Guidelines on. Monoclonal Antibody Production

Transcription

1 Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production Endorsed 15 March 2001 i

2 Commonwealth of Australia 2001 ISBN Print: Online: This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from AusInfo. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Manager, Legislative Services, AusInfo, GPO Box 1920, Canberra ACT address: The strategic intent of the NHMRC is to provide leadership and work with other relevant organisations to improve the health of all Australians by: fostering and supporting a high quality and internationally recognised research base; providing evidence based advice; applying research evidence to health issues thus translating research into better health practice and outcomes; and promoting informed debate on health and medical research, health ethics and related issues. NHMRC web address: This document is sold through AusInfo Government Info Bookshops at a price which covers the cost of printing and distribution only. For publication purchases please contact AusInfo on their toll-free number , or through their internet address: ii

3 F O R E WO R D The publication of the NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production marks a major achievement in support of the principles of Replacement, Reduction and Refinement the 3Rs upon which the Australian Code of Practice for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes was established. The basic message contained within the Guidelines, which were an initiative of the NHMRC Animal Welfare Committee (AWC), is that the use of the ascites fluid method for the production of monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) is no longer acceptable. Since the first MAbs were produced in the mid-1970s, their ability to recognise a unique part of a complex molecule has made them extremely useful in basic and medical research, medicine and biotechnology. However, until relatively recently, the only reliable way of making MAbs the ascites method caused concerns to all members of Animal Ethics Committees (AECs) due to its potential to induce pain and distress in the mice. In the ascites method, mice are treated so as to develop tumours and produce ascites fluid as a source of the MAbs. Developments in technology now provide a variety of cell culture systems to generate MAbs of high quality in good yields. Having consulted with the relevant specialists before proceeding with the guidelines, the NHMRC AWC concluded that in vitro technology had reached a point where continued use of the ascites method for MAb production was no longer justifiable, except in rare and special cases. For those instances where the use of the ascites method is justifiable to an institutional AEC, the Guidelines offer a number of steps which constitute refinement of the existing procedures, to minimise pain and distress to the mice. The NHMRC believes that a change to non-animal methods for the routine production of MAbs should benefit all interested parties. The NHMRC will continue to support the Australian Code by monitoring progress and producing similar guidelines as advances in technology allow some or all elements of the 3Rs to be put into practice for the use of animals in teaching and research. The NHMRC AWC is most appreciative of the numerous, informed and constructive submissions it received from interested parties around Australia as part of the formal public consultation process. Professor Warwick A Anderson Chairperson NHMRC Research Committee Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production III

4 C O N T E N T S 1 Preamble 1 2 Definitions and Abbreviations 3 3 Guidelines Scope Replacement Refinement Information required by an AEC in applications to use the ascites method of MAB production 8 4 Further Information 9 Appendices 1 Some possible reasons why it may be necessary 10 to consider in vivo production 2 Process for guideline development and evaluation 11 Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production V

5 1 P R E A M B L E This document was developed in response to recognition of the growing need for further emphasis on the principles of Replacement and Refinement as they apply to the use of animals for the production of monoclonal antibodies. The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Animal Welfare Committee (AECs) has developed the following guidelines to assist institutional Animal Ethics Committees in the evaluation of applications involving monoclonal antibody production. This document should be read in conjunction with The Australian Code of Practice for the Ca r e and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes, 6th edition which is available from the NHMRC internet site: These guidelines are based upon the following considerations: The production of monoclonal antibodies using animals involves procedures which have the potential to produce significant pain and distress; The Australian Code of Practice for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes, 6th edition, section 1.9 states Techniques which replace or complement the use of animals in scientific and teaching activities must be sought and used whenever possible ; and In vitro methods exist which can replace the ascites fluid method in most experimental applications without compromising the aims of the study. These methods are available and are better or equal to the ascites method in terms of antibody quality. There are three stages in the production of monoclonal antibodies: a) The immunisation stage the induction of antibody-producing cells in vivo. b) The testing and selection of antibody-producing cells in vitro. c) The in vitro or in vivo propagation of selected cells to produce monoclonal antibodies. In vitro cells are propagated in a bioreactor. In vivo cells are propagated in mice to generate ascites fluid containing monoclonal antibodies. In most circumstances, use of mice will continue to be required in the immunisation stage. The NHMRC advises that the ascites fluid method of monoclonal antibody production is no longer acceptable, except in rare cases where in vitro methods are shown to be unsuitable. NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production 1

