just click below to share now!


Wednesday, November 4, 2015

Genome Editing Applications | Brussels, Belgium | 2-3 December 2015

Get updates on Therapeutic and Biomedical Applications of CRISPRs, ZFNs, TALENs and other Genome Engineering Technologies

Genome Editing Applications 
2-3 December 2015
Sheraton Airport Hotel
Brussels, Belgium

Biomedical researchers have long strived for a reliable and efficient method of making targeted changes to the genome of living cells. With the advent of CRISPR/Cas9 researchers are now able to explore gene function in a much more thorough and cost-effective way.

This year, Lorenz Mayer from Astrazenca will be giving a presentation on their genome wide target discovery and target validation studies. Ines Royaux from Janssen Phamaceutica will also be giving a presentation touching on the team’s first experience of using genome editing for ex vivo gene therapy. Read on to find out more about what you can expect to learn from the speakers at this year's conference.

Get a sneak peek into the new developments and data the speakers will be sharing during their presentations here.

Informa's Genome Editing Applications 2015 conference, taking place on 2-3 December 2015 in Brussels, will showcase the most up-to-date therapeutic and biomedical applications emerging using CRISPRs, ZFNs, TALENs, AAVs and other genome engineering technologies. From improving lead discovery, validation of targeted cell lines and development of transgenic animal models to therapeutic uses in cell therapy & gene therapy.

This inaugural event in Europe follows the enormous success of Genome Editing Applications in March 2015 in the US from our sister company, IBC Life Sciences.

*Genome Editing Applications is co-located with Cell Therapy Manufacturing and Gene Therapy conferences with a shared exhibition area

So far, across the three conferences, over 120 have confirmed to attend with representation from biopharm, pharma and biotech companies - including Novartis Pharma AG, Glaxosmithkline, CRISPR Therapeutics, Astrazeneca, F Hoffmann-La Roche AG, GSK Pharma, Hitachi LTD, Bluebird BIO, Sanofi Pasteur, Janssen Pharmaceutica NV, Merck & CO., INC., Precision Biosciences, INC.

Hear from influential industry experts such as:

Genome Editing Applications conference in Brussels

REGISTER FOR AS LITTLE AS £799* TODAY

*Based on standard industry rate Biopharm/Pharma/Biotech 2 day conference pass for one attendee. Not including suppliers/vendors.


Share this article with your social network, just click below to share now!


Monday, November 2, 2015

Cell Therapy Manufacturing Best Practices from PCT


This article is the second in a series of weekly posts featuring cell therapy news and articles as reported by BioProcess International Magazine. 


By: Leah Kinthaert

In the October 15 issue of BioProcess International, a group of industry thought leaders consisting of Bob Preti, Ann Daus, Cenk Sumen and Brian Hampson from PCT - Caladrius were asked to give their opinions on the most successful strategies for manufacturing in the cell therapy industry.

Best practices for commercial cell therapy manufacturing
The team states that implementing DbD or Development by Design, consisting of these facets: quality, cost of goods, scalability and sustainability (picture above), will "provide significant cost and time advantages as a cell therapy moves along in its clinical process".

Compliance at cell therapy manufacturing facilities
A foundational state of compliance entails that people, facilities, systems and processes are unified in compliance, and that a QTF or quality task force is created  which includes "representatives from manufacturing, operations, and quality groups, with different areas of industry experience." They caution cell therapy developers not to wait to worry about quality until something has gone wrong - such as delays or regulatory actions - but to have the QTF in place from the beginning.

Develop QTPP early
The team gives another strong message about preparation when it comes to QTPP or quality target product profile. As with QTF, waiting to develop a QTPP can lead to problems.

Strategic Commercial Manufacturing Plan
One last acronym they recommend is a SCMP or strategic commercial manufacturing plan. Keeping with the theme of planning the future to avoid potential problems, a SCMP needs to include: "an evaluation of a developer’s current manufacturing processes; an analysis of those processes for areas of potential optimization and improvement; and a practical, implementable strategy to take a process from its current state to a future, commercial-ready state while reducing risks." You can read the entire article here.

