Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31122133›Full record

ArticlemAbs2019

De novo discovery of antibody drugs - great promise demands scrutiny.

William J J Finlay, Alexey A Lugovskoy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in mAbs, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Moving beyond Titers.Vaccines · 2022
    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.

William J J Finlaya mAbs , London , UK.
Alexey A Lugovskoya mAbs , London , UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We live in an era of rapidly advancing computing capacity and algorithmic sophistication. "Big data" and "artificial intelligence"find progressively wider use in all spheres of human activity, including healthcare. A diverse array of computational technologies is being applied with increasing frequency to antibody drug research and development (R&D). Their successful applications are met with great interest due to the potential for accelerating and streamlining the antibody R&D process. While this excitement is very likely justified in the long term, it is less likely that the transition from the first use to routine practice will escape challenges that other new technologies had experienced before they began to blossom. This transition typically requires many cycles of iterative learning that rely on the deconstruction of the technology to understand its pitfalls and define vectors for optimization. The study by Vasquez et al. identifies a key obstacle to such learning: the lack of transparency regarding methodology in computational antibody design reports, which has the potential to mislead the community efforts.

Indexed as

Drug DesignAntibodies, MonoclonalBinding Sites, AntibodyComputer SimulationEpitopesHumansProtein EngineeringAntibodies, MonoclonalEpitopesaffinity maturationantibody engineeringantibody therapeuticscomputational methodsdata integrityde novo designepitopehumanizationIn silico designmonoclonal antibodyparatopespecificity

Identifiers

PMID31122133
PMCPMC6601558

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.