6 Accordingly, AECs are expected to evaluate critically any proposed use of the ascites fluid method. Before approval of proposals which include the ascites method, AECs must determine that: a) The proposed use is scientifically justified. b) In vitro methods have been shown to be unsuitable for the specific monoclonal antibody which is the subject of the application. c) Methods that avoid or minimise discomfort, distress and pain have been incorporated into the design of the application. Fulfilment of these AEC responsibilities, with appropriate documentation, is considered central to an Institution s compliance with The Australian Code of Practice for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes. 2 NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production

7 2 D E F I N I T I O N S A N D A B B R E V I AT I O N S AEC: ANZCCART: Approved project: Ascites method: MAb: CFA: IFA: Animal Ethics Committee Australian and New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals in Research and Teaching A project approved by a properly constituted AEC, on the basis of a written proposal. The in vivo use of mice for the propagation of a hybridoma cell line and subsequent collection of ascitic fluid. Monoclonal antibody Complete Freund s adjuvant Incomplete Freund s adjuvant NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production 3

8 3 G U I D E L I N E S 3. 1 S C O P E These guidelines apply to: AECs, institutions, and investigators undertaking or overseeing the production of monoclonal antibodies for scientific, teaching or commercial purposes; All new or intended projects; and Modifications to existing projects. Projects approved prior to the adoption of these guidelines may continue to use the method detailed in the original project application. However, if a project is extended to include production of MAbs not specified in the original application these guidelines must be followed. After expiration of an approved protocol, all renewals must comply with these guidelines. These guidelines are not intended as a comprehensive source of information about monoclonal antibody production. They do not apply to MAbs routinely available as reagents from commercial outlets, except in the circumstances described in 3.2.2(c) below. Investigators and AECs are encouraged to seek information from other sources including the appended references R E P LAC E M E N T Use of the ascites method In vitro MAb production is the accepted method. The ascites method may only be used after it has been shown that in vitro methods are unsuitable for the production of the specific antibody required for the proposed project. (The failure of a researcher with an established track record in the production of MAb in tissue culture to grow a specific hybridoma in vitro would be an example of sufficient evidence.) The role of AECs in assessing applications to produce MAbs a) AECs should recognise that all hybridomas are unique, and that no single technique is suitable for all; in rare circumstances successful production may depend on use of the ascites method. However, an assumption, or conclusion, of a need for the ascites method should not be applied to broad classes of antibodies but only to individual hybridoma lines for which in vitro techniques have failed. b) AECs should not accept increased cost of in vitro methods as a reasonable justification to allow use of the ascites method. c) If a researcher wishes to request an external source to produce MAbs for them using the ascites method, approval by the institutional AEC is still necessary and must be made on the basis of of these guidelines. NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production 5

