- 现金
- 281 元
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 65
- 注册时间
- 2002-3-11
- 最后登录
- 2012-6-26
|
1楼
发表于 2002-5-25 11:39
From : Scientific American
Magic Bullets Fly Again
Molecular guided missiles called monoclonal antibodies were poised to shoot down cancer and a host of other diseases--until they crashed and burned. Now a new generation is soaring to market
By Carol Ezzell
The unbridled optimism that surrounded monoclonal antibodies in the 1980s was
infectious. You had to be the world's toughest cynic not to be dazzled. Got cancer?
No problem. Like heat-seeking missiles, monoclonal antibodies tipped with poisons
or radioactive isotopes would home in on malignant cells and deliver their deadly
payloads, wiping out cancer while leaving normal cells intact. How about an
infectious disease? All would be well. Monoclonals would surround marauding
viruses and bacteria like goombahs from Tony Soprano's crew, muscling them into
secluded byways where killer cells of the immune system would make them an offer
they couldn't refuse.
If only things had been so simple. Monoclonal antibodies are highly pure
populations of immune system proteins that attack specific molecular targets.
Unfortunately, people who received infusions of the early therapeutic monoclonal
antibodies tended to develop their own antibodies against the foreign ones, which
caused them to become even sicker for reasons that are not entirely clear. And
the liver showed a predilection for these early monoclonals, sopping them up
before they could target their quarries. Clinical trials failed. Stocks plunged.
Millions of dollars were lost. And a generation of scientists and biotechnology
Business people developed the skepticism shared only by the once burned, twice
shy.
Luckily, some of those individuals soldiered on despite the bad news and found
ways to overcome the failings of the early versions of the drugs. Now many are
hoping that 2001 will be the Year of the Monoclonals, when their perseverance
will pay off in the form of lots of effective monoclonal antibody-based drugs
approved or under evaluation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. "Antibodies
will be surging ahead," says Franklin M. Berger, a biotech analyst with JP Morgan
Securities. He predicts that soon there will be so many monoclonal antibodies
awaiting approval by the FDA that they will cause a bottleneck in the review
process.
Ten monoclonals have reached the market, and three await FDA approval, including
the first two that would be equipped to deliver a dose of radiation [see table].
Another 100 or more antibodies are being tested in humans, having already shown
promise in tests involving animals. But this summer the FDA sent a message that
could slow the monoclonal juggernaut. In July the agency told Genentech, located
in South San Francisco, Calif., that it would have to present additional data
from human (clinical) trials to prove the long-term safety of its monoclonal
antibody for asthma, Xolair, which mops up the antibodies that play a role in
asthma and allergies. Some observers have interpreted the move as an indication
that the FDA might be particularly rigorous in scrutinizing the side effects of
monoclonal antibodies, especially those that patients would take for years for
chronic conditions. The announcement sent a brief chill through investors, who
drove down the stocks of monoclonal developers for a week or so.
Nevertheless, the advantages of monoclonals are hard to ignore. Donald L. Drakeman,
president and CEO of monoclonal maker Medarex in Princeton, N.J., says that
antibodies are simply easier to develop than traditional drugs composed of small,
inorganic molecules. Because they are large molecules, they might not be suitable
for every disease, but he emphasizes that it takes only one or two years to come
up with a monoclonal antibody suitable for testing, versus the five years required
for small molecules. That speed translates into savings: it costs only $2 million
to ready a monoclonal antibody for clinical testing, Drakeman estimates, compared
with $20 million for a traditional drug. And despite the FDA's hesitancy to approve
Genentech's asthma therapy, he states that monoclonals have so far had a higher
success rate than small-molecule drugs in clearing regulatory hurdles.
"Antibodies are almost never toxic," he explains.
Ironically, monoclonals might be victims of their own success: market analysts
are predicting that companies won't have sufficient production facilities to make
them all. But the biotechnology industry has anticipated this problem. Some of
the more inventive proposals include the manufacture of monoclonals in the milk
of livestock or in plants.