PCT - Caladrius in the News: 
In his opening remarks at the BioProcess International Conference Cell Therapy Pre-Conference Symposia, Chairperson Kurt Tisler showed a map of the US with a handful of companies on it. The map included "Cell Therapy CMO Options in the US" and PCT was one of only 3 private companies and another handful of institutions that were options for Phase III in cell therapy. The map gave a striking picture of just how much those companies are in the forefront of cell therapy manufacturing. The past two months have been eventful for this industry leader, with news on multiple fronts. What follows is a brief run-down of noteworthy news about this organization.

PCT supporting IRX's development of IRX-2
PCT is providing IRX "with personnel and dedicated clean room capacity within its current cGMP infrastructure and pursuant to EU cell therapy manufacturing standards.” Caladrius is the only cGMP-compliant cell therapy manufacturing provider that has facilities on both the East and the West Coasts. Additionally they are the only one to see a client's cell therapy product receive approval from the FDA for commercial sale.

PCT has entered into a collaboration agreement with Sanford Research to develop CLBS03
The initial focus will be the execution of a clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of CLBS03 in adolescents. The Phase 2 study has an open and active IND; subject enrollment is expected to commence the first quarter of 2016.

NIH's National Cancer Institute gives $300K in funding, with a potential $2 million to follow
This will fund the first phase process optimization of Caladrius' therapeutic agent targeting tumor-initiating cells. The $2 million in funding is to be expected in June 2016 if both the government and Caladrius agree to proceed at the conclusion of the first phase.





Share this article with your social network, just click below to share now!


Wednesday, October 28, 2015

BPI 2015: Data Rules

By: Frank Corden

The explosion of readily available data is everywhere around us.  Silicon Valley is bombarding us and those who would like to sell to us with data to purportedly make our lives easier. Whether it be the articles you see on your news feed or the research you do before buying the next gadget, it seems like the current strategy is to conceive of a potential use for the data and throw it at us to see what sticks.  However, often the data isn’t timely or even useful. 

Take my commute in this morning to Boston. The warning of the traffic congestion came about 5 minutes before I hit the slow down.  Since several of the exits are more than 5 miles apart, there wasn’t time to get off Mass Pike.  But even if the data was timely, it wasn’t actionable.  Once you get to I-90 to head into town, there really isn’t an alternative route to get there.

A major theme of this year’s BioProcessing International Conference (#BPIConf) revolves around making informed decisions with data.  Whether it be on-line monitoring data, laboratory data, or process analytical technology (PAT) based data, data rules.  But what are the rules around data and how do we make it useful? What are the “rules” around using process data in bioprocessing?

I was sitting in the 8:15am presentation Evaluation of Continuous Manufacturing in a Downstream Process.  I guess I wasn’t the only one who headed into town early, the room is pretty full.  It’s great to feel the energy and enthusiasm of the group first thing in the morning.

The introduction to the Recovery and Purification track delivered by Marc Bisschops of Pall Life Sciences was provocative.  He challenged us to move from batch manufacturing to continuous manufacturing.  The benefits are clearly dependent on our ability to balance throughput of the various unit operations as you move through the process. 

Kudo’s to the first presentation, Data Based Comparison of Capture and Polishing Steps in a Continuous Mab Process.  The authors, from the chromatography company ChromaCon compared continuous versus batch approaches with hard data analysis.  By evaluating throughput, cost, and resource requirements, the analysis demonstrated that a change in the manufacturing paradigm from batch to continuous chromatography can have some impressive benefits. 

With a better quality outcome (increase in purity from mid 70% to mid 80%), you can cut chromatography resin usage by one-third.  For the resin selected, the reduction in resin usage translated into $190,000/year.  In the pilot facility studied, the breakeven for the investment in continuous chromatography occurred after the transfer of only two molecules.  Clearly, the dollar savings in a full production facility would be significantly greater. 

The decision to shift from the tried and true manufacturing approaches we use today is a difficult one.  We all realize the risk of getting it wrong is what keeps us up at night.  A delay in the release of a product not only affects our companies but also the patients who depend on these products to keep them healthy, or in some cases alive. 


Hard data to help make a difficult decision; now that’s data that rules.


Share this article with your social network, just click below to share now!