9 3.2.3 Facilities for in vitro MAb production Access to and experience with appropriate facilities and equipment is essential to the success of in vitro MAb production methods. Investigators lacking experience or resources should seek alternative suppliers of in vitro MAbs. Institutions with sufficient demand should consider establishing centralised or core facilities for MAb production using in vitro methods Use of the ascites method for MAb production It is recognised that in some situations, production of MAbs using the ascites method will be necessary. Possible reasons for considering in vivo production are listed in Appendix 1. Note that the list is not intended to be exhaustive. The responsibility for allowing use of the ascites method in any situation will remain with the AEC R E F I N E M E N T Refinement of immunisation (induction of antibody-producing lymphoid cells) a) Site of injection. Sub-cutaneous or intra-peritoneal routes of administration of antigen without adjuvant are recommended in mice. Intravenous injection is also an appropriate route of administration for soluble antigen without adjuvants. AECs should be aware that the use of intra-peritoneal, intradermal, intramuscular, or foot pad routes of administration of antigen containing adjuvant requires special justification and monitoring for evidence of unwanted side effects. b) Use of adjuvant. All adjuvants are irritants and should only be injected by an experienced technician. Careful monitoring of the animals is essential to detect any unwanted side effects. Freund s adjuvant should not be used where it is possible to use no adjuvant or less irritant adjuvants. If Freund s adjuvant is used, the recommended volume of CFA or IFA is ml (25 microlitres) and must not exceed 0.1 ml (100 microlitres) per injection site (see 3.3.1a) in mice. CFA must not be used more than once in an individual mouse. c) Total volume of inoculum. The combined adjuvant + antigen volume should not exceed 0.2 ml (200 microlitres) in mice. d) Blood sampling. The method of blood sampling prior to killing animals should be assessed by the AEC. The need to bleed animals more than twice should be justified. The competence of the technician should be taken into account when approving a method of bleeding. 6 NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production

10 3.3.2 Refinements of the ascites method of production ( in vivo propagation of hybridoma clones and collection of ascitic fluid) If the ascites method must be used, the investigator should justify it and take all appropriate measures to minimise distress and pain to the animals. A most important aspect of the ascites method of MAb production is the utilisation of skilled, competent, technical staff experienced in the handling and monitoring of mice and with the techniques used. Staff must be capable of recognising signs of distress in mice and be responsible for taking action when necessary. a) Priming. Use the lowest possible dose of priming agent required to achieve satisfactory results. For pristane, the volume should not exceed 0.2 ml (200 microlitres). The proposed use of more than 0.2 ml should not be approved without justification. b) Collection of ascitic fluid. Recommendations: Monitoring of animals to avoid pain and distress is critical during the accumulation of ascitic fluid. The excessive build up of fluid can cause distress and also mask a loss of body weight; Preferably ascitic fluid should be collected once only under terminal anaesthesia. However, if the condition of the animal shows no evidence of distress or suffering, up to two collections may be permitted; Sedation or general anaesthesia should be used for recovery collections; and A 22 gauge or smaller needle should be used for fluid collection. c) Holding period. Mice should be held no more than 28 days after hybridoma inoculation. An animal displaying loss of condition, pain or distress must be humanely killed immediately. d) Documentation. Application to use the ascites method must specify the techniques relevant to the points made in a) to c) above. In addition, the applicant must explain why the production of that particular MAb by in vitro methods was unsuccessful. e) AEC responsibility. AECs must be prepared to justify instances of approval of the ascites method of MAb production to relevant state and national authorities. Records giving the reasons for such approvals must be kept. These should specify the nature of the in vitro methods which were tested and possible technical explanations for why they failed. NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production 7

11 3. 4 I N F O R M AT I O N R E Q U I R E D B Y A N A E C I N A P P LICAT I O NS TO U S E T H E A S C I T E S M E T H O D O F M A B P RO D U CT I O N Any information available on in vitro production of the specific MAb; Where the in vitro trial was done (eg department, institutional core facility, commercial core facility, other); Brand and type of in vitro system used; Relevant details of the experience of the researcher with an established track record in the production of MAb in tissue culture; Details of the procedure that failed to produce sufficient MAb; and Steps taken to rectify failure of the procedure (eg including whether second opinions were sought, such as consultation with staff of a core facility). 8 NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production

12 4 F U RT H E R I N F O R M AT I O N NSW Guidelines for the Production of Monoclonal Antibodies Science Centre for Animal Welfare (SCAW) NIH Guidelines Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research chatline on in vitro production of MAbs. To subscribe, write: LISTSERV@WEHI.edu.au ANZCCART publication The Use of Immuno-adjuvants in Animals in Australia and New Zealand ANZCCART web-site NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production 9