Monoclonal Methods
The past failure of monoclonals stemmed in part from the way they were originally
made. The classic manufacturing technique was devised in 1975 by immunologists
Georges J. F. Kler and Car Milstein of the Medical Research Council's
Laboratory of Molecular Biology in Cambridge, England, who were awarded the 1984
Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for their innovation. The basic process
involves injecting an antigen--a substance the immune system recognizes as
foreign or dangerous--into a mouse, thereby inducing the mouse's
antibody-producing cells, called B lymphocytes, to produce antibodies to that
antigen. To harvest such antibodies, scientists would ideally pluck only the B
cells that make them. But finding the cells and getting them to make large
quantities of the antibodies takes some doing.
Part of the complex procedure involves fusing B cells from the mice to immortalized
(endlessly replicating) cells in culture to create cells called hybridomas
[see illustration]. The drawback of these particular hybridomas is that they
produce murine antibodies, which the human immune system can perceive as
interlopers. Patients who have received infusions of murine monoclonals have
experienced a so-called HAMA response, named for the human anti-mouse antibodies
they generate. The HAMA response includes joint swelling, rashes and kidney
failure and can be life-threatening. It also destroys the antibodies.
To avoid both the HAMA response and the premature inactivation of mouse antibodies
by the immune system, scientists have developed a variety of techniques to make
murine antibodies more human. Antibodies are Y-shaped molecules that bind to
antigens through the arms, or FAb regions, of that Y. The stem of the Y, the Fc
region, interacts with cells of the immune system. The Fc region is particularly
important in eradicating bacteria: once antibodies coat a bacterium by binding
to it through their FAb regions, the Fc regions attract microbe-engulfing cells
to destroy it.
One approach involves replacing all but the antigen-binding regions of murine
monoclonals with human components. Four of the monoclonals now for sale in the
U.S. are such chimeric--part mouse, part human--antibodies. Among them is ReoPro,
made by Centocor in Malvern, Pa., which prevents blood clots by binding to a
specific receptor on platelets; it had sales last year of $418 million. (The body
usually doesn't make antibodies targeted to healthy tissues, or autoimmune
disease would result. But such antibodies, delivered as drugs, can help treat
certain disorders.)
Another strategy, called humanization, is behind five more products on the market,
including Herceptin, the breast cancer-targeting monoclonal antibody developed
by Genentech. Humanization entails using genetic engineering to selectively
replace as much as possible of the murine antibodies--including much of their
antigen-binding regions--with human protein [see illustration].
Campath--thought by its maker, Millennium Pharmaceuticals in Cambridge, Mass.,
to be the first humanized antibody ever made--received FDA approval in May for
people with B cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia for whom other therapies haven't
worked. Campath binds to a receptor found on various types of normal and cancerous
immune cells, but patients make more of the normal cells after treatment ends.
The other monoclonal on the market is a purely murine antibody.
After more than 25 years of trying, researchers have also finally fused human
B cells to immortalized cells to create hybridomas that generate fully human
antibodies. In February, Abraham Karpas of the University of Cambridge and his
colleagues reported accomplishing the feat, although it is too soon to tell
whether the monoclonals made using human cells will be safer, more effective or
cheaper to manufacture than those generated using other technologies.
Medarex and Fremont, Calif.-based Abgenix have devised ways to induce mice to
produce fully human antibodies. The companies genetically alter the mice to
contain human antibody genes; when they inject the mice with antigens, the animals
produce antibodies that are human in every way. "The technology to humanize or
make fully human monoclonal antibodies was one of those changes that made
[monoclonals] more commercially viable," suggests Walter Newman, senior vice
president of biotherapeutics and nonclinical development for Millennium
Pharmaceuticals, which is also developing monoclonal antibody therapeutics.
Abgenix is conducting clinical tests of a fully human antibody against
interleukin-8 (IL-8), a naturally occurring chemical known as a cytokine that
normally activates cells of the immune system. When the body produces too much
IL-8, inflammatory autoimmune diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis or psoriasis
can result. Medarex has a variety of clinical trials of fully human monoclonals
ongoing for cancer and autoimmune conditions. It is also developing so-called
designer antibodies that have been engineered either to deliver a toxin directly
to a diseased cell or to recruit immune cells specifically to attack tumors.