BPI 2015: Day One Recap

The 12th annual Bioprocess International (BPI) Conference & Exposition began with a series of technical sessions, many of which broke new ground. BPI 2015 also proved to be an invaluable forum for scientists and engineers with its poster presentations and product announcements, as well as keynote talks from industry leaders. Here are some highlights of Day 1.

Keynote Addresses
Market leaders from Merck & Co., Novartis Pharma, and the Duke School of Medicine gave compelling and insightful keynote presentations on Tuesday at BPI 2015. And it is fitting that in Boston, one of the keynote speakers noted that there is a “revolution” underway in fighting cancer.

By: LSPR

Innovating mAb Production to Support the Immunotherapy Revolution was given by David J. Pollard, PhD, Executive Director, BioProcess Development, Merck & Co., Inc.  Dr. Pollard began the keynote session by stating it was an “exciting time in immunotherapy” and that a revolution is now underway in cancer treatment. To be successful in this revolution, the industry needs to be agile and flexible so it can quickly adapt to change.

To that point, Dr. Pollard emphasized the importance of there being a “collaboration between suppliers and end users” to help lower costs and increase throughput. “Working as a community we can help create a facility of the future,” he stated.

Such a “facility of the future” will create a tremendous opportunity to lower the cost of manufacturing while also being able to handle increased capacities, according to Dr. Pollard. He explained that a modular approach will be taken to develop these facilities so they can easily be built out as needed.

Dr. Pollard stated this next-generation manufacturing approach will improve acceleration to clinical trials and that technology will be used to de-bottleneck activities. This will create high-throughput workflows using enabled formulations from cell line development, process development (both upstream and downstream), and formulation.

Another challenge during this revolution is to create a bridge from IV to subcutaneous. The goal is to achieve the necessary high concentration of >150 mg/mL while also addressing viscosity issues. Dr. Pollard stated that, while it is early proof of concept, Merck has done research in which novel excipients have been added to meet this challenge. 


Next to speak was Spencer Fisk, Global Head, Biologics Process, R&D, Novartis Pharma, AG who spoke of Innovative Process Development Strategies to Drive the Rapid Clinical Introduction of Emerging Biologics. Fisk challenged the industry go beyond the “heavily walked path” and push boundaries to speed drug development and improve efficacy.

Fisk’s approach to accelerating drug development was for his colleagues to not avoid taking risks. He suggested to “use data to guide us” so scientists and engineers can approach the “edge of the cliff.” Using data, risk levels can be determined and comfort levels established with the end result of more quickly selecting the proper candidate for development.  

Choosing the best candidate requires evaluating all the variables such as the biology and the ability to develop the candidate. Each variable has its own elements. For example, in the case of biology, binding, potency and efficacy need to be assessed. In terms of development there are a number of aspects, including stability, that need to be determined.

Risk factors not only need to be established, they should be classified as critical (red), moderate (yellow), and low (green), suggested Fisk. If the risks are predominantly low, then the candidate should be moved ahead. “Green means go,” stated Fisk. The results will be favorable the majority of the time.

“If we get it right >80% of the time, we have significant time savings. In many cases, the 20% that does not work is simply due to the fact that more time is needed,” said Fisk.

Taking this approach will create a cycle that will benefit the market, as well as society. Once scientists have “walked to the edge” and realized it was not as close as they originally believed they will push the boundaries further, creating a continuum of accelerating drug development, according to Fisk.

The final keynote, Novel Approach to Developing and Producing Human Experimental Vaccines for HIV, was given by Michael Anthony, M.D., Chief Medical Officer, Associate Professor of Pediatrics, Duke Human Vaccine Institute, Duke School of Medicine. Dr. Moody emphasized that because HIV is a unique and challenging virus it poses many challenges. Vaccines that are developed and aim to be effective must deal with an incredible diversity of circulating strains.

“By locating and neutralizing antibodies we can prevent disease but this is not an easy task. Antibodies at a sufficient level can target many strains of HIV1,” said Dr. Moody.

One question posed by Dr. Moody during his session was if information gathered from those patients who are infected can be used to make antibodies. “But it’s not that simple. There are many changes to the immunosystem that we may need to mimic with adjuvants to be successful,” he explained.

