Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20818831›Full record

ReviewClinical pharmacokinetics2010

Population pharmacokinetics of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies.

Nathanael L Dirks, Bernd Meibohm

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 284 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
284citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–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

284 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Efficacy of Zenocutuzumab inThe New England journal of medicine · 2025
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Results from the long-term extension of PRIME: A randomized Phase 1b trial of aducanumab.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024
    Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

224 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.

Nathanael L DirksDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee 38163, USA.
Bernd Meibohm

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A growing number of population pharmacokinetic analyses of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been published in the scientific literature. The aims of this article are to summarize the findings from these studies and to relate the findings to the general pharmacokinetic and structural characteristics of therapeutic mAbs. A two-compartment model was used in the majority of the population analyses to describe the disposition of the mAb. Population estimates of the volumes of distribution in the central (V(1)) and peripheral (V(2)) compartments were typically small, with median (range) values of 3.1 (2.4-5.5) L and 2.8 (1.3-6.8) L, respectively. The estimated between-subject variability in the V(1) was usually moderate, with a median (range) coefficient of variation (CV) of 26% (12-84%). Between-subject variability in other distribution-related parameters such as the V(2) and intercompartmental clearance were often not estimated. Although the pharmacokinetic models used most frequently in the population analyses were models with linear clearance, other models with nonlinear, or parallel linear and nonlinear clearance pathways were also applied, as many therapeutic mAbs are eliminated via saturable target-mediated mechanisms. Population estimates of the maximum elimination rate (V(max)) and the mAb concentration at which elimination was at half maximum for Michaelis-Menten-type elimination pathways varied considerably among the different therapeutic mAbs. However, estimates of the total clearance (CL) of mAbs with linear clearance characteristics and of the clearance of mAbs via the linear clearance pathway (CL(L)) with parallel linear and nonlinear clearance were quite similar for the different mAbs and typically ranged from 0.2 to 0.5 L/day, which is relatively close to the estimated clearance of endogenous IgG of 0.21 L/day. The between-subject variability in the V(max), CL and CL(L) was moderate to high, with estimated CVs ranging from 15% to 65%. Measures of body size were the covariates most commonly identified as influencing the pharmacokinetics of therapeutic mAbs. In summary, many features of the population pharmacokinetics of currently used therapeutic mAbs are similar, despite differences in their pharmacological targets and studied patient populations.

Indexed as

Antibodies, MonoclonalClinical Trials as TopicFemaleHumansMaleMetabolic Clearance RateStructure-Activity RelationshipAntibodies, Monoclonal

Identifiers

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.