ArticlemAbs2017
Rethinking the INN system for therapeutic antibodies.
Article in mAbs, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tumor Biology Hides Novel Therapeutic Approaches to Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Narrative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Finding the Right Heavy Chains for Immunostimulatory Antibodies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Therapeutic Antibodies: An Overview.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Nomenclature of humanized mAbs: Early concepts, current challenges and future perspectives.Human antibodies · 2019Review
- Past, Present, and Future of Rituximab-The World's First Oncology Monoclonal Antibody Therapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2018Review
- Strategies and challenges for the next generation of antibody-drug conjugates.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the context of a possible revision of the International Nonproprietary Names (INN) system of recombinant monoclonal antibodies, which is saturated, we propose several avenues of reflection driven by the primary goal of the INN, information of health-care professionals. Clinical considerations argue for an abandon of the substems A (target category) and B (origin category), which lengthen the INN without real added-value. On the contrary, new substems or suffixes are required to alert on the absence/presence of an Fc portion and/or multispecificity, which are essential from a pharmacological point of view. Moreover, we think it necessary to explicitly mention Fc variations since they could influence the pharmacology of these biopharmaceuticals, and hence their efficacy and side-effects. Besides indicating the subclass/isotype in the documents easily accessible to health care professionals, we propose to systematically describe both the natural variations (allotypes) by using the Gm (G marker) system, and the artificial variations by using a Ge (G engineering) system that is discussed here and could apply to all IgG constant domains (tentatively called the Fy portion).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.