Other investigators are attempting to mass-produce monoclonals without the aid
of mice. Cambridge Antibody Technology in England and MorphoSys AG in Munich are
using a technique called phage display that does just that--and also helps to
find the most specific monoclonals against a particular antigen
Phage display takes advantage of a long, stringy virus called a filamentous phage
that infects bacteria. Researchers can isolate DNA from human B lymphocytes (each
cell of which makes antibodies against only one antigen), insert this DNA into
bacteria such as Escherichia coli and then allow filamentous phages to infect
the bacteria. As the phages produce new copies of themselves, they automatically
make the proteins encoded by the antibody genes of the various B lymphocytes and
add them to the surfaces of newly forming phage particles. Scientists can then
use the antigen they intend to target, such as a receptor on cancer cells, to
fish out the phages containing the gene for the most specific antibody to that
antigen. To produce a lot of that antibody, they can either have one phage infect
more bacteria or insert the antibody gene into cultured cells.
Zeroing In on the Targets
Together the newer forms of monoclonals--chimeric, humanized and human--are
looking good against an array of diseases. Two such drugs, if they pass muster
with the FDA this year as expected, will finally fulfill the dream of deploying
so-called conjugated monoclonals--ones that carry radioactive chemicals or
toxins directly to tumors as a new form of cancer therapy. Zevalin (developed
by San Diego-based IDEC Pharmaceuticals and Schering AG) and Bexxar (devised by
Corixa in Seattle and GlaxoSmithKline) both target an antigen called CD20 on the
surfaces of B lymphocytes, cells that grow uncontrollably in the cancer known
as non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. And both pack a hot punch: Zevalin totes an isotope
of yttrium (90Y), and Bexxar carries a radioactive form of iodine (131I).
Many other monoclonals now in clinical trials also target molecules on immune
cells that play a role in a variety of diseases. For example, Genentech is in
the late stages of testing Xanelim, its monoclonal against CD11a. This protein
exists on the surfaces of T lymphocytes and helps them to infiltrate the skin
and cause the inflammation of psoriasis, which afflicts an estimated seven million
people in the U.S. In a study of nearly 600 psoriasis sufferers that was reported
at the American Academy of Dermatology conference in July, researchers found that
57 percent of patients on the highest dose of the drug experienced at least a
50 percent decrease in the severity of their disease. Several companies are also
pursuing monoclonals against CD18, a protein on T lymphocytes that underlies
inflammation as well as the tissue damage resulting from a heart attack.
A molecule called the epidermal growth factor (EGF) receptor is an additional
tempting target for monoclonal developers. One third of patients with solid tumors
make excess EGF receptors; indeed, the much heralded small-molecule drug Gleevec,
sold by Novartis, interferes with the ability of cancer cells to receive growth
signals from those receptors. Anti-EGF receptor monoclonals might best be
administered in combination with traditional chemotherapies. At the American
Society of Clinical Oncology conference in May, researchers reported that
cetuximab, an anti-EGF receptor antibody produced by ImClone Systems in New York
City, helped chemotherapy to start working again in 23 percent of patients with
advanced colorectal cancer who had stopped responding to chemotherapy alone.
Other companies are focusing on making monoclonal antibodies to molecules on the
surfaces of the cells that line the blood vessels. Certain types of these
molecules, such as avb3, play a role in angiogenesis, the growth of new blood
vessels, which is a crucial step in the development of tumors. A hugely successful
monoclonal antibody drug now on the market, Remicade, targets tumor necrosis
factor (TNF), a molecule the body uses to juice the cellular arm of the immune
system but that also plays a role in inflammatory diseases. According to company
reports, Remicade, which is on pharmacy shelves for Crohn's disease (an
inflammatory bowel disease) and rheumatoid arthritis, made $370 million last year
for its developer, Centocor. Therapies that wipe out TNF have a potential
$2-billion annual market, according to Carol Werther, managing director of equity
research at the investment bank Adams, Harkness and Hill. (Enbrel, an anti-TNF
drug developed by Immunex in Seattle that was approved in 2000 for patients with
moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis, is not technically a monoclonal
antibody, because only part of an antibody--the backbone--is used; that backbone
is linked to a piece of another kind of molecule, the normal cellular receptor
for TNF.)
