6.2.1. In Vitro and Ex Vivo Studies
The conclusions of the EMA-EPAR [
24] are contradictory when it comes to studying the effector functions of nirsevimab. For the EMA, nirsevimab should exhibit normal Fc-mediated effector functions (complement activation, mediation of phagocytosis, antibody-mediated destruction of virus-infected cells, etc.). Nirsevimab does not prevent virions from attaching to cells. The EMA considers that effector functions are not part of nirsevimab’s mechanism of action [
24] (p. 18), yet writes that the contribution of Fc-mediated effector functions to protection against RSV disease cannot be excluded - in the rapporteur’s opinion, preclinical data from the cotton rat model seem ambiguous in this respect [
24], (p. 15). Mechanisms other than virus neutralization would be necessary for the therapeutic effect, such as viral clearance and killing of infected cells [
4]. The EMA reiterates the importance of studying effector functions for their involvement in a possible ADE [
24], (p. 29) (Fc effector functions are linked to the exacerbation of symptoms due to RSV [
117,
118]).
Before commercialization, the effector functions of nirsevimab were studied only in vitro or in cotton rats [
17,
119,
120] and cynomolgus monkeys [
67], and sometimes with a mAb different from nirsevimab. YTE mutations were shown to reduce FcγRIIIA binding by a factor of 2 (only with allotype F158), as well as ADCC (antibody- dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity) activity by a factor of 100 [
67]. This was confirmed in 2023 for ADCC in an in vitro study (on different human cell types). The EMA does not report any study of ADCC or the role of NK cells (which express only FcγRIIIA), which are nevertheless suspected of playing a primordial role in the balance between protection and pathology following the use of passive immunization [
106,
118]. Ex vivo (using sera from children participating in the nirsevimab clinical trial), the ADCC of NK cells mediated by FcγRIIIA (whose role is double-edged) is completely suppressed compared with that of palivizumab [
117]. But it is known that the level of ADCC activity in vitro does not correlate with clinical symptoms in primary RSV infection, and the role of ADCC in the protection or pathogenesis of RSV infection remains to be determined [
106,
117]. This reduction in ADCC by nirsevimab could influence the therapeutic effect. Indeed, the role of FcγRIIIa would be double-edged: it may be pro-inflammatory and contribute to RSV disease, or it may be anti-inflammatory [
99,
100].
Nirsevimab binds to activating and inhibitory FcγRs and the result of these activating and inhibitory functions could vary according to the level of mAb present in the serum [Brady]. Ex vivo studies show that, at certain dilutions, nirsevimab may possess effector functions linked to the exacerbation of RSV symptoms [
117] further underlining the importance of detailed pharmacokinetic studies. Dilution tests are performed on a pool of sera and do not sufficiently explore the influence of individual variations in nirsevimab concentration (the sera are collected 15 days after injection; analyses are performed on serum pools: 30 sera from treated participants are mixed, representing only 1.5% of the treated cohort). The results vary with serum dilutions, and only stand out from controls for certain dilutions. According to the authors, effector functions cannot be predicted beyond 150 days post-injection. Nirsevimab promotes beneficial ADNP (neutrophil phagocytosis), but neutrophilic inflammation with infiltration is also associated with severe RSV disease. At certain dilutions, nirsevimab amplifies phagocytosis by macrophages, which can be double-edged and requires further research. Complement deposition compared to placebo is strongly increased at certain dilutions. However, the authors do not anticipate any deleterious effect on this effector function in vivo, without further clarification. Complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) is not studied, which is unfortunate as complement can have a protective or pathogenic role in viral infections [
117] and particularly in RSV infections [
118]. Experimental methods proposed in the past, (but overlooked) could be used to assess effector function of nirsevimab: as early as 1989, Gimenez describes an assay for evaluating ADE, which quantifies it by assessing the amount of virus released by a macrophagic line [
68]. Gimenez [
107] and Bournazos [
100] also recall the gap between in vitro ADE assays and experimental in vivo systems.
Other specific studies should have been carried out in the presence of other antibodies, as neutralization and ADE activities are modified when two mAbs are mixed, and a synergistic ADE effect may occur in the presence of different antibodies [
114]. The binding of mAbs to antigen can cause structural changes in the region where IgG binds to FcRn, and also in its interaction with complement [
68,
116]; antigen binding could modify Fc effector functions [
97]. No trials have been carried out in the presence of immune complexes of nirsevimab bound to F protein or virus: all trials are performed in the absence of antigen. Binding to FcγRs depends on the conformational state of IgG (open or closed) [
5]: a possible conformational change in nirsevimab when bound to F antigen or virus could alter its binding to FcγRIII and consequently its effector functions and hence its therapeutic effect.