Novel adjuvants will need to be developed, according to Dr. Moody. Human trials are in the planning stages but there is no guarantee that the answers will be found. There is a paradox in the bnAb development – mutations develop. As a result, Phase I human testing is required. Within that context, two important elements are needed:
·         Targeting of multiple lineages
·         Multiple immunogens, likely in sequence

“Industry, academia and government will need to come together, as one of these alone cannot muster the resources needed to be successful,” emphasized Dr. Moody.

Technical Session Highlights
New Data on Continuous Manufacture in Downstream Process: In the Recovery and Purification technical track, Michael Bavand, PhD, Chairman and CEO of ChromaCon AG, released new data during his presentation entitled Data Based Comparison of Capture and Polishing Steps in a Continuous Mab Process.

Dr. Bavand spoke of a study conducted in which four resins were compared using batch mode, dynamic flow load, and continuous chromatography. The experiment evaluated five outputs – recovery percentage, high molecular rate (HMW%), productivity, host cell protein, and 0.1M NaOH tolerance. The results revealed:
·         Very little difference in recovery percentage, as all the conditions were > 90%
·         Slight reduction in HMW% in the continuous condition
·         Host cell protein (ng/mg) was equivalent or better in continuous condition
·         All DBC levels were > 90% initially after 100 cycles; resin 4 showed reduction in DBC after first measurement

A model was generated with all the productivity data. Validation cost estimates, lab scale system purchase, GMP system purchase, FTE estimates, and the number of new molecules arriving in a plant annually were all accounted for by the model. The model was used to estimate return on investment across the number of new molecules to come into a pilot plant every 12 months. Using a baseline of two new molecules per year, the initial estimates were that cost savings would be realized after three years.

Dr. Bavand also discussed a second part of the experiment that studied a process using MCSGP with a membrane adsorber to determine if it would have equivalent or better outputs than a cation exchange (CEX) resin step in terms of recovery, productivity, and impurity levels. Through the experiment, a Flow Through MCSGP was demonstrated to have equivalent purity and recovery with significant higher productivity levels than batch mode.

As revealed by the results, higher productivity and large cost savings are possible using a continuous chromatography system for both capture and polishing steps. Additional verification of these processes is needed before they can be implemented into a pilot plant concluded Dr. Bavand.

Poster Highlight
Essential Pharmaceuticals’ poster entitled Novel Lipid Based Supplement Increases Protein Yield in Single Use Bioreactor presented the use of a lipid supplement using various strategies to improve protein yield.

The poster stated that by adding the lipid supplements at the beginning of the culture, the yield in titer antibody protein production increased 30% from CHO cells without increasing proliferation. Further, when the metabolic profile was examined, it was discovered that there were no differences in any of the metabolites.

The poster also stated that the supplement was used as a feed and there were two notable effects: 1) increasing the titer yield by 25% and 2) extending the window for peak protein production from one day to two. These results show that there are windows for further optimization of protein production using lipids. It is possible the use of lipids reduces the energy requirement for new cell formation and, therefore, can be used for protein production. 

Product Highlight 
Pall Life Sciences is showcasing key components of its biopharmaceutical portfolio in its booth (#309). A host of updated and new portfolio products will be on display, with particular emphasis on continuous solutions Pall has available for downstream processing support.

Included in the BPI 2015 booth will be:
  • The disruptive Acoustic Wave Separation technology for cell-culture clarification in either fed-batch or perfusion applications
  • A preview of Pall’s latest advance in depth filtration: Stax™ Depth Filters with Hyperion Flow technology, for direct mammalian cell harvest with a new filter to remove cells and cellular debris effectively and efficiently
  • The award-winning Cadence™ Inline Concentrator single-pass tangential flow filtration system for direct flow-through and in-process volume reduction in an integrated or stand-alone format
  • The recently introduced BioSMB® System for single-use or multicolumn continuous chromatography featuring a disposable flow path with a proprietary integrated valve cassette to service up to 16 columns or devices.




Share this article with your social network, just click below to share now!


Tuesday, October 27, 2015

How to get that market authorization when the new drug is made of living cells



By Fabio D'Agostino 

Historically human cells have only been considered as the microscopic building blocks of human body and it was not until the late 1950s that Dr. E. Donnall Thomas demonstrated that bone marrow can be used to cure patients dying from blood cancers. Since then, researchers turned to cells (and stem cells) as the active pharmaceutical ingredient of the future. 

