Trial reportClinical pharmacokinetics2017
Remarkable Pharmacokinetics of Monoclonal Antibodies: A Quest for an Explanation.
Trial report in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 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.
- Flycodes enable simultaneous preclinical analysis for dozens of antibodies in single cassette-dosed mice.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Inter-Antibody Variability in the Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Monoclonal Antibodies Characterized Using Population Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Non-neutralizing functions in anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies.Biomedical journal · 2024Review
- Temporal Modulation of Drug Desensitization Procedures.Current issues in molecular biology · 2022Review
- Fluctuations in Pharmacokinetics Profiles of Monoclonal Antibodies.European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2019Article
- Potential Influence of Endothelial Adsorption on the Delayed Time to Maximum Concentration of Biopharmaceuticals.European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) usually display slow and limited distribution with combined linear and non-linear elimination mechanisms. While studying individual pharmacokinetic profiles, it was noticed that MAb plasma concentration can vary abruptly over time, with one or more increases after the time to maximum plasma concentration when theoretically the concentration should only decline. This article summarizes the frequency of these additional peaks and assesses whether normal intra-subject and assay variability can explain the observations. For this analysis, we used a benchmark consisting of three registered (adalimumab, bevacizumab, and trastuzumab) and three unregistered immunoglobulin G1 MAbs. At a selected 'normal' intra-subject variability of 12%, at least 70% of the study participants (approximately 90% for certain MAbs) still had at least one additional peak, which decreased when the 'normal' variability was increased. There was no difference in occurrence between the high- and low-concentration ranges. Only a high sample density was associated with an increased likelihood of detecting additional peaks. Based on the analytical variability for the applied ligand-binding assays (5-10%, up to 15% at the lower limit of quantitation), the number of observed increases was extremely improbable (p < 0.01) for most MAbs, especially for the large excursions. Therefore, the fluctuations are likely genuine. We discuss the possible explanations and the relevance for clinical practice.
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.