Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29409507›Full record

ReviewJournal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR2018

Fate of Antibody-Drug Conjugates in Cancer Cells.

Cécile Chalouni, Sophia Doll

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 105 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
105citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

105 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 196 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Antibody-drug conjugate engineering: from design to efficacy and safety.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

45 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Cécile ChalouniDepartment of Pathology, Genentech, San Francisco, CA, USA. cecilec@gene.com.
Sophia DollMax Planck Institute, Munich, Germany.
Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antibody-Drug Conjugates (ADCs) are a class of cancer therapeutics that combines antigen specificity and potent cytotoxicity in a single molecule as they are comprised of an engineered antibody linked chemically to a cytotoxic drug. Four ADCs have received approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicine Agency (EMA) and can be prescribed for metastatic conditions while around 60 ADCs are currently enrolled in clinical trials. The efficacy of an ADC greatly relies on its intracellular trafficking and processing of its components to trigger tumor cell death. A limited number of studies have addressed these critical processes that both challenge and help foster the design of ADCs. This review highlights those mechanisms and their relevance for future development of ADCs as cancer therapeutics.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalBiological TransportBiomarkersEndocytosisHumansImmunoconjugatesMetabolic Networks and PathwaysMolecular Targeted TherapyNeoplasmsTissue DistributionAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalBiomarkersImmunoconjugatesAntibody-drug conjugatesEndocytic compartmentsEndocytosisIntracellular trafficking

Identifiers

PMID29409507
PMCPMC5802061
OpenAlexW2797342751

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.