GET THE APP

Understanding Immunogenicity and Loss of Effectiveness of Biologic Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: The Role of Anti-drug Antibody Development
..

Journal of Anesthesiology and Pain Research

ISSN: 2684-5997

Open Access

Commentary - (2024) Volume 7, Issue 1

Understanding Immunogenicity and Loss of Effectiveness of Biologic Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: The Role of Anti-drug Antibody Development

Jonas Gratch*
*Correspondence: Jonas Gratch, Department of Pharmacy, University of Bologna, 40138 Bologna, Italy, Email:
Department of Pharmacy, University of Bologna, 40138 Bologna, Italy

Received: 19-Jan-2024, Manuscript No. japre-24-129690; Editor assigned: 22-Jan-2024, Pre QC No. P-129690; Reviewed: 05-Feb-2024, QC No. Q- 129690; Revised: 10-Feb-2024, Manuscript No. R-129690; Published: 17-Feb-2024 , DOI: 10.37421/2684-5997.2024.7.221
Citation: Gratch, Jonas. “Understanding Immunogenicity and Loss of Effectiveness of Biologic Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: The Role of Anti-drug Antibody Development.” J Anesth Pain Res 7 (2024): 221.
Copyright: © 2024 Gratch J. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Introduction

Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD), encompassing conditions such as Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, is characterized by chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract. Biologic therapies have revolutionized the management of IBD, offering targeted treatment to suppress inflammation and induce remission. However, a significant challenge in the long-term efficacy of biologics is the development of Anti-Drug Antibodies (ADAs) by patients, leading to reduced drug levels, loss of effectiveness, and potentially adverse reactions. This article delves into the complex interplay between immunogenicity, ADAs, and the loss of effectiveness of biologic therapy in IBD patients.

Biologic therapies are monoclonal antibodies or fusion proteins designed to target specific molecules involved in the inflammatory cascade. Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha (TNF-α) inhibitors, such as infliximab and adalimumab, were the first biologics approved for IBD treatment. Subsequently, newer classes of biologics targeting different cytokines or cell surface molecules, such as vedolizumab and ustekinumab, have expanded the therapeutic options for IBD patients. These biologics have shown efficacy in inducing and maintaining remission, reducing the need for corticosteroids, and improving patients' quality of life.

Description

p>Immunogenicity refers to the ability of a therapeutic protein to induce an immune response in the host, leading to the production of ADAs. Biologic agents, despite their specificity, can still be recognized as foreign by the immune system, triggering the formation of antibodies against them. Several factors contribute to the immunogenicity of biologics, including their molecular structure, route of administration, dosing regimen, and patient-specific factors. ADAs are antibodies generated by the host's immune system against biologic therapies. These antibodies can neutralize the drug's activity by binding to its antigen-binding site, forming immune complexes, or inducing drug clearance through various mechanisms. ADAs can develop in a subset of patients receiving biologic therapy, leading to reduced drug concentrations in the bloodstream and diminished clinical response over time.

Several factors influence the development of ADAs in IBD patients receiving biologic therapy. These include the inherent immunogenicity of the biologic agent, concomitant use of immunomodulators such as methotrexate, patient-related factors such as genetic predisposition and previous exposure to biologics, and treatment-related factors such as dosing regimen and route of administration. Additionally, the presence of inflammation and mucosal damage in the gastrointestinal tract may enhance the immune response to biologic therapies, further promoting ADA formation. The presence of ADAs in IBD patients receiving biologic therapy has significant clinical implications. High ADA titers have been associated with reduced drug efficacy, increased risk of treatment failure, and higher rates of adverse events such as infusion reactions and hypersensitivity reactions. Furthermore, ADAs can accelerate drug clearance, necessitating d ose escalation or switching to alternative therapies to maintain clinical response.

Routine monitoring of ADAs and drug levels is essential in optimizing the management of IBD patients receiving biologic therapy. Various assays, including enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) and radioimmunoassays, can quantify ADA levels in patient serum. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) involves measuring drug concentrations to guide treatment decisions, such as dose adjustment or switching to alternative therapies, based on individual patient profiles. Several strategies have been proposed to mitigate AD A formation and improve the long-term efficacy of biologic therapy in IBD patients. These include co-administration of immunomodulators such as methotrexate, which can suppress the immune response to biologic agents and reduce ADA formation. Additionally, optimization of dosing regimens, such as dose intensification or interval shortening, may help maintain therapeutic drug levels and minimize the risk of ADA development. Despite the significant advances in biologic therapy for IBD, the development of ADAs remains a clinical challenge impacting treatment outcomes and patient management. Future research efforts should focus on elucidating the mechanisms underlying ADA formation, identifying predictive biomarkers for ADA development, and developing personalized therapeutic strategies to mitigate immunogenicity and maximize treatment efficacy. By advancing our understanding of the complex interplay between immunogenicity, ADAs, and loss of effectiveness, we can enhance the care and outcomes of IBD patients receiving biologic therapy [1-5].

Conclusion

Inflammatory bowel disease represents a significant healthcare burden globally, and biologic therapies have revolutionized its management. However, the development of ADAs poses a formidable challenge to the longterm efficacy of biologic therapy in IBD patients. Understanding the factors contributing to ADA formation, monitoring ADA levels, and implementing strategies to mitigate immunogenicity are crucial steps in optimizing treatment outcomes and improving patient care. By addressing the complexities of immunogenicity and ADA development, clinicians can tailor therapeutic approaches to individual patient needs, ultimately enhancing the quality of life for IBD patients worldwide.

Acknowledgement

None.

Conflict of Interest

None.

References

  1. Kornbluth, Asher. "Infliximab approved for use in Crohn's disease: A report on the FDA GI Advisory Committee conference."Inflamm Bowel Dis 4 (1998): 328-329.

    Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  2. Leone, Gian Marco, Katia Mangano, Maria Cristina Petralia and Ferdinando Nicoletti, et al. "Past, present and (foreseeable) future of biological anti-TNF alpha therapy."J Clin Med12 (2023): 1630.

    Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  3. Hirten, Robert P., Marietta Iacucci, Shailja Shah and Subrata Ghosh, et al. "Combining biologics in inflammatory bowel disease and other immune mediated inflammatory disorders."Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 16 (2018): 1374-1384.

    Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  4. Wheat, Chelle L., Cynthia W. Ko, Kindra Clark-Snustad and David Grembowski, et al. "Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) pharmacotherapy and the risk of serious infection: A systematic review and network meta-analysis."BMC Gastroenterol17 (2017): 1-15.

    Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  5. Borren, Nienke Z. and Ashwin N. Ananthakrishnan. "Safety of biologic therapy in older patients with immune-mediated diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis."Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol17 (2019): 1736-1743.

    Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

arrow_upward arrow_upward