Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30294716›Full record

ReviewAntibody therapeutics2018

DNA damaging agent-based antibody-drug conjugates for cancer therapy.

Ying Fu, Mitchell Ho

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Antibody therapeutics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

40 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Advancements in antibody-drug conjugates as cancer therapeutics.Journal of the National Cancer Center · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Antibody Therapy for Patients with Lymphoid Malignancies: Past and Present.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Ying FuLaboratory of Molecular Biology, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Mitchell HoLaboratory of Molecular Biology, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9152-5405

Funding

Development of new antibody-based cancer therapiesZIABC010891 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI HO, MITCHELL · 2009 to 2025
$21.4M
Antibody Therapy of CancerZ01BC010891 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI HO, MITCHELL · 2008 to 2008
$56k
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 BC010891Intramural NIH HHS ZIA BC010891
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Currently, four antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are approved by the Food and Drug Administration or the European Medicine Agency to treat cancer patients. More than 60 ADCs are in clinical development for cancer therapy. More than 60% of ADCs in clinical trials employ microtubule inhibitors as their payloads. A better understanding of payloads other than microtubule inhibitors, especially DNA-damaging agents, is important for further development of ADCs. In this review, we highlight an emerging trend of using DNA-damaging agents as payloads for ADCs. This review summarizes recent advances in our understanding gained from ongoing clinical studies; it will help to define the utility of DNA-damaging payloads for ADCs as cancer therapeutics. Future directions of the development of ADCs are also discussed, focusing on targeting drug resistance and combination treatment with immunotherapy.

Indexed as

antibody-drug conjugatecancer therapyDNA-damaging agentdrug resistance

Identifiers

PMID30294716
PMCPMC6161754

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.