The role of the glycosylation of nirsevimab on Fc binding has not been explored. According to EMA [
24], nirsevimab is produced on CHO (Chinese hamsters ovary) cells and has a glycosylation site in the Fc domain (Asn-306) like most mAbs; this glycosylation is of the complex type (EPAR specifies that it has been characterized without further precision). mAbs produced from Chinese hamster CHO cell can produce afucosylated mAbs [
121]. Glycosylation may play a role in mAb binding to FcRγ and C1q [
122,
123]. In particular, non-fucosylated IgGs bind more strongly to human FcγRIIIA and ADCC assays may show enhanced cytotoxicity [
69]. Glycosylation of the Fc region affects mAb stability, and plays a role in CDC and ADCC functions by modulating binding to the Fcγ receptor [
124]. Sialylation would not affect FcγRIIIa binding, but afucosylated IgG would have no ADCC activity [
121,
122]. Galactosylation of IgG1 positively influences C1q binding and CDC, and sialylation increases C1q binding of galactosylated IgG [
122]. The glycosylation of nirsevimab should have been studied as well as its effect on the effector functions of the molecule [
118].
mAbs with high anti-viral activity could contribute to inflammation in the advanced stages of the disease, which is probably why they are not used therapeutically [
106]. This possible immune disruption [
74,
110,
111,
112] was not assessed in the trials. Yet there is a method for assessing the pro-inflammatory effect of immun-complexes (IgG binding to FcγRI) on a macrophagic line [
125].
In vitro and ex vivo studies, albeit incomplete, show that nirsevimab has altered effector functions compared with other anti-RSV mAbs, particularly with regard to NK cytotoxic activity and phagocytosis by neutrophils and macrophages, as well as complement deposition. Increased binding to FcRn may disrupt the immune system: this risk has not been assessed. Many unknowns therefore remain, and it is a pity that some of the preclinical in vitro experiments were carried out only after the clinical trials, and were incomplete.
Function of nirsevimab and its relationship with ADE
Function of nirsevimab
* Binds to RSV F (membrane fusion) protein by its variable part and binding to FcRn through its Fc fragment (to extend its lifespan)
* These two bonds are strongly enhanced compared to other mAbs directed against F
Relationship of this function with ADE
* Macrophages and lung epithelial cells strongly express FcRn: these cells are involved in ADE during RSV infections
* FcRn is able to facilitate entry of certain virus-antibody complexes into target cells at sub-neutralizing concentrations
Strong binding to FcRn is able to modify other effector functions of nirsevimab that may be involved in its therapeutic effect (binding to FcγR and complement components), particularly at low concentrations
* Effective concentrations are reached within a few days in some subjects
* Non-specifically, injection of large quantities of mAbs capable of saturating FcRn may result in an immunosuppressive and pro-inflammatory effect
6.2.2. Animal Challenge Studies
During animal challenge studies, risk assessment should be carried out according to Munoz [
126], as prescribed by EMA: all cases of vaccine failure should be investigated for VAERD, viral infection should be confirmed by detection and quantification of the virus in specific sites (blood, upper and lower respiratory tracts, tissues) as well as characterization and sequencing of the virus; the immune response should be assessed and compared (in the present case mAb levels should be measured). Deposits and consumption of complement should be detected. Tissues obtained by autopsy should be evaluated for evidence of immunopathology. Although these post-challenge checks have not been carried out, EMA concludes that ADE has not been observed in cotton rats, even at sub-effective doses [
24].
In rat trials, it is necessary to use a mAb without YTE mutations, as these increase the affinity of FcRn in rats at neutral pH and suppress the protective effect of FcRn binding [
4,
117,
119]. It is therefore difficult to extrapolate the results in these models to assess the absence of VAERD in humans. In the two studies with an antibody almost identical to nirsevimab (lacking the YTE mutations), pulmonary viral loads in cotton rats treated with the mAb and then challenged with RSV where greatly reduced compared with controls who had not received antibodies [
4,
117]. The authors conclude that these trials rule out the risk of ADE. However, we do not know what effect the increased affinity of YTE mutations would have on the viral loads. The reduction in viral loads does not depend on Fc effector functions [
117], however, in humans, Fc effector functions are linked to exacerbation of RSV symptoms [
5,
98,
118]. This calls into question the usefulness of ADE trials in rats. The effect of nirsevimab is being studied in cynomolgus monkeys, but they are not challenged with the virus, so the possible VAERD effect is not studied. No studies of ADE by immune system disruption have been carried. No histopathological evaluation was carried out in rats in the trials (in particular to look for alveolitis and neutrophilic infiltration, which are the signs of ADE in this animal model). Moreover, the animals used were not suitable for characterizing ADE. The EMA stresses that as the rats used in the studies were mature, the translability of the finding to highly immature infants is unknown [
24]. The choice of animals to test for ADE is also problematic. In rats, effector functions are not necessary for protection against RSV infection, so the cotton rat model is not representative of human disease [
117]. The animals usually used to study hRSV (non-human primates, cotton rats, mice and lambs) are semi-permissive to virus replication and experimental infection. Only chimpanzees are completely permissive to hRSV. Cynomolgus macaques do not usually produce signs of disease unless infected with a high titer inoculum. In the VAERD study in cynomolgus monkeys immunized with inactivated RSV virus, pulmonary pathology was not associated with increased viral replication, suggesting that the pathology was due to non-viral antigens. In cotton rats, too, the severity of alveolitis, used as a primary marker of VAERD with inactivated vaccine, depends on the response to non-viral antigens [
127].