Mus musculus
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
PROVIDER: PRJNA262642 | ENA |
REPOSITORIES: ENA
Similar Datasets
Project description:For decades, policies regarding generic medicines have sought to provide patients with economical access to safe and effective drugs, while encouraging the development of new therapies. This balance is becoming more challenging for physicians and regulators as biologics and non-biological complex drugs (NBCDs) such as glatiramer acetate demonstrate remarkable efficacy, because generics for these medicines are more difficult to assess. We sought to develop computational methods that use transcriptional profiles to compare branded medicines to generics, robustly characterizing differences in biological impact. We combined multiple computational methods to determine whether differentially expressed genes result from random variation, or point to consistent differences in biological impact of the generic compared to the branded medicine. We applied these methods to analyze gene expression data from mouse splenocytes exposed to either branded glatiramer acetate or a generic. The computational methods identified extensive evidence that branded glatiramer acetate has a more consistent biological impact across batches than the generic, and has a distinct impact on regulatory T cells and myeloid lineage cells. In summary, we developed a computational pipeline that integrates multiple methods to compare two medicines in an innovative way. This pipeline, and the specific findings distinguishing branded glatiramer acetate from a generic, can help physicians and regulators take appropriate steps to ensure safety and efficacy.
2014-10-01 | GSE61901 | GEO
Project description:For decades, policies regarding generic medicines have sought to provide patients with economical access to safe and effective drugs, while encouraging the development of new therapies. This balance is becoming more challenging for physicians and regulators as biologics and non-biological complex drugs (NBCDs) such as glatiramer acetate demonstrate remarkable efficacy, because generics for these medicines are more difficult to assess. We sought to develop computational methods that use transcriptional profiles to compare branded medicines to generics, robustly characterizing differences in biological impact. We combined multiple computational methods to determine whether differentially expressed genes result from random variation, or point to consistent differences in biological impact of the generic compared to the branded medicine. We applied these methods to analyze gene expression data from mouse splenocytes exposed to either branded glatiramer acetate or a generic. The computational methods identified extensive evidence that branded glatiramer acetate has a more consistent biological impact across batches than the generic, and has a distinct impact on regulatory T cells and myeloid lineage cells. In summary, we developed a computational pipeline that integrates multiple methods to compare two medicines in an innovative way. This pipeline, and the specific findings distinguishing branded glatiramer acetate from a generic, can help physicians and regulators take appropriate steps to ensure safety and efficacy. Glatiramoid samples for SPL cell activation were grouped into four categories: 1) Verified GA, which included GA-RS (22 biological samples) and GA drug product (GA-DP, 34 biological samples from 30 batches) manufactured by Teva; 2) Deliberately Modified GA (DM-GA; 9 biological samples), which included glatiramoids made by Teva that were similar to GA but modified in a variety of ways: prepared with different ingredients (e.g., missing a constituent amino acid); prepared with the same amino acids in the same molar ratio as GA, but with defined amino acid sequences and different molecular weights (referred to as peptide markers TV-35 and TV-66); synthesized by a different process (e.g., changing acetolytic cleavage conditions, alternating polymerization initiator); exposed to destabilizing conditions (e.g., degradation by acid, base, and heat); 3) Unverified Glatiramoids, which included 4 biological samples, TV-5010 and 3 glatiramoids synthesized to be similar to GA but not manufactured using the Teva-patented manufacturing process; and 4) Unverified Generic GA, which included samples from 2 glatiramoids (M-bM-^@M-^\GA-QM-bM-^@M-^] 11 biological samples from 5 different batches, and 2 M-bM-^@M-^\GA-CM-bM-^@M-^] samples from a single batch) marketed as generic GA manufactured by companies other than Teva.
2014-10-01 | E-GEOD-61901 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Glatiramer Acetate (GA) has provided safe and effective treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS) patients for two decades. It acts as an antigen, yet the precise mechanism of action remains to be fully elucidated, and no validated pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic biomarkers exist. In order to better characterize GA’s biological impact, genome-wide expression studies were conducted with a human monocyte (THP-1) cell line. Consistent with previous literature, branded GA upregulated antiinflammatory markers (e.g. IL10), and modulated multiple immune-related pathways. Despite some similarities, significant differences were observed between expression profiles induced by branded GA and Probioglat, a differently-manufactured glatiramoid purported to be a generic GA.
2015-05-22 | GSE68527 | GEO
Project description:Glatopa is a generic glatiramer acetate recently approved for the treatment of patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis. Gene expression profiling was performed as a means to evaluate equivalence of Glatopa and Copaxone. Microarray analysis containing 39,429 unique probes across the entire genome was performed in murine glatiramer acetate–responsive Th2-polarized T cells, a test system highly relevant to the biology of glatiramer acetate. A closely related but nonequivalent glatiramoid molecule was used as a control to establish assay sensitivity. Multiple probe-level (Student’s t-test) and sample-level (principal component analysis, multidimensional scaling, and hierarchical clustering) statistical analyses were utilized to look for differences in gene expression induced by the test articles. The analyses were conducted across all genes measured, as well as across a subset of genes that were shown to be modulated by Copaxone. The following observations were made across multiple statistical analyses: the expression of numerous genes was significantly changed by treatment with Copaxone when compared against media-only control; gene expression profiles induced by Copaxone and Glatopa were not significantly different; and gene expression profiles induced by Copaxone and the nonequivalent glatiramoid were significantly different, underscoring the sensitivity of the test system and the multiple analysis methods. Comparative analysis was also performed on sets of transcripts relevant to T-cell biology and antigen presentation, among others that are known to be modulated by glatiramer acetate. No statistically significant differences were observed between Copaxone and Glatopa in the expression levels (magnitude and direction) of these glatiramer acetate-regulated genes. In conclusion, multiple methods consistently supported equivalent gene expression profiles between Copaxone and Glatopa.
2015-09-26 | GSE73465 | GEO
Project description:Glatiramer Acetate (GA) has provided safe and effective treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS) patients for two decades. It acts as an antigen, yet the precise mechanism of action remains to be fully elucidated, and no validated pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic biomarkers exist. In order to better characterize GA’s biological impact, genome-wide expression studies were conducted with a human monocyte (THP-1) cell line. Consistent with previous literature, branded GA upregulated antiinflammatory markers (e.g. IL10), and modulated multiple immune-related pathways. Despite some similarities, significant differences were observed between expression profiles induced by branded GA and Probioglat, a differently-manufactured glatiramoid purported to be a generic GA. Cells from a human monocyte cell line (THP-1) were stimulated with either branded GA, purported generics from several manufacturers including Probioglat by ProbioMed, or vehicle control (mannitol) for 6, 12, or 24h. RNA was extracted and expression profiled genome-wide using the Affymetrix U133 Plus 2.0 chip. Four batches of GA and one batch of Probioglat were comparatively tested in six biological replicates each.
2015-05-22 | E-GEOD-68527 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8784167 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11335981 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC5321798 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC395764 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4490682 | biostudies-literature