Emerging Issues
With all these good opportunities facing them, biotechnology and pharmaceutical
companies might be expected to be ramping up their production lines in
anticipation of a big market surge. But worldwide just 10 large-scale antibody
plants are now operating.
Part of the problem is financial: banks don't want to lend the hundreds of millions
of dollars it takes to build a state-of-the-art monoclonal production facility
unless the likelihood that the plant will generate profits is all but guaranteed.
Many of them look back on the 1980s, when drug manufacturers built facilities
that operated for years at only partial capacity.
The gold standard for producing monoclonals from hybridomas relies on enormous
tanks called bioreactors. V. Bryan Lawlis, chairman of Diosynth ATP in Cary, N.C.,
estimates that one giant, 60,000-liter bioreactor plant would be able to
(hypothetically) accommodate only four products. Assuming that 100 monoclonals
will be on the market by 2010, as analysts predict, Lawlis calculates that the
industry will need to build at least 25 new facilities or "we can't satisfy all
the needs." Those production plants would require $5 billion or more and between
three and five years to be built and certified by the FDA--a prospect no one thinks
is going to happen.
To fill the void, some companies are turning to transgenic animals and plants,
those organisms engineered to carry genes for selected antibodies. Transgenic
mammals that secrete monoclonals in their milk can generate one gram of antibody
for roughly $100--one third the cost of traditional production methods, industry
officials say. Centocor and Johnson & Johnson are looking into producing Remicade
using transgenic goats, and Infigen in DeForest, Wis., intends to make monoclonals
in cow's milk, although no such products have yet received FDA approval. Moreover,
it isn't clear how many companies will be willing to turn to these transgenic
options over the standard bioreactors.
Newman concedes that transgenic animals are attractive alternatives, but he adds
that companies must still undergo the sometimes tedious step of isolating the
monoclonals from the milk proteins. "You have purification problems, but you don't
have the expense of 10,000-liter bioreactors," he says. Genetically engineering
and breeding the animals can also take years.
Mich B. Hein, president of Epicyte in San Diego, sees green plants as the answer
to the monoclonal production shortfall. "It's pretty clear that the production
facilities will not meet the demand for even the most promising molecules," he
says. Plants have the advantages of being economical and easily scalable to any
level of demand: they can yield metric tons of monoclonal products. But
purification problems remain, and it is still unclear how the FDA will regulate
pharmaceuticals produced by transgenic plants.
Epicyte has teamed up with Dow to produce corn plants able to generate monoclonal
antibodies that will be formulated as creams or ointments for mucosal surfaces
such as the lips and genitalia or as orally administered drugs for
gastrointestinal or respiratory infections. Hein predicts that by the end of next
year Epicyte will seek FDA clearance to begin clinical trials of corn-produced
monoclonals to prevent the transmission of herpes simplex between adults and
during childbirth. The company is also developing monoclonals that bind to sperm
as possible contraceptives, as well as antibodies that could protect against human
papillomavirus, which causes genital warts and cervical cancer.
Whether they come from cattle, goats, corn or bioreactors, monoclonal antibodies
are set to become a major part of 21st-century medicine.
Further Information:
Monoclonal Antibodies: A 25-Year Roller Coaster Ride. N. S. Halim in The
Scientist, Vol. 14, No. 4, page 16; February 21, 2000.
A Human Myeloma Cell Line Suitable for the Generation of Human Monoclonal
Antibodies. A. Karpas, A. Dremucheva and B. H. Czepulkowski in Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences USA, Vol. 98, No. 4, pages 1799-1804; February
13, 2001.
Biotech Industry Faces New Bottleneck. K. Garber in Nature Biotechnology, Vol.
19, No. 3, pages 184-185; March 2001.
Abstracts of scientific presentations at the 2001 annual meeting of the American
Society of Clinical Oncology are available at virtualmeeting.asco.org/vm2001/
The Author
Carol Ezzell is a member of the board of editors.
|
|