ArticleImmunologic research2018
Routinely utilized in-house assays for infliximab, adalimumab and their anti-drug antibody levels.
Article in Immunologic research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- The First WHO International Standard for Adalimumab: Dual Role in Bioactivity and Therapeutic Drug Monitoring.Frontiers in immunology · 2021Article
- Editorial: autoimmunity-the ever endless world.Immunologic research · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
By monitoring serum concentrations of infliximab (IFX) and adalimumab (ADL) and levels of their antibodies in patients with inflammatory diseases, clinicians can adjust dose and increase safety and effectiveness of treatment. The aim was to develop and validate in-house enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) for IFX and ADL, together with anti-IFX and anti-ADL ELISAs for routine detection and further analysis with acid dissociation of immune complexes. Furthermore, the objectives were to compare in-house assays with commercial ELISAs and reporter gene assays (RGAs) and to determine cross-reactivity between original Remicade®/Remsima™ and their antibodies. In-house ELISAs were validated (imprecision, accuracy among other criteria) and compared with commercial apDia ELISAs and RGAs. Correlation coefficients, intraclass correlation coefficients, agreement, and bias were calculated. All in-house ELISAs gave precise and repeatable results. The immune complexes between IFX and anti-IFX were found in 3% of samples, while complexes between ADL and anti-ADL were found in 14% of samples. Significant correlations were found between in-house and apDia ELISAs and RGA for IFX, ADL, anti-IFX, and anti-ADL results. Remicade®, Remsima™, and their antibodies could be accurately measured with either apDia or in-house IFX and anti-IFX ELISAs. Accurate and precise in-house ELISAs, highly comparable with commercial ELISAs and RGAs, were developed and validated for routine analysis of samples of patients treated with IFX (Remicade® or Remsima™) or ADL providing substantial cost benefit. Complex dissociation identified samples with anti-IFX-IFX (3%) and anti-ADL-ADL (14%) complexes indicating the benefit of adding acid dissociation to therapeutic drug monitoring of IFX and ADL.
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.