Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19619593›Full record

ReviewAdvanced drug delivery reviews2009

T cell epitope: friend or foe? Immunogenicity of biologics in context.

Constanze A Weber, Preema J Mehta, Matt Ardito, Lenny Moise, Bill Martin, Anne S De Groot

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advanced drug delivery reviews, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

58 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Biotechnologia · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. 3 Biotech · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

Constanze A WeberEpiVax, Providence, RI 02903, USA.
Preema J Mehta
Matt Ardito
Lenny Moise
Bill Martin
Anne S De Groot

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Like vaccines, biologic proteins can be very immunogenic for reasons including route of administration, dose frequency and the underlying antigenicity of the therapeutic protein. Because the impact of immunogenicity can be quite severe, regulatory agencies are developing risk-based guidelines for immunogenicity screening. T cell epitopes are at the root of the immunogenicity issue. Through their presentation to T cells, they activate the process of anti-drug antibody development. Preclinical screening for T cell epitopes can be performed in silico, followed by in vitro and in vivo validation. Importantly, screening for immunogenicity is complicated by the discovery of regulatory T cell epitopes, which suggests that immunogenicity testing must now take regulatory T cells into consideration. In this review, we address the application of computational tools for preclinical immunogenicity assessment, the implication of the discovery of regulatory T cell epitopes, and experimental validation of those assessments.

Indexed as

Epitopes, T-LymphocyteAnimalsBiological ProductsB-LymphocytesEpitope MappingHumansT-LymphocytesT-Lymphocytes, RegulatoryBiological ProductsEpitopes, T-Lymphocyte

Identifiers

PMID19619593
PMCPMC7103283

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.