13 A P P E N D I X 1 S O M E P O S S I B L E R E A S O N S W H Y I T M AY B E N E C E S S A RY TO C O N S I D E R I N V I V OP R O D U C T I O N a) The hybridoma cell line does not grow well in vitro and/or yields of antibody are very low. Estimates of the failure rate of in vitro hybridoma growth are less than 10 percent and more commonly between 2 percent and 4 percent. b) The MAb is to be used for experiments in mice where non-mouse proteins may confuse the results. c) Steps in purification of MAb have caused denaturation and loss of antibody activity. d) Specific glycosylation patterns from MAbs produced in vitro have effected antibody activity adversely. e) The hybridoma cell line is contaminated with infectious agents, such as mycoplasma, yeast or fungi, and can be decontaminated by sub-cutaneous injection into mice to re-derive uncontaminated hybridoma cells. The AEC should consider any possible side effects of this process on the animals. f) It may be necessary to check the viral status of a hybridoma cell line by injecting it into mice and testing for seroconversion. The AEC should consider any possible side effects of this procedure on the animals. NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production 11

14 A P P E N D I X 2 P R O C E S S F O R G U I D E L I N E D E V E L O P M E N T A N D E VA L UAT I O N P U R P O S E A N D S CO P E O F T H E GU I D E LINES Welfare of animals in research Encapsulated in the Australian Code of Practice for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes (the Code) is the need in scientific and teaching activities to consider the principles of: replacement of animals with other methods; reduction in the number of animals used; and refinement of techniques used to reduce the impact on animals. The Code provides general principles for the care and use of animals, specifies the responsibilities of investigators and institutions, and details the terms of reference, membership and operation of institutional AECs. Techniques which replace or complement the use of animals in scientific and teaching activities must be sought and used wherever possible. Studies must be scientifically and statistically valid, and must use only the minimum number of animals necessary. AECs must ensure that all animal care and use within the institution is conducted in compliance with the Code and incorporates the principles of replacement, reduction and refinement. It is the responsibility of AECs to ensure that only those scientific or teaching activities which conform to the requirements of all relevant sections of the Code and of legislation are approved. Written proposals for the consideration of AECs should include reasons why animals are necessary for the project and, in particular, why techniques which do not use animals have been rejected as unsuitable. They should also include a description of experimental, surgical and related procedures, including dose and route of any substance administered. The production of MAbs using animals involves procedures which have the potential to produce significant pain and distress. These guidelines arose in response to a growing awareness that a method of MAb production exists which can replace the use of animals for one of the stages of MAb production. This method replaces the in vivo propagation of selected cells to produce MAbs, with an in vitro method. The guidelines will assist AECs to determine whether any proposed use of the in vivo method is justified. Target audience These guidelines were developed to assist institutional AECs in the evaluation of applications involving MAb production to ensure that only in vitro methods of 12 NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production

15 production are used for all new research projects funded by NHMRC, except where in vitro methods have been shown to be unsuccessful in the production of a specific MAb from a given cell line. Economic implications In developing the guidelines, it was recognised that the in vitro method of propagating selected cells to produce MAbs will increase costs in the short term. A number of researchers will have to find access to suitable bioreactor facilities. The set up costs for a new facility for medium level production is likely to cost $35-$50k. The production costs for a single MAb extraction are estimated to be in the range $400 to $1200. Nevertheless, the welfare of the animals is considered to be the paramount concern. The guidelines do not accept increased cost of in vitro methods as reasonable justification for the in vivo method. Scope of the guidelines The guidelines recognise that the use of animals for MAb production will continue to be required during the initial, immunisation stage of production, in the induction of antibody-producing cells in vivo. The guidelines also recognise that there are circumstances where it may not be possible to replace the in vivo method in the later stage of MAb production, in the propagation of selected cells to produce MAbs. Some of these circumstances are outlined in Appendix 1 to the guidelines. Special justification for using the in vivo method is required in all circumstances. While it is recognised that direct influence over the method of MAb production at institutions not funded by the NHMRC is not possible, relevant State and Territory legislation requires compliance to the Code. Links between the guidelines and the Code are planned as part of any future revision of the Code. C O NS U LTAT I O N P RO C E S S The animal welfare issues involved in the production of monoclonal antibodies were considered by the NHMRC Animal Welfare Committee from 1997 onwards. A joint NHMRC/ANZCCART workshop was held in March 1998 for animal welfare groups, researchers and industry representatives to discuss the relative merits of in vitro and in vivo methods of monoclonal antibody production. As a result of these discussions, a draft policy document was prepared for public consultation. Initial public consultation process Advertised 10 March 1999 in The Australian and the Australian Government Gazette, and on the NHMRC Animal Welfare Committee internet page; A copy of the consultation package was sent to identified stakeholders, including AECs; Submissions were due on 27 May 1999; and NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production 13