In Europe, cell-based products in which cells have been either substantially manipulated or are not intended to be used for the same essential function(s) in the recipient and the donor are regulated as medicinal products under the legal framework of Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs). As ATMPs developers tried to comply with the same regulatory principles as for other medicinal products, EMA recognized the need for some flexibility given the complex nature of this advanced biologics. Although a certain degree of risk-based approach might have been adopted by developers in the last 20 years, EMA formally introduced a guideline in 2013 [1].

 It is no longer the regulator but rather the developer who sets the extent of quality, nonclinical and clinical data which are necessary to submit the Market Authorization Application, given the risk profile generated for that product. Therefore, it can also be used as a strategy to justify any deviation from the technical requirements as defined in Directive 2009/120/EC. This approach was successfully applied for Holoclar®(Holostem Advanced Therapies, Italy), the first stem cell product which was granted a Marketing Authorization in the European Union in April 2015 [2]. 

Holoclar® is a transparent circular sheet of 300,000 to 1,200,000 viable autologous human corneal epithelial cells attached on a 2.2 cm diameter fibrin support in physiological transport medium. Although the manufacturer will have to provide additional post-marketing efficacy and safety data in order to confirm that the benefit-risk balance is positive, this MA represents an important landmark for developers of ATMPs. Other companies might follow in the next 12 months, such as GSK (who filed a MAA in May 2015 for their gene therapy drug - GSK2696273), Tigenix and Kiadis. It turns out that risk profile and risk mitigation are not actually just for investors but also for regulatory body and as for investors, they can tolerate risks as long as it is kept under control and a well-thought through mitigation plan is in place. 

But where do the risks lie for ATMP developers? Here are some:

1)      Quality of donor cells used as starting materials. These could be affected by high inter-donor variability and could potentially introduce tumorigenic or genetically altered cells into the product when sourcing the starting materials from patients concomitantly treated with other drugs.

2)      Quality of raw materials. As many of the raw/ancillary materials currently available are not covered by pharmacopeia’s, developers should define the quality of raw materials they need for their products (more info can be found on PAS 157, USP Ancillary materials and EP chapter on Raw Materials for ATMPs [3],[4],[5])

3)      Impossible to remove/inactivate adventitious agents once in the product. Aseptic processing and rigorous control of donor cells used as starting material are paramount.

4)      Limited stability (unless frozen) and limited amount of material available. For autologous products, this might limit the possibility for comprehensive batch release testing of the finish product (sterility, purity, identity, potency). Extensive process characterization, process validation and in process control data could supplement final product testing. 

5)      Paucity of relevant certified reference materials and the need to develop these in-house to ensure measurement reliability.

6)      Increased cell manipulations can lead to genetic modifications and/or immunogenic response (also for autologous products)

The key word is product characterization. While regulatory authorities appreciate the technical and scientific differences between characterization of cell based drugs and other medicinal products, it is paramount to characterize the product in order to identify and confirm which quality attributes (QA) are critical to quality (CQA). This is also necessary to identify and confirm the critical process parameters (process characterization). 

Arguably, two of the most discussed issues with product characterization are purity and potency. The former has to take into consideration the cells intended to elicit the therapeutic effect, all the other cells present into the products and also the remainders of cell debris, exosomes and reagents which might be present. For Holoclar®, the marketing authorization holder on the basis of clinical data justified that the active substance consists of a mixture of cells with an average of 3.5% of limbal stem cells as the main functional component. These were histochemically quantified by expression of the phenotypic marker p63-bright. Clonogenic transienty amplifying cells and terminally differentiated corneal epithelial cells are also present in the final product but these were not regarded as impurities but as supportive cell populations for the formation of the epithelial circular sheet structure. This is an example of cell-based product where purification steps are not necessary as both the active substance and supportive cell population act in concert to deliver the therapeutic effect.  Even more complicated is perhaps the development of a potency assay which should be validated before entering pivotal clinical trials.

Suggested approach is to define a number of biological assays that can be correlated with clinical outcome as more data become available. It should be then possible to identify one or more markers which correlate with the biological function of the product (i.e. their mechanism of action), like the minimum amount of p63-bright cells for Holoclar®. 

