Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24808864›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2014

Assessing analytical methods to monitor isoAsp formation in monoclonal antibodies.

Catherine M Eakin, Amanda Miller, Jennifer Kerr, James Kung, Alison Wallace

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Assessing and Improving Protein Sample Quality.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Catherine M EakinDepartment of Analytical Sciences, Amgen Inc., Seattle WA, USA.
Amanda MillerDepartment of Analytical Sciences, Amgen Inc., Seattle WA, USA.
Jennifer KerrDepartment of Analytical Sciences, Amgen Inc., Seattle WA, USA.
James KungDepartment of Functional Biocharacterization, Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks CA, USA.
Alison WallaceDepartment of Analytical Sciences, Amgen Inc., Seattle WA, USA.
Amgen (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A ubiquitous post-translational modification observed in proteins is isomerization of aspartic acid to isoaspartic acid (isoAsp). This non-enzymatic post-translational modification occurs spontaneously in proteins and plays a role in aging, autoimmune response, cancer, neurodegeneration, and other diseases. Formation of isoAsp is also a significant issue for recombinant monoclonal antibody based protein therapeutics particularly when isomerization occurs in a complementarity-determining region due to potential impact to the clinical efficacy. Here, we present and compare three analytical methods to monitor and/or quantify isoAsp formation in a monoclonal antibody. The methods include two peptide map based technologies with quantitation from either UV integration or total ion peak areas, as well as an alternative approach using IdeS digestion to generate Fc/2 and Fab'2 regions, followed by hydrophobic interaction chromatography (HIC) to separate the population of Fab'2 containing an isoAsp. The level of isoAsp detected by the peptide map and the digested-HIC methods presented here show similar trends although sample throughput varies by method.

Indexed as

fabricatorhydrophobic interaction chromatographyIdeSisoaspartic acidpeptide map

Identifiers

PMID24808864
PMCPMC4010776
OpenAlexW2163760030

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.