16 31 submissions were received as follows: Assoc. Prof. G Mayrhofer Prof. L Powell Prof. I Frazer Dr V de Carvalho Dr H Zola Dr G Fernando Dr E Favoloro H Boyd Ms K Stiles Dr A Henniker Assoc. Prof. P Wright, Prof. B Adler & Assoc. Prof. J Davies Prof. C Masters Prof. J McCluskey Prof. J Goding Dr J Hatch Mr J Kelly Ms S Cook Prof. C Marlin Dr J Barnett Mr M Cawthorne Ms J Ferguson Ms G Oogjes Dr J Hatch Ms L Chave Ms J Carryer Prof. R Bishop, AO & Mr P Masendycz Dr D Noonan Dr A Cameron Ms H Arthurson Dr R Symons Ms A Watt The University of Adelaide, SA The Queensland Institute of Medical Research The University of Queensland Central Coast Area Health Service, NSW Child Health Research Institute Inc., SA The University of Queensland Western Sydney Area Health Service, NSW Central Sydney Area Health Service, NSW NSW Westmead Hospital and Community Health Services, NSW Monash University, Vic. The University of Melbourne, Vic. The University of Melbourne, Vic. Monash University, Vic. The University of Adelaide, SA Bioquest Limited, NSW La Trobe University, Vic. The Flinders University of South Australia Victorian Institute of Animal Science, Agriculture Victoria Institute of Medical and Veterinary Science, SA The Garvan Institute of Medical Research, NSW Animals Australia, Vic. The University of Adelaide, SA Animal Research Review Panel, NSW Agriculture Compassion for Animals, WA Royal Children s Hospital, Melbourne, Vic. Monash University, Vic. Bureau of Animal Welfare, Vic. Government The University of New England, NSW Animal and Plant Health Service, Qld Government The Royal Melbourne Hospital Research Foundation, Vic. 14 NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production

17 Each submission was considered by a face-to-face meeting of the Monoclonal Antibody Guidelines Working Group on 17 August 1999; The members of the Monoclonal Antibody Guidelines Working Group were: Dr Brian Burke Dr Mike Calford Assoc. Prof. Graham Jenkin Dr Alana Mitchell Dr Carole Webb Steggles Australia Australian National University Monash University NHMRC Animal Welfare Liaison Officer Cat Protection Society of Victoria Second round of public consultations Advertised on 20 September 2000 in The Australian and the Australian Government Gazette, and placed on the NHMRC Animal Welfare Committee internet page; A copy of the consultation package was sent to identified stakeholders, including respondents to the initial public consultation process; Submissions were due on 17 November 2000; 18 submissions were received as follows: Prof. I Frazer Mr N Hoogenraad Mr T York Prof. A Favaloro Mr M Cawthorne Ms J Lowndes Ms A Watt Ms S Watson Dr J Hatch Ms L Chave Ms J Carryer Dr D Noonan Prof. J Rasko & Prof. B Green Ms G Oogjes Dr H Wirth Prof. C Marlin Dr L Murphy Prof. J McCluskey The University of Queensland La Trobe University, Vic. Royal Perth Hospital, WA Western Sydney Area Health Service, NSW Institute of Medical and Veterinary Science, SA Joint Hospitals Ethics Committee, NSW The Royal Melbourne Hospital Research Foundation, Vic. Monash University, Vic. The University of Adelaide, SA Animal Research Review Panel, NSW Agriculture Compassion for Animals, WA Monash University, Vic. Centenary Institute of Cancer Medicine and Cell Biology, NSW Animals Australia, Vic. RSPCA Australia, ACT The Flinders University of South Australia Animal and Plant Health Service, Qld Government The University of Melbourne, Vic. NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production 15

