ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2017
Therapeutic drug monitoring of CT-P13: a comparison of four different immunoassays.
Article in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- LC-MSMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Laboratory Monitoring of Biological Therapies in Rheumatology: The Role of Immunogenicity.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2020Review
- Appropriate Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Biologic Agents for Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2019Article
- Comparison of ELISA and HPLC-MS methods for the determination of exenatide in biological and biotechnology-based formulation matrices.Journal of pharmaceutical analysis · 2019Review
- Switching from originator infliximab to the biosimilar CT-P13 in 313 patients with inflammatory bowel disease.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2018Article
- The performance of Remicade®-optimized quantification assays in the assessment of Flixabi® levels.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2018Article
- A SPECIAL MEETING REVIEW EDITION: Highlights in Biosimilars From the World Congress of Gastroenterology at ACG 2017: Introduction: A Review of Selected Presentations From the World Congress of Gastroenterology at ACG 2017 • October 13-18, 2017 • Orlando, FloridaGastroenterology & hepatology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe commercialization of CT-P13, an infliximab (IFX) biosimilar, has the potential to decrease health-related costs and enhance access to biological therapies. This study aimed to address the accuracy and inter-assay agreement of the CT-P13 quantification using four different assays initially developed to assess IFX.
methodsThe four different methods, one in-house method and three commercially available kits, were used to quantify exogenously-spiked samples and the sera from 185 inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients on CT-P13 therapy.
resultsThe quantification of the spiked samples unveiled a consistent and accurate behaviour of three of the tested methods, with average percentage recoveries of 90%, 102% and 109%. Results from the clinical samples demonstrated that these three assays were also highly correlated, both concerning Spearman's rank coefficients (range 0.890-0.947) and intraclass correlation coefficients (range 0.907-0.935). There were a few systematic deviations among them, but their impact in the clinical stratification of the patients using different cut-offs was minimal, particularly when these cut-offs were in the 3-4 µg/ml range, for which the strength of agreement (as assessed by the Kappa statistics that ranged from 0.732 to 0.902) was substantial to almost perfect.
conclusionsOur results indicate that three of the tested IFX quantification methods can be used to accurately quantify CT-P13 without any adjustments.
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.