Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31683745›Full record

ArticlePharmaceutics2019

Improving In Vivo Brain Delivery of Monoclonal Antibody Using Novel Cyclic Peptides.

Kavisha R Ulapane, Brian M Kopec, Teruna J Siahaan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceutics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Immunotherapy for glioblastoma: the promise of combination strategies.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kavisha R UlapaneDepartment of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, The University of Kansas, 2095 Constant Avenue, Lawrence, KS 66047, USA. k581h718@ku.edu.
Brian M KopecDepartment of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, The University of Kansas, 2095 Constant Avenue, Lawrence, KS 66047, USA. brian.kopec@ku.edu.
Teruna J SiahaanDepartment of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, The University of Kansas, 2095 Constant Avenue, Lawrence, KS 66047, USA. siahaan@ku.edu.
University of Kansas · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many proteins can be used to treat brain diseases; however, the presence of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) creates an obstacle to delivering them into the brain. Previously, various molecules were delivered through the paracellular pathway of the BBB via its modulation, using ADTC5 and HAV6 peptides. This study goal was to design new cyclic peptides with N-to-C terminal cyclization for better plasma stability and modulation of the BBB. Cyclic HAVN1 and HAVN2 peptides were derived from a linear HAV6 peptide. Linear and N-to-C terminal cyclic ADTHAV peptides were designed by combining the sequences of ADTC5 and HAV6. These novel cyclic peptides were used to deliver an IRdye800CW-labeled IgG monoclonal antibody into the brain. Cyclic HAVN1 and HAVN2 peptides deliver IgG into the brain, while the parent linear HAV6 peptide does not. Cyclic and linear ADTHAV and ADTC5 peptides enhanced brain delivery of IgG mAb, in which cyclic ADTHAV peptide was better than linear ADTHAV (

Indexed as

blood–brain barrier (BBB), cadherin cyclic peptidesmAb in vivo brain deliverymonoclonal antibody (mAb), paracellular pathway

Identifiers

PMID31683745
PMCPMC6920923
OpenAlexW2982489916

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.