18 Each submission was considered by a face-to-face meeting of the Monoclonal Antibody Guidelines Working Group on 1 February 2001; and The members of the Monoclonal Antibody Guidelines Working Group were: Mrs Elizabeth Grant AM Assoc. Prof. Graham Jenkin Dr Alana Mitchell Dr Carole Webb Chair, NHMRC Animal Welfare Committee Monash University NHMRC Animal Welfare Liaison Officer Cat Protection Society of Victoria I M P LE M E N TAT I O N AND DISSEMINAT I O N P LANS NHMRC will be responsible for disseminating and implementing the guidelines. The guidelines will initially be targeted at AECs at NHMRC-funded institutions, and NHMRC-funded researchers. In the longer term, planned links between the guidelines and the Code will provide wider application. Endorsement The guidelines have been submitted to the NHMRC for endorsement and will be circulated to relevant stakeholders as a critical first step to aid dissemination and implementation. Methods for dissemination An initial print run of 1,000 copies of the guidelines will be made. It will be disseminated free of charge to all identified stakeholders, including respondents to the public consultation process, and institutional AECs receiving NHMRC funding. These AECs will also be alerted about the guidelines by letter. Information about the guidelines will be brought to the attention of researchers through the standard NHMRC grant documentation. The guidelines will be placed on the Animal Welfare Committee page of the NHMRC internet site. Promotional activities will include submissions to relevant newsletters and journals. E VALUAT I O N As a large number of animals have been used to date in the production of MAbs, it is believed implementation of the guidelines will significantly reduce this number. Evaluation of the effect of implementing the guidelines on animal numbers will be based on statistical reports from AECs, and reviews of current literature. R E V I S I N G T H E GUIDELI N ES In response to advances in biological sciences and changes in community attitudes, periodic revisions have been made to the Code. Links between the Code and the guidelines will be considered in any future revision process. 16 NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production

19 The National Health and Medical Research Council The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) is a statutory body within the portfolio of the Commonwealth Minister for Health and Aged Care, established by the National Health and Medical Research Council Act The NHMRC advises the Australian community and Commonwealth; State and Territory Governments on standards of individual and public health, and supports research to improve those standards. The NHMRC advises the Commonwealth Government on the funding of medical and public health research and training in Australia and supports many of the medical advances made by Australians. The NHMRC also develops guidelines and standards for the ethical conduct of health and medical research. The Council comprises nominees of Commonwealth, State and Territory health authorities, professional and scientific colleges and associations, unions, universities, business, consumer groups, welfare organisations, conservation groups and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission. The Council meets up to four times a year to consider and make decisions on reports prepared by committees and working parties following wide consultation on the issue under consideration. A regular publishing program ensures that Council s recommendations are widely available to governments, the community, scientific, industrial and educational groups. The Council publishes extensively in the following areas: Aged care Health promotion Child health Infection control Clinical practice guidelines Men s health Communicable diseases Mental health Dentistry NHMRC National Health Diabetes and Medical Research Council Drugs and poisons Nutrition Drug and substance abuse Public health Environmental health Research Ethics Animal Sport/Injury Ethics Human Women s health Health procedures Workforce A list of current publications is available from: The Publications Officer ONHMRC MDP 100 GPO Box 9848 Canberra ACT 2601 Phone: (02) (24-hour answering machine) Toll free: Fax: (02) nhmrc.publications@health.gov.au Internet: NHMRC Guidelines on Monoclonal Antibody Production 17