More examples can be found in Bravery at al.’s paper [6]. Perhaps 20 or 30 years from now, we will be able to handle human cells like they were chemically defined entity and regulatory authorities will have issued “the magic to do list” to get an ATMP approved. Sadly, this is quite far from today’s reality. This should not mean that patients have to wait that long to get access to these therapies.

Fabio D’Agostino is a passionate life sciences professional with experience in both the medical device and biopharmaceutical industry. An active member of the PDA Cell and Gene Task Force, he has contributed to a number of conferences in the cell and gene therapy industries. He was also instrumental in the launch of the new journal: Cell and Gene Therapy Insights.
After graduating with Honours from the Polytechnic University of Turin (Italy) with a BSc and a Master’s in Biomedical Engineering, he started his career at LivaNova (formerly Sorin Group) before moving to Newcastle University to take an Engineering Doctorate in Biopharmaceutical Process Development. He currently holds a research position at the Institute of Genetic Medicine (Newcastle University) where he is responsible for the development of an innovative platform for modular tissue engineering.

References
[1] EMA/CAT/CPWP Guideline on the risk-based approach according to annex I, part IV of Directive  2001/83/EC applied to Advanced therapy medicinal products (http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2013/03/WC500139748.pdf )

[2] Flory E, Gasparini P, Jekerle V et al. Regulatory viewpoints on the development of advanced stem cell-based medicinal products in light of the first EU-approved stem cell product. Cell Gene Therapy Insights 1(1), 109-127 (2015) www.dx.doi.org/10.18609/cgti.2015.010

 
 
[5] http://pharmeuropa.edqm.eu/PharmeuropaArchives/ (EP general chapter 5.2.12)

[6]          Bravery, C. a., Carmen, J., Fong, T., Oprea, W., Hoogendoorn, K. H., Woda, J., … Van’T Hof, W. (2013). Potency assay development for cellular therapy products: An ISCT* review of the requirements and experiences in the industry. Cytotherapy, 15(1), 9–19. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcyt.2012.10.008


Share this article with your social network, just click below to share now!


Thursday, October 8, 2015

Look Who's Attending | Last Chance to Save up to $400

Last Chance to Save up to $400 is This Friday, October 9th
Register Today
Be Sure to use code: D15172BLOG

  

Connect with hundreds of your colleagues this December in San Diego at the largest and most trusted Antibody Engineering & Therapeutics event to discover, engineer and develop novel and next generation antibody modalities across diverse disease indications. Included with your 4-day registration fee this year is a new 2-day Antibody-Drug Conjugate track that will showcase the latest progress and clinical updates from the most exciting ADC programs in development.

Secure your seat today to attend this year's meeting and access:
• 100+ speaker presentations covering critical scientific and development updates that can accelerate your antibody research, discovery efforts and clinical programs - download the agenda. 
• 50+ exhibitors to keep you on the pulse of evolving technologies
• 100+ scientific posters to give you first-hand updates on unpublished, peer-submitted research projects
• 700+ global antibody researchers for you to connect with onsite to forge successful scientific and business partnerships

