Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19252861›Full record

ArticleMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2009

Therapeutic antibodies: current state and future trends--is a paradigm change coming soon?

Dimiter S Dimitrov, James D Marks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
38.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

64 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 130 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. BeyondChemical reviews · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Peptide ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. The reduced form of the antibody CH2 domain.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2021
    Article
  12. A NovelLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. ROS in cancer therapy: the bright side of the moon.Experimental & molecular medicine · 2020
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dimiter S DimitrovNCI-Frederick, National Institutes of Health, Frederick, MD, USA.
James D Marks
Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research · USUniversity of California System · US

Funding

Human Monoclonal Antibodies Against CancerZIABC010701 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI DIMITROV, DIMITER S · 2009 to 2017
$6.9M
Antibody-based therapeutics and vaccines against AIDSZIABC011155 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI DIMITROV, DIMITER S · 2009 to 2017
$2.6M
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antibody-based therapeutics currently enjoy unprecedented success, growth in research and revenues, and recognition of their potential. It appears that the promise of the "magic bullet" has largely been realized. There are currently 22 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for clinical use and hundreds are in clinical trials for treatment of various diseases including cancers, immune disorders, and infections. The revenues from the top five therapeutic antibodies (Rituxan, Remicade, Herceptin, Humira, and Avastin) nearly doubled from $6.4 billion in 2004 to $11.7 billion in 2006. During the last several years major pharmaceutical companies raced to acquire antibody companies, with a recent example of MedImmune being purchased for $15.6 billion by AstraZeneca. These therapeutic and business successes reflect the major advances in antibody engineering which have resulted in the generation of safe, specific, high-affinity, and non-immunogenic antibodies during the last three decades. Currently, second and third generations of antibodies are under development, mostly to improve already existing antibody specificities. However, although the refinement of already known methodologies is certainly of great importance for potential clinical use, there are no conceptually new developments in the last decade comparable, for example, to the development of antibody libraries, phage display, domain antibodies (dAbs), and antibody humanization to name a few. A fundamental question is then whether there will be another change in the paradigm of research as happened 1-2 decades ago or the current trend of gradual improvement of already developed methodologies and therapeutic antibodies will continue. Although any prediction could prove incorrect, it appears that conceptually new methodologies are needed to overcome the fundamental problems of drug (antibody) resistance due to genetic or/and epigenetic alterations in cancer and chronic infections, as well as problems related to access to targets and complexity of biological systems. If new methodologies are not developed, it is likely that gradual saturation will occur in the pipeline of conceptually new antibody therapeutics. In this scenario we will witness an increase in combination of targets and antibodies, and further attempts to personalize targeted treatments by using appropriate biomarkers as well as to develop novel scaffolds with properties that are superior to those of the antibodies now in clinical use.

Indexed as

Antibodies, MonoclonalClinical Trials as TopicHumansAntibodies, Monoclonal

Identifiers

PMID19252861
PMCPMC3402212
OpenAlexW1503491996

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.