Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19459844›Full record

ReviewBritish journal of pharmacology2009

Therapeutic antibodies: successes, limitations and hopes for the future.

Patrick Chames, Marc Van Regenmortel, Etienne Weiss, Daniel Baty

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in British journal of pharmacology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 622 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
622citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
16.9field-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

622 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1,357 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Imaging ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

562 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Patrick ChamesLaboratoire d'Ingénierie des Systèmes Macromoléculaires, CNRS, UPR9027, GDR2352, 31 chemin Joseph Aiguier, F-13402 Marseille Cedex 20, France. pchames@ibsm.cnrs-mrs.fr
Marc Van Regenmortel
Etienne Weiss
Daniel Baty
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRÉcole Supérieure de Biotechnologie de Strasbourg · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With more than 20 molecules in clinical use, monoclonal antibodies have finally come of age as therapeutics, generating a market value of $11 billion in 2004, expected to reach $26 billion by 2010. While delivering interesting results in the treatment of several major diseases including autoimmune, cardiovascular and infectious diseases, cancer and inflammation, clinical trials and research are generating a wealth of useful information, for instance about associations of clinical responses with Fc receptor polymorphisms and the infiltration and recruitment of effector cells into targeted tissues. Some functional limitations of therapeutic antibodies have come to light such as inadequate pharmacokinetics and tissue accessibility as well as impaired interactions with the immune system, and these deficiencies point to areas where additional research is needed. This review aims at giving an overview of the current state of the art and describes the most promising avenues that are being followed to create the next generation of antibody-based therapeutic agents.

Indexed as

Genetic VectorsAnimalsAntibodies, MonoclonalHumansMiceModels, MolecularAntibodies, Monoclonal

Identifiers

PMID19459844
PMCPMC2697811
OpenAlexW1580407891

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.