A sample of the attending companies:
• Abbvie
• Albert Einstein College of Medicine
• Amgen
• Bayer Healthcare
• Biogen
• Boehringer Ingelheim
• Boston College
• Boston University
• Bramhill Biological Consulting
• Bristol Myers Squibb
• Celgene Corporation
• Covagen AG
• Daiichi Sankyo
• Dana Farber Cancer Institute
• Dartmouth College
• David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA
• Development Center for Biotechnology
• Eli Lilly & Company
• EnGen Bio
• Esbatech A Novartis Company
• Genentech
• Genesun Biopharmaceutical      
• Genmab BV
• Genomics Inst of Novartis Research
• Genzyme Corporation
• Georgetown University
• GlaxoSmithKline
• Global Biological Standards Institute
• Imaginab
• Immunocore
• ImmunoGen
• Janssen
• Johnson & Johnson
• Jounce Therapeutics
• Kookmin University
• KTH Royal Institute of Technology
• Massachusetts Institute of Technology
• Maxcyte Inc
• MD Anderson Cancer Center
• MedImmune
• Meditope Biosciences
• Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
• Merck
• Merrimack Pharmaceuticals Inc
• National Cancer Center Hospital East
• National Cancer Institute NIH
• National Institute for Communicable Diseases
• National Research Council Canada
• Novartis
• Novo Nordisk   
• OMT Therapeutics
• Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospi
• Oxford University Kellogg College
• Panorama Research Institute
• Pfizer
• Queen Mary University of London
• Regeneron
• Research Corporation Technologies
• Roche
• Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)
• Sanofi
• Seattle Genetics
• Simon Fraser University
• Stanford University Medical Center
• Stanford University School of Medicine
• Taipei Medical University
• Takeda
• Tel Aviv University
• Teva Pharmaceuticals
• The Rockefeller University
• The Scripps Research Institute
• The University Of Tokyo
• Tokyo University of Pharmacy and Life Sciences• UCL Cancer Institute
• UMass Medical School
• Univ. of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Ct
• University of Cincinnati College of Medicine
• University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute
• Vaccinex
• Yale School of Medicine and more!

Don't miss out! Join the growing list of attendees at the largest antibody engineering and therapeutics event in the industry! This Friday, October 9th is your last chance to take advantage of the early-bird savings of up to $400. Be sure to use code: D15172BLOG – Register here.

Best,
The Antibody & Protein Therapeutics – From Discovery to Production Team
@ibcusa
#AntibodyEng
http://futurebiopharma.blogspot.com/



Share this article with your social network, just click below to share now!


Wednesday, September 30, 2015

Scott Burger on finding the right strategic partner

By Brian Caine

Advanced Cell & Gene Therapy MD Scott Burger gave attendees of Cell Therapy Bioprocessing & Commercialization a detailed overview of the roles, responsibilities and importance of teaming up with the right strategic partners, CMOs, CROs Suppliers and other contract providers.

“While it takes a village to raise a child, it also takes a village to successfully bring a product to market,” he said.

He also outlined the five historical problems with working with CMOs:
  1. Insufficient cell therapy experience and expertise
  2. Inadequate capacity
  3. Lack of commitment to the project
  4. Differing expectations for roles and responsibilities
  5. Inadequate/ineffective communication between client and CMO
Burger provided examples of differences between a biological and a CT CMO and reinforced the critical need to vet each CMO candidate to ensure their “capabilities, capacity, availability match your needs and expectations”.

Join the conversation on Twitter by following #IBC_CTB15


Share this article with your social network, just click below to share now!


Early stage cell therapy funding gap can be filled by ‘venture philanthropies’



Attendees gather ahead of Brock Reeves' presentation at Cell Therapy Bioprocessing & Commercialization 2015

By Ryan Geswell

Brock Reeve, executive director of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute joined the Cell Therapy Bioprocessing & Commercialization today to discuss the commercialization of cell therapies and, more specifically, ways to fund early stage science.

He told a packed session that, because of uncertainty in financial markets, venture capitalists and other financially motivated investors have moved away from cell therapy, leaving a gap in funding. This gap is being filled by venture philanthropy organizations.

The goal of these venture philanthropy organizations is to move things from “the academic world and into the commercial market”, he said. 

He cited the 2014 move by the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation to sell rights to a drug its funding helped develop for $3.3bn, which Reeve said firmly placed venture philanthropy organizations as investment vehicles into the spotlight. 

Since then others have come to light, he said. He discussed how the SMA Foundation was created to accelerate the development of a treatment for SMA, the number one genetic killer of infants and toddlers. The foundation has spent more than US$110m on SMA drug development and serves as a hub for SMA research, investing in a cross-section of activity.

Other investment vehicles have also presented themselves, Reeve said. One has been the emergence of debt as a financing mechanism for medical R&D. Traditionally, medical research “has lagged behind other sectors” in the creation and application of novel financing methods to address market failures, he added.

These unique methods of financing for the sector have presented tremendous opportunity for advancements in research, drug development, and treatment, Reeve concluded. And because of these funding opportunities, many organizations have already hinted at potential cures.

Join the conversation on Twitter by following #IBC_CTB15




Share this article with your social network, just click below to share now!